They are great trains, even after 20 years. The frecciarossa 1000 is also a great train and is newer. Talgo is also launching a new train platform soon with the new AVRIL.

I don’t mean Alstom makes terrible trains but little bit of rolling stock diversity would be better. Even Turkey (with I’m pretty sure very less expertise and budget on railroads) have acquired both Europe’s most cost-effective (CAF Cepia) and most technological (Siemens Velaro) high speed trains initially for YHT services.

Greetings from germany

The Netherlands also should've done that.. I mean, look at the Fyra debacle, all because they had to cheap out on their trains (like Amtrak)

@@jorgea5426 There is the new Velaro NEO and NOVO which are updated trains

Blame the people. Everyone claims they want one but as soon as one is proposed the people hire every shady lawyer that crawls out of the woodwork to sue over every imaginable issue, real or not. Without loser pays we can no longer have nice things.

@@RS-ls7mm The car infrastructure in our cities have to be bulldozed the same way our cities were bulldozed to eliminate trams and railways. So long as this continent is addicted to cars, both individually and politically, reform is impossible.

@@spaghettiking7312 No offense but this kind of thinking dies when its your house than needs bulldozing. The EU invented rail and has more abandoned rail lines then the US will ever have new rail lines. Its easier and more valid for the EU in every way.

@@RS-ls7mm Err... if you look at your history... Practical rail was a British invention (Britain wasn't in the EU at the time, obviously, and isn't today either)... More importantly, INDIA had a functional main line railway before continental Europe did (built by the British for their own reasons, mind you). More importantly still... the claim that the EU invented rail runs into the problem of Rail predating the EU. Substantially. Now, "railways were invented in Europe" is valid... for a ever so very slightly stretched definition of Europe (and assuming we're talking about practical railways. I make no claim regarding where minecart tracks or wagon-ways, both of which used rails, but weren't really Railways, which are generally defined by the existence of the power being provided by something other than gravity or the muscles of living beings.)

@@laurencefraser Obviously I was generalizing. If you want a detailed history then KZfaq is not the place.

I'm sure Siemens would've built them with upside-down seating if Amtrak ordered it.

@@jfolz That would only be useful in Australia.

@@nitehawk86 tinnie holders for the Aussies.

People seriously hated the 2+2 table seats? Those are the best when traveling with either more than 2 people or in relatively empty trains! Perfect to get some work done while your companion sits across, for having a chat, or a meal. Only travelling alone or in overbooked trains are regular seats nicer IMO

@@Lolwutfordawin ​ I remember reading about the trials, and one passenger they "interviewed" said "sitting face to face with a stranger for 2 hours might be fine in Germany, in the US it might get you shot." On a sillier note: Siemens also forgot to provide an english language manual for the Bord Restaurant's coffee machine. So that didn't help the mood.

Japan Railway started using pendulation for their shinkansen with the 500 series and the N700 series. It's amazing how they combine high quality trains and high quality tracks to create a fast and confortable experience. France's tilted track are unconfortable when the train is not at correct speed at each section.

Well fortunately Brightline West is going to be a building a straight-ish high speed right of way (hopefully). If they use the Avelia trains there (which I think they will for timeline reasons), hopefully there will be a lot less shenanigans getting them to work there.

Ummm, no. Brightline West is literally doing the opposite of straight track. They’re building in a highway median with mostly 65 mph speed limits for rubber tire vehicles. Consequently, there are no HSR sections at all on the California side (2/3rds of the trackage). In fact, Brightline’s right of way is so twisty that their permitting documents only indicate two short 150+ mph on the flat desert approach into LV. The entire thing is also single-tracked with a few passing sections to reach the rather meager 45-minute maximum theoretical train frequency. This is exactly why no one ever builds HSR in an existing highway median. If this is ever done they either built the highway with HSR curvature and elevation requirements from the outset, or they build both concurrently. Brightline’s plan is a bit of a dumpster fire and not technically HSR. It’s just fast-ish “highER speed rail”.

Not going to happen given the US legal system. Every time one is proposed it collapses under the weight of frivolous lawsuits. Imaginary "sacred" grounds, not in my back yard, special interest, union corruption, ..... Without loser pays this country isn't going to change.

And overambitiousness. A very Europe-specific problem is also international certification. When Czech Railways were buying their own Pendolinos (class 680 derived from the FS ETR 460) the railroad was like "it's so cool man high speed rail and it can go like 230km/h and we'll have a whole new category of trains, and you can go from Brno to Berlin without switching trains". The 680s got certified for travel in Slovakia and Austria, but not Germany. And on the international routes there's only Pendolinos going to Slovakia because trains to Vienna are handled by rented Railjets. The other service is a border-to-border express train (Františkovy Lázně - Pilsen - Prague - Ostrava) but Pendolinos are not common, most trains on the route are just regular express trains pulled by Vectrons or 362s. All main railroad corridors in the country are limited to 160km/h at best, no track goes above that. The main corridors are good, Praha-Pardubice is pretty much a straight line, the rest are worse as they're pretty much drawn along a river, the main problem is with outdated railroad classification dating back to the early 90s. And nowadays, the tracks are being Also, there were 160km/h locomotives by the time, so the speed advantage was dubious. Passenger-comfort wise not, because the existing locomotives were technologically outdated before they were made, the replacement locomotive was still nowhere because the heavy industry giant developing it got privatized and nearly collapsed, and the carriages were not even air conditioned. Pendolinos aren't being replaced even though the sets will turn 20 in some years, the railroad still counts on them, instead it seems to focus on updating and replacing other rolling stock, I can't blame them because a lot of it is nearly half a decade old. TLDR: Czech state railroad ordered 7 sets of high speed tilting trains that even after 20 years can't run any faster than regular trains because of outdated tracks and track legislation and the government and its appointed railroad officials overpromised before they could deliver

Problem is if they tried to take as much money from people as car lobby it'd be more noticable since it'd be mostly on ticket and transport prices, while car lobby succesfully offloaded the entire infrastructure cost of roads to taxpayers while keeping the profits.

Kinda hard to maintain a domestic train industry when the federal government is doing everything in their power to destroy the domestic steel and oil industries.

Whatever happened to GE and EMD? They still make solid locomotives...

The year is 2123. The train lobby is as influential as General Motors with in the twentieth century. All of the streets have been ripped up and replaced with rails. People need to walk five miles to their nearest level crossing, then wait 1 hour for a twenty mile long precision scheduled megatrain to pass before they can cross. All of this just to get to the CVS across the street. No one should ever be as successful as GM again. They totally claim 80%+ of public space for their product.

Well, then we'd have to deal with badge engineered trains. The Buick LaCountry with 4400 HP built on the same platform as the Chevrolet Pelvic Traction making 1500 HP and featuring a Fisher-Price playset interior.

It might be standard but I still find it goofy

Plenty of UK stock has wings on the pantographs of intercity stock. . Standard brecknell Willis pantograph

Misuse of a comma.

I was about to say "whats wrong with panto wings?", they are on near enough every pantograph here in the UK

​@@AwesomeHaironoone cares.

lol

i thought i was the only one who noticed

He writes them bass ackwards.

ikr ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Budd had some of the world's best rolling stock tech at their peak. Nowadays, to see trains built with the latest version of that tech, you gotta go to Latin America or Asia...

⁠@@tl8211GM was selling licenses to European train manufacturers (Nohab) in the 70s, but as network electrified, they became irrelevant.

after seeing this comment i just found out the budd company only went defunt in 2014. we had time to include them in modernization plans and let's be real, anything they built probably would have been 10x more reliable than some french bs.

It sure would be a source of encouragement for American manufacturing if someone would buy up Budd’s IP, find any engineers still around from their glory days, and start up the company again.

@@noahwilliams8918 I doubt the IP would be worth much these days, the last licenses they sold were in the late 80s, a generation ago. A lot has changed in the railway world since.

Well, SNCF ordered 115 TGV M (Avelia [Horizon]) trainsets. That is certainly not a decline in numbers. Especially, since TGV M can hold up to 740 passengers on a 200m trainset.

​@@deepsteep4748 Yeah. Americans don't seem to understand how trains work outside of the kilometers long trains

@@deepsteep4748 hence the quotes around "downsizing". The fleet size relative to the size of the HS network is on a downwards trends. SNCF recently scrapped the last Sud-Est units (109 built), Atlantique units are out too (27 remaining out of 105), 1st gen Eurostars are mostly gone (8 remaining out of 36). The peak was probably in the mid 2000s and there hasn't been a one-for-one replacement since then. The number of **seats** is fairly consistent but on much fewer trains. It **is** an issue because some destinations have fewer trains per day, but SNCF can still claim to offer the same service. There's a massive loss of convenience on some routes. But it's a topic far too complex for a KZfaq comment 😅

@@remicardona_poly Ok, you are right on that one. At least, this 115 train badge is similar to the numbers of the first Generations, with much more seats per train, tho. But considering the growth of the LGV-network since the 1980s, it should be more trainsets and i certainly hope, that there is an upwards trend in fleet size for the future. Thanks for the clarification!

@@remicardona_poly for several reasons you are wrong, first of all the retirement of the TGV Sud Est (355 pax per train) and Atlantique (454 pax per train) have been replaced by the TGV Euroduplex 3UFC (556 pax per train) proves that the available seats are increasing, moreover the first generation of TGV Duplex is being renovated to gain 50 pax per train. Secondly, Eurostar trains do not belong to sncf but to Eurostar directly and have been replaced by Siemens velaro trains, which also have greater capacity.

Connecticut, Delete the whole thing and straighten the route.

The biggest thing stopping amtrak from running superliner cars through NYC is the tunnels, they are too small. That's why amtrak uses the viewliner cars on its long distance trains that go through NYC.

There's a few Very Expensive bits that have to get redone like bridges and tunnels, and you can't incrementally roll out bilevel cars if you can't run them at least from NYC to DC.

@@Joesolo13 ironic given it's called Connect-i-Cut.

@@jfolz emphasis on "I cut"

This! Bombardier, god bless them, made some truly terrible rolling stock as a result. Competition is still necessary if you want good results.

Don't forget the only reason Bombardier's rail business got as big as it did was because they bought both Hawker-Siddeley's rail division, the Montreal Car Company, and UTDC. So in typical Canadian fashion multiple companies became just one both thus reducing competition and making everything worse in general. It's impressive our bus industry still exists although Orion is gone.

@@METRO6 I didn't forget, I mentioned that in my last sentence

The federal government sadly subsidized the company into oblivion.

The majority of the defense budget is also corporate welfare for the weapons manufacturers. Military boondoggles come and go without anyone batting an eye at billions of dollars going up in smoke. But if a train project goes over budget everyone loses their minds. You get wall to wall negative media coverage, conservative politicians bash the project to get votes and it sets back the US rail industry by 30 years.

But automotives are American, while trains are communist.

Only really by purchasing from those companies. Yes, the government did "bail out" GM, but it made money from that. Fiat bailed out Chrysler. Ford did not need bailout money.

funny comment, considering the US Government actually BAILED OUT GM and Chrysler in 2008

Ultimately, that’s because trains only effect parts of the country, whereas cars and the car industry affects almost everyone.

At least in Europe, every country had its own companies. Austria had SGP and Elin, East German AEG factory was ranemed LEW Hennigsdorf after WW2, Italy had (until very recently) Breda and Fiat, ASEA was Swedish, Czechoslovakia had Škoda (still exists but they don't make locomotives anymore), Poland's Pafawag still exists I think. A lot of them went under either Siemens or, ultimately, Alstom. LEW Hennigsdorf is probably what underwent the most acquisitions, first it was bought back by AEG, which then merged into ADTranz, which got bought by Bombardier, which got bought by Alstom. ASEA too, merged with Swiss Brown Boveri into ABB, then ADTranz, and so on.

@@segarallychampionship702 Notice how the rigging and bending of EU procurement rules conveniently ignored in France and Germany lead to two very large rail manufacturers coincidentally one German and one French. I think CAF, Stadler and Talgo won't survive long in their present form.

And we have John Major to thank for that diabolical state of affairs with his ill-fated rail privatisation, then coupled with the UK government slavishly following EU Procurement rules conveniently ignored elsewhere in Europe (looking at France and Germany).

@@aalan4296 Alstrom owns stuff in Germany (and other places) and with Siemens it's reverse. Stadler will survive if only because it's propped up by the Swiss themselves -- and it's not like they aren't successfully exporting, either. It would really be a mistake to under-estimate what they can bring to the table given the utter paradise that is the Swiss train system and they built pretty much all of it in often very flexible and ingenious ways. They're not afraid of single track, for example, or putting two pantographs on a train and have them run on AC on one section, and DC another.

@@aoeuable The Swiss require narrower pantographs than what is common elsewhere in Europe (presumably due to tunnel clearance), so some ÖBB 1116 locomotives have three pantographs

Not just that but the NPN and Norfolk corridors due to them being extremely straight. The Acelas won't run on them but at least 110-125 mph service with sprinters

New Haven Railroad had plans to electrify the Hartford line installing catenary bridges all the way to MP 3.5, Benton St. the plan was scrapped during the depression. If you watch a cab ride video they are still there, but wire was never strung.

@@Charger_84 that's easy enough to say, but the rails in VA are owned by freight railroads. they definitely do not want wires above their rails.

@@jackchen7003 intermodal trains are not an excuse

@@jackchen7003 most main lines in Virginia were purchsed by the state. And you can put wires above rails, in fact freight companies can benefit from it. And yes, double stack trains could be electric too.

Best comment on here, yet no likes in the first day as hundreds of other comments appear. WTF railfans?

@@trainluvr thank you!!! Glad to know at least one person has read it!

SO maybe buy america is the problem!

@@jacktattersall9457 In is a problem in so far as a train developped with X compoents in mid now has to be redevelopped with totally new components that the designers did not think of or test or choose. In montréal, when CDPQ impose its REM on the city without consultations, it knew Bombarder was to go bankrupt (since itw aas the one who imposed unsurvivable coditions when it helped recapitalise it) so it ordered trains not only from Alstom, but from an Indian production line that was already producing models for another city and CDPQ chose the exact same trains with very few modifications in order to reduce risk. Because it was technically not a govrnment contract, (even though it is government pension plan)_ it escaped any Made in Canada provisions but was quite cirticised for it. So there is an advantage of taking an off the sehglf product and not insisting they chjange everything to contain enough local content.

That’s the problem. Amtrak bought HSR trains without having any HSR infrastructure. That’s like trying to run Shinkansen trains on the normal network. It just won’t work, or work very well. Some people might point out that this “doesn’t work” because the Shinkansen runs on an entirely separate network from the regular trains, and the Amtrak uses regular main lines. Well so does ICE and the TGV, expect both DB and SNCF networks are up to par so that wherever the HSR trains need to run on normal mainlines, those mainlines can properly handle the HSR trains. That’s what’s missing for Amtrak.

The better choice for NEC tracks is Pendolino, that is designed to run up to 155 Mph commercial speed and maximise the speed on winding alignments. You need to change your FRA regulation to a less European like stringent ones...

​@@DanTheCaptain Please start shouting at the House Chair of transportation about that.

This is objectively untrue. The NEV is 50+% 125 mph track. The actual problem is that a good chunk of it is old and needs repairs which are already budgeted for in the Infrastructure Bill. But this is not the problem that Alstom is having. Siemens dies just fine on the NEC. The problem is Alstom’s own disorganized nature. They’re just not a serious company anymore with all the cuts that they gave been doing. Their French contracts have dwindled in recent years and they simply don’t have the money to operate as they used to . But instead of downsizing, they’re doing sneaky internal cuts and trying to keep an outward facade if “business as usual”. You can see how well that denial is working out for them.

​@@DanTheCaptain A high-speed train without having HS infrastructure - that is actually the principal idea behind the Pendolino, that it is a train which can go faster on legacy infrastructure. It's not as fast as a "real" HS train on a completely new, properly built HS corridor, but it's a good compromise between speed, investment cost, and "time to market".

WOW. I’m in Medford and hate the T but hasn’t heard this.. 20 years to rebuild a station that was only 30 years old? Only in Massachusetts… disgraceful

S

Me convincing random people online to hate the French: "They're savages! Savages! Barely even human!"

As an austrian i approve of this message

(insert germany vs france joke here)

@neptune well luckily America didn't buy trains from AnsaldoBreda those trains where and some are not trustable and NS is testing their ICNG trainsets

This problem shows up on the old New Haven line tracks in east NY/western CT, where the track centerlines are too close to deploy tilt

Add to that the tunnels in Baltimore which have never been widened or modernized.

Weight. Had to meet FRA buff load standard. These new ones don't. Crash energy mgt is allowed now.

...the heavy weight is why the French called them "pigs". It's also what caused the problems that took them OOS in the beginning.

It was the ICE train crash in Germany, and the resulting carnage, that spooked the Feds into requiring heavier trains.

Plus, privatisation and the butchering of BREL didn’t help

In the grand scheme of things we do pretty well with rolling stock, especially now that the Pacers have gone. The EC/WC mainlines have some great trains running on them

Yea totally. The thing that would make the new Acela train better is the Hybrid K5LA horn. HYBRID!!!

The LIRR locomotives are flat out junk. They never even came close to meeting their potential. The F-125s that followed are garbage, too.

Considering the ACS-64 (which already runs at 125) hasn't had any issues coping with the NEC, I think it's safe to say that it's an Alstom problem. You can simp for your shitty French products but regardless of whether it's trains or submarines, we know better and know to buy elsewhere from now on.

I think it would have been better that way honestly. X2000 were suited better for the enviroment than both the ICE and the current Acela.

Short life of Amtrak trains? Amfleet anyone?

@@davidsixtwo Meant to say "short service life of the Acelas". But still, the AEM-7's are long gone but their Swedish counterparts from the early 1970's are chugging along. The oldest ones still in service (Rc2, produced 1969-1975) have had significant upgrades, but the ones contemporary with the AEM-7 are mostly in original configuration still.

@@renhanxueit’s because of the backwards way funding works in the US. It’s very difficult to convince our shortsighted government to spend big money on things with long term benefits like new rail infrastructure, because why should any House rep approve a project they’re potentially unlikely to see the end of if it’s not in an election year when they need the votes. It’s easier to convince them to buy a flashy new train set every few years because “oh wow it’s new and I get to be the congressperson who inaugurates it before the end of my term.” It’s stupid. And it sucks. But that is our unfortunate reality at the moment here.

@@renhanxue It's an interesting argument, but I've never heard anyone boast about which rail service has the oldest trains, at least outside of nostalgia. When Germany or Switzerland get a new fleet, it seems to be received well.

@@davidsixtwo It's not boasting, rather the opposite. Of course newer trains would be better, but railways are underfunded here too, and refurbishing old trains is cheaper - at least in terms of capex - than buying new ones. In an ideal world we would've built actual high-speed alignments and the X2000's would at best be relegated to peripheral lines. Instead they're still doing their thing on the highest traffic intercity services in the country. What I'm saying is that Amtrak seems to want more than it can really afford.

the ALC-42E as designed will not be a dual mode for Empire Service duty. it'll be a diesel-electric locomotive on one end, with a battery-electric cab car on the other. they (rather stupidly) will not use third rail at all as a result. also, the metro north third rail is incompatible with the amtrak third rail used on the hellgate line. metro north third rail (which runs all the way to Poughkeepsie) uses under-running third rail with wider, shorter shoes, while amtrak uses narrower, longer over-running shoes. as a result the P32AC-DM's only run on third rail until they're out of the tunnels; they run on diesel power everywhere else. running on metro north track (such as into grand central) requires modifying the shoe mechanisms for that service.

@@francistheodorecatte I was not aware of this, thank you.

@@francistheodorecatte makes me wonder what they will do with the lakeshore limited. will they use the ALC-42Es to pull the train out of the tunnels? and will it use battery power of third-rail?

Yeah, citation required for your debunked fantom “problem with the Chargers”. We’ve had those in operation for about a decade now with none of the issues you foamers claim materializing. They’ve had about the same teething issues that all new equipment has. They’ve dealt with those three same that all manufacturers do. So what is your assertion actually based on here? I understand that hating the Chargers has become basically a foamer meme at this point, but you’ll have to come up with better evidence than anonymous foamer blog posts if you want anyone to believe you.

Yeah. I thought the Acelas were Duplex locomotives but the motor sounds different.

Yep.

Ice 3 has epic sounds The ICE 3 neo is straight up heaven

For as long as the frame keeps intact.

the wear and tear in the US is a lot harsher then in Europe generally so rolling stock last a lot shorter

The X2000 set that the Swedish state railways loaned to Amtrak in the early 1990's is still in service in Sweden. There's a refurbishment program in progress for the X2000's and there's no plan to take them out of service. That's baby tier though; the Swedish Rc4 locomotive that was loaned to Amtrak in 1976 for the trials that led to the AEM-7 is _also_ still in service in Sweden. The Rc locomotives are gradually being withdrawn from passenger service in favor of quicker-accelerating EMU's, but there's still hundreds of them in service, especially in freight.

Japan replaces it's shinkansen after 20 years. Across most of Europe we run trains for longer. Germany still had ICEs running from 1990.

It is easier to keep very old rolling stock in service, because it is easier to source the electromechanical parts. I have some experience in train-spare parts procurement and replacing somewhat modern parts (late 90's - early 2000s) that use obsolete technical standards or proprietary technology of defunct comanies can be challanging and / or expensive. There are computers on fairly modern trains that still run windows 3.1. Trains use an early form of 2g to communicate. Therefore, the lifetime of trains will probably shorten, if a redesign that replaces / overhauls whole systmes is not done and depending on how standards change.

It’s sort of mind-boggling to me that the Acela is barely one year older than the ICE 3 and exactly as old as an ICE T. Basically, instead of bodging together a half-assed tilting TGV they could have just waited like two more years and buy an americanized version of the ICE T instead.

@@ft4709 Well.. the ICE T is one of the less reliable ones in the ICE family, so i believe there would have bin troubles either way. But at least it would have been an actually consistent design, that was not fused together in a weird way. But there is another major problem: crash safety regulations for trains in the US. As the video mentions the TGV locos had to be reinforced, to meet the standart. The issue with teh ICE T is that it is an EMU. And a lightweight one out of alluminium to make it worse. For people unfamiliar with the ICE T it has a super short "nose" and the passengers sit right behind the driver. To change the design so that it can pass theese tests must be a mayor challenge, if not impossible! Reinforce a locomotive at some points and make if heavier seems like an easy task in comparisson. Some private High Speed Projects, like Brightline West or the one in texas or also california hsr, use Siemens ICE 3 ( or rather Velaro, to be exact) style trains in their promo material and visulizations. I wonder if they want to really reinforce the train platform or they hope that they can get an exception from that rule. Siemens might try to cut a deal, when they are willing to bring the construction to the US. Some story that i find a bit amusing, as a german: There is some connection in california, called the sprinter, that uses a small EMU ( Siemens Desiro) , that is typically used as a regional and commuter train in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. But because that cute thing is way to fragile to withstand mayor crashes, it was actually classified as light rail service in order for it to be legal Simply Railways has a great video on it youtube.

The ICE-T uses Alstom tilting technology. Appart from that it shares a lot of technology with the ICE3. I think it would be smarter to go with a standard Pendolino, since this is a more mature and proven platform. If it can run through poland, greece and portugal, it must be able to handle the NEC.

That X2000 Amtrak tested is still running in Sweden. So is the original Swedish meatball...

yeah. The first TGV's lasted 40 years. The TGV's can last at least 30 though. After 15 years, the TGV's go into a midlife operation where the trains have their interiors renovated and repainted.

Climate change means things will come to a head, one way or another.

That’s nonsense. The NEC is about an average HSR corridor by EU standards. I understand that people want to be all edgy with their “America Bad” criticism, but it’s genuinely misplaced here. If you remove corridors like the NEC from HSR consideration then only four countries in Europe still have HSR.

​@@TohaBgood2 No the NEC is nowhere near an average HSR corridor by EU standards. In Europe, Spain, France, Germany, and Italy have networks, Belgium, the Netherlands and UK have HSR lines. With only Spain and France with true large scale continuous HSR networks. The NEC is a Frankenstein's creature, a mash-up of many different qualities of track. And the lack of consistency is a real issue. Any rolling stock happily frolicking on European tracks would have a much harder time on the NEC.

@@KyrilPG Nope. Only France, Germany, Spain, and Italy have actual HSR track. Benelux and the UK have HSR stubs built by the French so that they can spread their TGV products. The actual rail in those countries still tops out at 125 mph at best. And virtually no HSR services except the ones in Spain run exclusively on a single LGV line. If what you said were actually trued than French TGV would lines would only be able to sell you tickets for a half dozen destination pairs. In reality all of these services travel significant portions of their routes on conventional freight track. I encourage you to look at the TGV's fleet average in France. Why does the Acela beat the TGV network on average speeds on some years? How would that even be possible? Do TGV trains politely hit the breaks as soon as they reach 125-150 mph so that they don't embarrass their American cousin?

@@TohaBgood2 Gosh, are you a troll or something? The TGV's run mostly on dedicated tracks. For the main and most traveled destinations, TGV's run only a short distance on legacy tracks before entering the true high-speed backbone lines rated for either 300 or 320kph. And these legacy tracks are not specifically freight tracks, they are usually 160kph legacy tracks and often 220kph legacy upgraded tracks. The innermost city tracks run at the local service's speed and sometimes faster, like the 220 and 180kph tracks in Paris suburbs next to the RER before accessing the HSL. The "average speed" you are mentioning takes the whole number of TGV *services* from their origin to their furthest destination, including the "collector" services that run at legacy speeds with multiple stops far from a high-speed line, not counting the ridership nor the fact full speed ones are operated by double length double deckers while the frequent stop destinations far reaching off the high-speed lines are mostly served by single length, single deck trains. That heavily skews the absolute number for average speed for the overall service. It's like saying NY's subway has an overall 12 minute frequency because some obscure branches have a half hourly or hourly service that tanks the whole average when most riders experience a 3 minute frequency. A Paris > Toulouse currently runs only 1/4th of the distance on legacy upgraded tracks, while the first 3/4th are run at full speed on dedicated tracks. The vast majority of TGV riders travel between major destinations that are HSL equipped all the way, with only the city center access run on legacy tracks. A Paris to Bordeaux takes 2h and 4 minutes for roughly 600km with half hourly service at peak, or Paris to Strasbourg in 1h45 for 500km, Paris Marseille in 3h05 for 800+km, Lyon to Marseille in 1h40 for almost 400km, etc. My father uses the Paris Reims TGV regularly, it's 42 minutes and apart for a short distance on legacy tracks to access the HSL, it is run on dedicated tracks. The lines in UK, Belgium and the Netherlands are true high-speed lines but the ones in Benelux are not even to the highest French or Spanish standards as they don't have bypass tracks around cities to form a continuous network. HSL 1, 2 and 4 in Belgium run at 300kph and HSL 3 is runs at 260kph, but they are separated trunks, like most European HSL's outside of France and Spain. HSL Zuid in the Netherlands is more consistent and is the extension of the Belgian HSL 4 but is still cut in two by Rotterdam, lacking a bypass. The Belgian and Dutch railways don't use rolling stock fast enough to run at the full speed these lines allow, only Thalys, Eurostar and ICE trains run at full speed on these lines. Yet, they are still true high-speed lines. Just look for pictures of one of the Belgian HSL's and you'll see that they are very different from the NEC tracks. There's not even a single mile of true high-speed track in the NEC, and if you want to compare something correctly, compare the NEC with another corridor or the real LGV or LAV *network* , or the Köln Frankfurt corridor, not the "reach" of a service. What tanks the average speed of the overall TGV *service* are the numerous small Alpine destinations where the TGV's run slow on old tracks for a rather short distance but a long time after having run most of the distance at steady full speed on dedicated tracks. Like compare with the Paris Bordeaux corridor, where certain services have a 280+ kph average speed, from station to station. Or the Calais Marseille corridor, which is like 99% on dedicated high-speed tracks. In no way, shape or form does the NEC can be considered similar to the TGV or AVE networks. Comparing a strict corridor to an entire system with far reaching services is just bad faith. At least compare corridor to corridor, and then you'll find a vastly different result.

The good news is that as far as US rail stations go, they’re still operating in New Jersey! Secaucus Junction (which has a BUNCH of them in different colors for the lines that stop there), Atlantic City Rail Terminal, and the Trenton Transit Center all have them!

It's coming back (but only as decoration since it isn't ADA compliant)

​@@AverytheCubanAmericanThe old "Solari & Co." board (which is the Italian company who made these things) at Newark Penn has unfortunately been replaced however. The replacement is LCD, which really does a good job of replicating the look. It even plays a recording of the flaps moving, to let you know the status has changed.

Cheaper than some airlines but more expensive than budget ones

they are 60 booked in advance

They are wayyyy too expensive yes, but these new trains will add seats and round trips. Hopefully the extra supply pushes prices down a bit

Same in Germany, just be early and have luck

Easy, just subsidize them as much as planes are subsidized or stop subsidizing planes.

I really *do* like the left-right headlight blinking trains do when crossing roads in the US, though. But yeah if you see an ICE taking a level crossing in Germany then it's because it's driving from one factory it's built in to another, or something like that. Regional service, usually using something like a Bombardier Talent, should see the most crossings as metro systems are again highly grade-separated because of the sheer frequency of trains. S-Bahns will have a mixture of both, only grade-separated on high-throughput roads.

The station along the waterfront in New London CT comes to mind. I'm not sure it would make much sense to build grade separation there anyways, since its built on and between some seriously sharp curves in the track. Maybe New London just needs a new alignment/ station? Also, can anyone explain the slowness between roughly Bridgeport CT and Rye NY? Is it just the number of curves or is there something else going on with the track?

Connecticut

The only modelling I can think of is vehicle dynamics to make sure train behaves on track as conditions change and track, wheels, suspension wear to limits. You don't need this to insure safe operation. Periodic and/or continual real world testing would suffice.

But for NTV they run on a true HSR infrastructure whit not a mix like NEC, and more over, here in italy and the rest of Europa hs train are politension elettric,

Im not so sure about that idea, i think we should just use companies already familiar with that field

Might want to drag EMD back out it's hole. They made atleast 1 good locomotive within the past 20 years.

We did that in the 70s and Boeing made TERRIBLE LRVs for Boston and SF.

Why would you want to take a company that has technical prowess in one discipline and get them to take a cash grab and make a substandard product in something they have no idea how to make properly?

I'm french, so I'm obviously biased, but we do some nice rolling stock too. Especially on the light rail, but even the TGV is oretty nice. That said, I'm indeee not exactly convinced Alstom was the best designer for the north East corridor tracks. We are testing pendolino construction, others have been far better than us for longer. Also, sorry for the cars being late :

Nice, but too slow. Amtrak didn't get the ridership they expected, and this loss of revenue meant no new Superliners. Ever.

@@tonyburzio4107 Yeah, it's also usually really expensive to go even a short distance. It got me to DC pretty quickly, but going to NYC it's barely faster than regular Amtrak, and it just doesn't justify the price.

@@tonyburzio4107it’s not that slow

One problem is that currently the US market for passenger train is very small. Amtrak has roughly as many trains as the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB/CFF/FFS), and Switzerland is a very small country (8 Million people), so Stadler has a similar home market than a US manufacturer would have, and they are very export oriented - you find KISS and FLIRT train-set in many countries. Also the US market is special (crash regulations, tracks designed for heavy and slow cargo trains, heavy reliance on diesel power, not using UIC standards) mean a US company would struggle to strive abroad…

The CTA still operates the 2600-Series cars which were built by Budd in the 1980s.

THIS has been pissing me off with every single picture of the Acelas I look at!!! The lower blue third of the sides doesn't line up in pictures and it makes me go mental! Also the livery is trash. Remember the concept video they put out like SEVEN YEARS AGO?! That was much better.

The US railroads in the 40s were arguably better

CAF trains are so not comfortable

Not really because I heard they having problems in France.

Then how are your TGV M trains also delayed? Europeans need to admit they arent perfect superior beings sometimes.

@@tankman_tv9332 exactly

And I hate when those same hypocrite refuse to admit they dump MUCH MORE money into roads and maintaining the status quo.

Alstom bought out all of Bombardier's rail business, not just the European business...

i thought the rail business was based in europe i was just trying to seperate it from the airliner business

It's funny how you can point out that multiple customers are having issues with Alstom products, yet you'll continue to see French simps insisting that it's our fault, not theirs. Absolutely nothing will convince them otherwise, it seems.

Yes, that's right when wondering how to get its new high-speed trains capable of 160 mph that will run on a wholly electrified at most four tracked fully grade separated between Washington and New Haven up and running Amtrak should look to a company running the exact same diesel trains that Amtrak runs in the Midwest, on non-grade separated, non-electrified track where every fortnight some Floridian dies after having driven around the boom gates. Brightline trains have a max speed of 79 mph while Amfleets (Amtraks Budd workhorses from the 70's) go 110 mph from Washington to New York. Come on let's be serious here. Like in what way has Brightline taken a "whole different approach to operating a railroad" other than introducing airport style security?

The Brightline diesels have been tested at least 130 mph, IIRC.

@@geraiswaiya2347 Brightline uses the same locomotives that Amtrak does and they have a top speed of 125mph. Also, it doesn't matter how fast they can theoretically go, it matters how fast they are allowed to go which in this case is 79mph.

@@livgalbraith6531You mean 125 MPH?

​@@livgalbraith5538brightline west will be on a dedicated track and will be "high speed"by definition, unlike Florida. It's electric, which California likes on their end for meeting emissions goals. Nevada side likes it for tourism and traffic. I'm certain CA will screw up their connecting lines, but at least it's something

yes (columbus, ohio resident)

It’s probably because Alan lives in the Northeast

Probably cs our cities were here first & grew the fastest lol

I mean its also the only track Amtrak owns (all in a busy corridor no less), which makes it more reliable, and therefore has the demand to justify further improvements. If only rail was nationalized other places could see similar improvements

The Northeast is the best, tho

Heh -- yeah, for the 50 miles or so where the right-of-way allows the Acela to reach its top speed.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Well if it was Seattle or Portland, the staff probably couldnt make it past the daily Antifa riots.