daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old October 30th, 2009, 09:04 AM   #21
metsfan
Photographer
 
metsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Newtown, PA
Posts: 661
Likes (Received): 42

I know the NJT arrow 3 trains, and their diesel trains, can really accelerate quite fast. The ALP series are more meant for sheer hauling capacity & top speed vs acceleration, though if an ALP-46 wants to go, even with 10 MLV cars, it can do 0-100 (stop to limit, single level cab car first operation limited to 95, MLV cab first is 100) in about 20 seconds or less. Of course, pax may not enjoy this, so it is rarely done. More common is 60 mph to 100 mph, going into and out of restriction zones along the NEC. A talented engineer (of which NJT has several) can really put the throttle out the front window of the cab and ride the dynamic brakes to get maximum traction for HP accelerating. One time said engineer took us from stopped to 100 MLV first, man did those tall cars sway!!! o.O

- A
__________________
Lets Go Mets!
metsfan no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 30th, 2009, 07:24 PM   #22
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

So... a few simple calculations on the non-stop graph posted on page 1.

Looks like it travels 2 minutes at 45kph on cruise control.

1.5km @45kph

It travels for 11 minutes at an average of about 340kph (between 330 and 355)

62.5km @ 341kph

The total trip is 115km.

So, the train spends 51km accelerating and decelerating. This takes 16 minutes, meaning an average speed during this time of 191.25kph.

So, to recap
01% of dist. on Cruise @ 45kph
46% of dist. accel/decel @ ~191.25
54% of dist. at full speed @ ~341km/h

Put another way, %62 of time is NOT spent at top speed.

( I know, I'm using kph and not km/h... it's easier to type and sounds better. Yes, I live in a metric country )

If we double the time spent at top speed, we're up to 177.5km @ ~266kph in 40 minutes.

If just 1 minute can be cut off the acceleration and deceleration time, with 177km between stops it would set a new scheduled service record of 280kph avg. without even trying.

Of course, that's about a 12% increase in performance, so nothing to sneeze at.

However, even on the current 115km run between Beijing and Tianjin, reducing acceleration time from 16 minutes to 14 minutes, would increase the average speed 7.5% from 238kph to 256kph. That's a pretty big increase which would improve even more for shorter journeys.

I guess the real question is... what is the average/optimal distance between high speed rail stations?

My guess is, with the limits of rail technology and acceleration, stations should be around 150km apart.

Any closer than this and going faster will result in very little actual increased benefit, until acceleration is improved.

Perhaps, this is a good reason Mag-lev is a worthwhile technology. It's not so much the top speed, but the acceleration.

Given that the Shanghai gets up to 430kph in just 4 minutes... if regular rail had THAT kind of acceleration, we'd have an AVERAGE speed of 330kph... or in other words, a 40% INCREASE in average speed over 115km!!!. Trip time would be down from 29 to 21 minutes.

And that's running at a maximum speed of 341kph.

Perhaps Mag-lev should be considered for SHORT-distance high-speed... not long-distance.
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2009, 07:54 AM   #23
yaohua2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 453
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
So... a few simple calculations on the non-stop graph posted on page 1.

Looks like it travels 2 minutes at 45kph on cruise control.

1.5km @45kph

It travels for 11 minutes at an average of about 340kph (between 330 and 355)

62.5km @ 341kph

The total trip is 115km.

So, the train spends 51km accelerating and decelerating. This takes 16 minutes, meaning an average speed during this time of 191.25kph.

So, to recap
01% of dist. on Cruise @ 45kph
46% of dist. accel/decel @ ~191.25
54% of dist. at full speed @ ~341km/h

Put another way, %62 of time is NOT spent at top speed.

( I know, I'm using kph and not km/h... it's easier to type and sounds better. Yes, I live in a metric country )

If we double the time spent at top speed, we're up to 177.5km @ ~266kph in 40 minutes.

If just 1 minute can be cut off the acceleration and deceleration time, with 177km between stops it would set a new scheduled service record of 280kph avg. without even trying.

Of course, that's about a 12% increase in performance, so nothing to sneeze at.

However, even on the current 115km run between Beijing and Tianjin, reducing acceleration time from 16 minutes to 14 minutes, would increase the average speed 7.5% from 238kph to 256kph. That's a pretty big increase which would improve even more for shorter journeys.

I guess the real question is... what is the average/optimal distance between high speed rail stations?

My guess is, with the limits of rail technology and acceleration, stations should be around 150km apart.

Any closer than this and going faster will result in very little actual increased benefit, until acceleration is improved.

Perhaps, this is a good reason Mag-lev is a worthwhile technology. It's not so much the top speed, but the acceleration.

Given that the Shanghai gets up to 430kph in just 4 minutes... if regular rail had THAT kind of acceleration, we'd have an AVERAGE speed of 330kph... or in other words, a 40% INCREASE in average speed over 115km!!!. Trip time would be down from 29 to 21 minutes.

And that's running at a maximum speed of 341kph.

Perhaps Mag-lev should be considered for SHORT-distance high-speed... not long-distance.
If you read my previous post carefully, you may notice the graph did not start as the train leaving the station. The roof of the platform blocks GPS signal and it takes a while for a GPS receiver to lock the satellite after that. It is not easy to make the train stop at the center of the city. There's quite a section of speed-limiting track near Tianjin Railway Station with sharp railway curve radius. That is also why most recently built Chinese high-speed train stations are far from the urban area.



green line = lower speed, purple line = higher speed
yaohua2000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2009, 09:48 PM   #24
alphorn2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
How important really IS acceleration and braking? How much time can a trip be shortened by?
The answer is, of course, "it depends". The more stops or slowdowns you have on your way, the more important acceleration gets. Here's the numbers I could find, including in this thread.

0.48 m/s² Alstom ETR 610
0.57 m/s² Bombardier Zefiro(0-50 km/h)
0.72 m/s² JR N700
0.86 m/s² ICE-3
1.20 m/s² Stadler Dosto (max speed 200 km/h)

Not comparable:
0.38 m/s² Siemens Velaro CN (0-200 km/h)
1.20 m/s² Talgo 350 (Locomotive only!)

The Stadler Dosto is an upcoming double decker derived from a regional train, which is why it has high acceleration. Also, the lower max speed helps.

Note that the acceptable lateral acceleration level in curves (for passenger comfort) is 0.85 m/s² on high quality track. Yet I expect that longitudinal acceleration can be higher since it does not come as a sudden surprise.
alphorn2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2009, 12:25 AM   #25
Ariel74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Posts: 414
Likes (Received): 1

It's annoying to have an argument with someone who has not the least ability to distinguish completely different things: I don't care a straw about what the chinese can or cannot do, I was just pointing out that your purported _argument_ using the fact that the chinese lowered the top-speed for the beijing-tianjin route does not work. You seem to be obsessed with the question of who can do what. Either this obsession or a general lack of ability to read logical argument made it impossible for you to see that I was taking issue with your argument, not your conclusion per se.

try to cure your obsession, or learn some logic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gramercy View Post
really..

so name me ANY train controll system that allowes for 350 kph

and by the way, i know it for a fact that they are using ETCS L1 on the line, so...


and OF COURSE i agree with the efficiency, let me quote myself here
Ariel74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2009, 12:27 AM   #26
LUCAFUSAR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,698
Likes (Received): 231

edit.
LUCAFUSAR está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2009, 12:28 AM   #27
LUCAFUSAR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,698
Likes (Received): 231

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn2 View Post
The answer is, of course, "it depends". The more stops or slowdowns you have on your way, the more important acceleration gets. Here's the numbers I could find, including in this thread.

0.48 m/s² Alstom ETR 610
0.57 m/s² Bombardier Zefiro(0-50 km/h)
0.72 m/s² JR N700
0.86 m/s² ICE-3
1.20 m/s² Stadler Dosto (max speed 200 km/h)

Not comparable:
0.38 m/s² Siemens Velaro CN (0-200 km/h)
1.20 m/s² Talgo 350 (Locomotive only!)

The Stadler Dosto is an upcoming double decker derived from a regional train, which is why it has high acceleration. Also, the lower max speed helps.

Note that the acceptable lateral acceleration level in curves (for passenger comfort) is 0.85 m/s² on high quality track. Yet I expect that longitudinal acceleration can be higher since it does not come as a sudden surprise.
Sorry, but the 1.2 m/s2 value of the Talgo350 is the maximum lateral acceleration in curve. It has nothing to do with the speeding up capability of a train.
About the ICE/3: on the Siemens website I found that the Velaro E (AVE Class 103), that is 800 kw more powerful than the ICE3, reaches 320 kph in 380 seconds. So, the average acceleration is 0.84 km/h/s2, i.e. 0.234 m/s2. I think that the ICE/3 has lower acceleration capabilities, because it's less powerful than the Velaro E.
LUCAFUSAR está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2009, 10:03 PM   #28
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by yaohua2000 View Post
If you read my previous post carefully, you may notice the graph did not start as the train leaving the station. The roof of the platform blocks GPS signal and it takes a while for a GPS receiver to lock the satellite after that. It is not easy to make the train stop at the center of the city. There's quite a section of speed-limiting track near Tianjin Railway Station with sharp railway curve radius. That is also why most recently built Chinese high-speed train stations are far from the urban area.


green line = lower speed, purple line = higher speed
Cool! So, that would slightly increase the average speed during accel/decel ever so slightly.

I accounted for the lower initial speed where it is "cruising" and I figured it had to do with the station being "inside" the city.

Ideally, I think it's better for a station to be closer to the centre of the city, though you sacrifice a bit of time. There is time involved in getting to the station as well.

This may mean underground lines in the city, which are more expensive, but in some cases worth the extra cost.

Of course, every country has different needs. It's just nice to see a country so heavily invest in such a potentially clean technology.
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2009, 12:57 AM   #29
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Question: In general, is a multiple EMU setup ( like Shinkansen ) able to accelerate faster than a TGV, given similar tracks?

How do newer players (like Pendolino, Talgo and Zefiro ) fare when it comes to acceleration?
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2009, 03:30 AM   #30
Tri-ring
Expert
 
Tri-ring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 459
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Question: In general, is a multiple EMU setup ( like Shinkansen ) able to accelerate faster than a TGV, given similar tracks?

How do newer players (like Pendolino, Talgo and Zefiro ) fare when it comes to acceleration?
I believe so since you have less load per powered axle providing more allowance for the wheels to apply torque to the rail without slippage. The down side is that it applies more weight and electro-magnetic resistance to the overall train set and motors requiring more overall power out to obtain faster top speed.
__________________
banned for denial of war crimes in world war 2.
Tri-ring no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2009, 11:08 PM   #31
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn2 View Post
The answer is, of course, "it depends". The more stops or slowdowns you have on your way, the more important acceleration gets. Here's the numbers I could find, including in this thread.

0.48 m/s² Alstom ETR 610
0.57 m/s² Bombardier Zefiro(0-50 km/h)
0.72 m/s² JR N700
0.86 m/s² ICE-3
1.20 m/s² Stadler Dosto (max speed 200 km/h)

Not comparable:
0.38 m/s² Siemens Velaro CN (0-200 km/h)
1.20 m/s² Talgo 350 (Locomotive only!)

The Stadler Dosto is an upcoming double decker derived from a regional train, which is why it has high acceleration. Also, the lower max speed helps.

Note that the acceptable lateral acceleration level in curves (for passenger comfort) is 0.85 m/s² on high quality track. Yet I expect that longitudinal acceleration can be higher since it does not come as a sudden surprise.
Some different ranges apply to those values ... from what I found until now we get the acceleration values taken from:


0->80km/h (only marginal in HST , urually only comuter/urban trains)

0-160km/h (electric locomotive hauled and other intercity trains)

0-200km/h (HST in europe usually refer to this range)

0-300km/h (until now only the TGV acc. values refer to this)

300-320km/h , 320-330km/h (until now only the TGV acc. values refer to this)

Most HST acc. values only consider the 0-200 so everything should be taken with a grain of salt.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2009, 11:57 PM   #32
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Question: In general, is a multiple EMU setup ( like Shinkansen ) able to accelerate faster than a TGV, given similar tracks?

How do newer players (like Pendolino, Talgo and Zefiro ) fare when it comes to acceleration?
In short ... NO ... nothing like that in general ... just when trains are built specifically for that same greater acceleration.


Bypassing the usual rants and deaf-ears discussion about what is or isn't a EMU or not ...

500 series Shinkansen has 18,24MW evenly distributed among 64x 285KW traction motors (64 axles)
N700 series shinkansen has 17MW distributed among 56x 305KW traction motors (64 axles) , 715ton , 1323 pass.
ICE3 (double?) has
TGV Duplex has 17,6MW (Double consist) distributed among 16x 1100KW powered axles (plus 36 unpowered axles)

What diferentiates the Japanese shinkansen from the european HST's is merely the way they evolved ... from what they evolved from ... and the safety/environmental/service conditions in wich they would need to operate.

- the allowance of passengers in the 1st coach of a HST ir a recent adition to European trains
- the high-tech inovations put onto the trains is abundant no matter wich train in particular we speak about.
- HST run on aerodinamics and brute force
- the tecnologies aplied to HS trains prior to 1994 are majorly outdated nowadays (and that means ICE1/2 , Shinkansen 300 and older , etc)
- HS coaches are usually assigner dedicated purposes (other than carrying passengers) ... some carry traction motors , some carry transformers , etc

The explanation for all of this is very simple ... HST in Japan is developed to run on dedicated tracks ... in europe HST run on "the" national networks and stretch their legs here and there on a stretch of HSR (wich might not even be dedicated exclusively to passenger traffic).

In terms of acceleration it is considered ideal to have roughly only 1/2 the axles motored ... something in the way of a balance between grip and torque on those same axles.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2009, 12:32 AM   #33
LUCAFUSAR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,698
Likes (Received): 231

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotavento View Post
...
ICE3 (double?) has
...
ICE3 in double consist has 2*8.0 MW>16.0 MW.
LUCAFUSAR está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2009, 06:03 AM   #34
ruready1000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 760
Likes (Received): 107

Starting Acceleration
  • Shinkansen N700 Series : 2.6 km/h/s (0.72 m/s/s)
  • Shinkansen 700 Series : 1.6 km/h/s (0.44 m/s/s) or 2.0 km/h/s (0.55 m/s/s)
  • Shinkansen 300 Series : 1.6 km/h/s (0.44 m/s/s)
    source
  • Korea KTX-II : 1.6 km/h/s (0.45 m/s/s)
    source
ruready1000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2009, 05:28 PM   #35
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by LUCAFUSAR View Post
ICE3 in double consist has 2*8.0 MW>16.0 MW.
Thanks ... it seems that I "ate" a couple of lines of text over there somehow.

ICE3 , Talgo350 , HST(diesel) and one or two more.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2011, 04:52 PM   #36
Maadeuurija
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tapa
Posts: 1,920
Likes (Received): 532

I have a question
In what time a train with N700's acceleration can pass a 44km long line with no stops between and top speed of 350 on the line?
Maadeuurija no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2011, 06:06 PM   #37
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 452

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maadeuurija View Post
I have a question
In what time a train with N700's acceleration can pass a 44km long line with no stops between and top speed of 350 on the line?
I don't have the math for such a calculation, but from actual schedules, for example, the stretch of the Tokaido Shinkansen from Kyoto to Shin-Osaka, a distance of 39km, takes 13 min start to stop for a N700 trainset on a Nozomi service (180km/h avg.). Note that this portion of line has some curves. Another example, the stretch of track from Maibara to Kyoto, which has a long stretch of straight track (capable theoretically of 330km/h running), a total of 68km, requires 22 minutes for an older 700 series to traverse start to stop (185km/h avg.). On your imaginary line with no curves, grades, other traffic, and a top speed limit of 350km/h, a N700 will have a higher avg. speed than the real-life examples above.
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 16th, 2011, 05:57 PM   #38
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maadeuurija View Post
I have a question
In what time a train with N700's acceleration can pass a 44km long line with no stops between and top speed of 350 on the line?
first one needs to get the engine rpm , wheel base lenght (2x pi radius) and all other usefull information regarding the mechanical proprieties of the power package.


Then we can begin to discuss about the acceleration proprieties of the train such as what torque those engines can get onto the rails and calculate the proper acceleration/breaking time in the extremes of the route (0-350 acceleration curve = x km , 350-0 deceleration curve = x km , full 350 = x km)

Once we break the acceleration and deceleration curves into their various smaller components* one can proceed to try to guess the average** accel/decel distance ... what remains is the full speed lenght.

* a train can have a very long gear ratio and the power available to the motor can(or can't) easily fully accelerate at slower speeds and thus the initial acceleration can be affected from this factor. Two examples:


In portugal the Alfa Pendular(4000 series) runs at 220km/h using the SAME ~500KW siemens electric engines as the urban/comuter 2300 series EMU's ...
Both have (suposedly) 1950rpm nominal at full speed ... but in reality the AP is using the same gear/transmissions as the Italian ETR and the spanish AVE104 (wich are known for reach above 270/280km/h) and the portuguese speed record (slightly above 250km/h) was achieved without even reaching the 1950rpm on the engines ...
AP trains are known for being very VERY sluggish in accelerating from standstill to medium/high speeds ... due to the extremelly long gearing ratios 0-250?)
Another interesting factor is that those same motors in the 2300 class have a "daily use overspeed capacity" up to 3950rpm (units are geared to 120km/h at 1950rpm) ...

A pair of trains exiting Gare do oriente simultaneously in the up direction (4 tracks with 160/200km/h limit for 20km in all tracks) is something to see ... as the AP is totally humiliated by the sheer acceleration of the comuter units ... wich are able to completely exit the station platforms while the AP is still barely able to jerk and begin to roll ... by the time the AP eventually passes the end of the platform the 2300 is already at the next station with its doors open ... and when the AP reaches that point still strugling to go as much as 60km/h (?) the 2300 is already long gone ... when eventually the AP reaches the operational 120km/h of the other train it has already lost a minute or two in the process ... while the other train in between 1km/2km stops runs for most of the time at that "full speed".
Given the ability of that same 2300 to overspeed so easily if one considers the 320km long Northern Line (Lisboa-Porto 1/2 of it at 200/220km/h) one can guess that for most of the time the 2300 could easily cruise at 140/160 km/h with 8/10 intermediate stops and still manage to achieve BETER start to stop times as a DIRECT AP train ... since every time (and there are plenty) the AP would need to play the reprises game (accel/decel) it would be eventually defeated by KO each and every time along the curveous/hilly route.
If weren't for the tilting abilities of the AP it would eventually be left further behind even further since the acceleration couldn't possibly cope with the performance required of them ...

On an even harder setting on the Southern Line (Lisboa-south) the AP is evenly matched by the 160km/h intercity trains due to the exact same reasons of sluggish acceleration.
A 20km long section of 220km/h track is passed uphill(northbound) in a pure reprise of 100-200(yess 200) slow acceleration due to the inability of the train to gain enough speed to get there in time before it runs out of 220km/h trackage.
On the downhill(southbound) direction it just cruises at 227/228km/h (220 + 4km convel + 4km convel tolerance) for the entire lenght ...
Notice: coming from the north the single track 220km/h diverges into a double track and 00km south it merges again into a 80km(110km/h for tilting trains) single track ... so the northbound and train has no chance from the start to the end of the section.
The point is that acceleration is a b*tch unless you have enough to spare ...



Back to N700 performances ... the N700 is preciselly a JR atempth to have some faster shinkansen in the usuall conditions into wich the 2300 series (above) need to operate. Main fast trains in the middle of a very dense comuter stile operation (12/15 tph in each direction with average 180km/h on these regional/comuter traffic).
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2011, 04:46 PM   #39
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 2,001
Likes (Received): 1035

The question I have about all this is how much accelerative and braking force is typically thought to be commercially acceptable. That seems to me to be the real limitation on HSR speed-ups in the future.
aquaticko no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2011, 11:48 PM   #40
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

comuter trains usually go as high as 1,2 /2,5 m/s2

HSR trains usually have lower maximum acceleration usually as low as 0,5 /0,7 due to extremelly high gear ratios.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
high speed train

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium