Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8134Re: McLanes vs. Train Lanes

Expand Messages
  • emccaughrin
    Feb 27, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford"
      <mailbox@c...> wrote:
      > There's no real DISadvantage to wide gauge.

      Except that it would involve running custom-built (i.e. more
      expensive) rolling stock that is utterly incompatible with the rest
      of the world. But yeah, other than that...

      > It permits independently suspended wheels right
      > out at the edges of the coaches, allowing passage through the
      > train without steps--just articulate the coaches

      You mean like this?



      > >Historically, aircraft manufacturers have done an awful job at
      > >building reliable rail vehicles.
      > That's right. Doesn't mean it has always to be that way.

      The reason why the Boeing LRT's were such a disaster, and BART cars
      spend 25% of the time in the shop, is because an aircraft
      manufacturer has none of the experience or institutional knowledge
      for building rail vehicles. So, if you were to try again at having
      an aerospace company build rail cars, the same result seems
      inevitable. Or, to put it another way: Would you buy an automobile
      from Honda or Lockheed? (Ok, maybe a bad example for this listserv.)

      > We really DO need light weight, and we really DO need high
      > reliability. Historically, only airplanes have this characteristic.

      That simply isn't true. Lots of industries know how to build with
      aluminum and carbon fiber. On the other hand, not too many know the
      intricacies of ATC, signaling, bogies, and general rail
      infrastructure issues.
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic