8135Re: [carfree_cities] Re: McLanes vs. Train Lanes
- Feb 27, 2005I guess what isn't clear here is that I'm proposing a blank-sheet
re-start of railroading. Get rid of all the problems that have
plagued the industry since its beginnings 180 years ago.
>Except that it would involve running custom-built (i.e. moreAll of this rolling stock is going to be completely custom built.
>expensive) rolling stock that is utterly incompatible with the rest
>of the world. But yeah, other than that...
If it's done right, we'll build more perfectly-identical passenger
coaches than the sum total of all passenger coaches ever built in
the USA. We're talking tens of thousands of absolutely identical
>> It permits independently suspended wheels rightYes, except that the whole section of the coach in way of the
>> out at the edges of the coaches, allowing passage through the
>> train without steps--just articulate the coaches
>You mean like this?
wheels doesn't have to be pinched in at floor level in order
to accommodate the wheels (assuming these are low-floor units).
We're not going to do high-floor units because the platforms
cost too much and the frontal area of the trains is too great
and the underbody too ragged for good air flow.
>The reason why the Boeing LRT's were such a disaster, and BART carsBut we have the problem that rail vehicle manufacturers have
>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.)
never understood the need for light weight (except Alsthom,
I believe, which builds the TGVs). And I'm afraid they have
never understood the need for reliability, either.
>> We really DO need light weight, and we really DO need highSo, we pair the remains of AdTranz with AirBus. Or Boeing with
>> 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
the remains of Budd.
Remember, conventional rail manufacturers are going to have to
figure this stuff out too, because the environment is going to
be completely different from anything they've ever seen. Nobody
in the rail business is familiar with mounting 6% grades at high
speed. Nobody knows about running trains around fairly sharp
curves at high speed in a fully-balanced condition. Nobody has
built high-speed equipment that is independently suspended.
This is not a timid venture. We're throwing out all the rules.
We're throwing out the FRA. We're going to do it all over again,
this time right. We'll be shooting for passenger safety that's
at least an order of magnitude better than anything that's ever
-- ### --
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>