Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
1–10 of 76 posts
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#2Important context buried at the bottom:
"Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said."
Also, the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger.
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#3Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#4Important context buried at the bottom: "Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Also, the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger.
>"Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said."
Why? For marketing purposes?
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#5Important context buried at the bottom: "Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Also, the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger.
>"Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Why? For marketing purposes?
I would guess to account for any unfamiliarity from the operators (new systems, etc) and allowing more time to sort out any other kinks. (they also pad the schedules for old trains too -- this is to accommodate small slowdowns without causing cascading delays).
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Why? For marketing purposes?
I would guess to account for any unfamiliarity from the operators (new systems, etc) and allowing more time to sort out any other kinks. (they also pad the schedules for old trains too -- this is to accommodate small slowdowns without causing cascading delays).
New trains: padded schedule
Old trains: padded schedule
So really, all train schedules are padded - which makes sense, you need buffers to absorb variance in performance to have reliable schedules.
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#7Important context buried at the bottom: "Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Also, the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger.
You’re right on this point, but my read of the article was that you can buy the fastest trains in the world but if your infrastructure is not up to enabling them, they won’t go much faster than the ones you have already.
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#8US rail is so pathetic. Not the rail’s fault per se, but it's pretty embarrassing for a a supposedly wealthy country to not be able to offer its citizens cheap, easy, high speed travel across the country.
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#9Important context buried at the bottom: "Passenger rail analysts said that it isn’t unusual for rail operators to pad their schedules when introducing new trains, especially if they will run alongside older ones. For example, during a rollout, a railroad might schedule more generous dwell time at stops, they said." Also, the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger.
> the new schedule is only about 15 mins longer than the old one...this is a big nothingburger
Then why the new cars? Are they cheaper to run? If so, the real price of a ticket (or losses [1]) should go down.
[1] https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/p...
Re: Amtrak's New Acela Trains Are Here. They're Moving Slower Than the Old Ones
#10US rail is so pathetic. Not the rail’s fault per se, but it's pretty embarrassing for a a supposedly wealthy country to not be able to offer its citizens cheap, easy, high speed travel across the country.
> US rail is so pathetic
National passenger rail.
We still have the world's largest rail network [1]. It's just focussed on freight. (We also have world-class municipal and regional rail in the New York area.)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_tran...