I rode the Turbo between Toronto and Montreal a number of times. I always dashed up to get a seat in the bar area behind the engineers. There was a glass partition so you could see ahead down the tracks and watch the crew operate the train.
Researchers have later found that one can overdo tilting on a train. A combination of tilting train and track can give you a sensation of a "level" floor when rounding a curve at speed, but a feeling of nausea when the view of the ground tilting outside becomes "disconnected" from your ear's balance sense accelerometer. Not much of a problem in a jet, banking into a turn above the clouds versus being a few feet from the ground on a train. The solution was to adjust the tilt mechanism to counter the centrifugal force by 70% instead of 100%, so people feel some cornering forces to correspond to the view outside.
@@eottoe2001 It's the same basic principle as to why people get sea-sick - the orientation the brain derives from the accelerometers of the inner ear and the one it derives from the eyes diverge too much, especially dynamically. Nothing whatsoever to do with coriolis.
When Mercedes developed their air suspension for the S class, they initially set it to completely eliminate roll. Before starting sales, they reprogrammed the system to allow for a small amount of roll, because everyone who tested the car felt it behaved wrong
Very sad that this became its fate... it shows so much but not a single one survived, this train shows that you need high speed track and the train and not just the train its self. This seems like it would be awesome to ride. too bad we can't even see it.
My dad's uncle was in charge of the Turbo at United Aircraft. One of the big problems they had was that the tracks were not welded like on dedicated high speed rails. They ran the train so fast that the vibrations would loosen all the spikes!
Took the Turbo a few times on trips to Toronto from Montreal (Dorval) when I was young. My brother and I would sit behind the engineer and conductor and watch in amazement as everything went by at 100 MPH. I do remember getting tossed around when you got up to walk through the cars.
The concept of high-speed rail in the United States was never really taken seriously after 1955. There were companies that researched it, but after the Interstate system was completed, heavy rail was only looked at as a means of transporting materials and goods, not people.
Quite right. It's too bad that passenger rail travel wasn't considered as a means to alleviate automobile congestion on the roads in those days. Today, the multilane freeways and other systems are highly inefficient and risky to travel on. For example, metro areas like Houston ,Texas has an ever expanding multilane system that gets worse as time goes on.
@@midgetman4206 AI cars (if they ever arrive) can't solve the inefficiency inherent to cars, it takes a fucking amount of city space and a lot of energy, to move 1.15 people.
I remember watching the Turbo fly though the suburbs of Montreal as a kid. Amazing sound and looked really futuristic then! Like a 747 on the tracks...
My grandfather was the conductor on that VIA Turbo that burned to the ground. His brother-in-law was the conductor on the CN train that hit the meat truck on the inaugural run in Canada.
When Geddy Lee of Canadian band Rush sang "Jump to the ground as the Turbo slows to cross the borderline" I assumed it was an entirely fictional view of the future, I never realised there was genuinely a turbine train called the Turbo in Canada at the time!
I rode that train from Boston to NYC in the early 1970s. It was great trip. The observation decks at either end of the train also held the train controls and engineers. Passengers could talk to the engineers while they were operating the train.
The notion that going fast around a (relatively) flat curve would disturb passengers did not materialize. In the US, only the most senior engineers could bid on passenger trains. They were extremely skilled in train handling and could set up ahead of a curve to take it without slowing down. While maintaining throttle, a quick reduction in brake pipe pressure would apply the brakes to the cars. In the time it took for the last car to apply its brakes, the engineer would release the brakes entering the curve. As a result, each car in turn would essentially float to the center line of the track without hitting the outside or inside rail with a wheel flange. To the passengers, the effect was as if they were riding on tangent track.
A modern wheeled train might hit, let's say, 225mph. Even if you do everything right, you're still going to experience ten times the lateral force that you would at 70mph, on the same curve. Soup is going to spill.
BART ([San Francisco] Bay Area Rapid Transit) trains are horrendously noisy in curves because of flange rub. Especially inside tunnels. Makes for a very unpleasant ride.
for sure, the PT6 ran at about 6000 rpm , think it's a single spool with a centrifical and axial section.. so the reduction gear must have been a sun and planet arrangement, turbines make better torque than you think, hence lm1500's used in marine applications and pumping natural gas etc.. cool thing is there's no physical connection from the turbine to the gas generator.. so even if things go bad down the line , your power plant's sort of protected.. I believe they run sort of like a helicopter, thing runs at it's peak speed all the time, and you sort of sap off the power you need.. most pt6 powered aircraft have a low idle, and high power lever to save wear and tare on the engine on the taxiway.. plus fuel.. Be interesting to know why they chose this power plant over others out there..
If you’re talking about the world record speed run, that was the plane filming from the air. They had to use a small, fast jet to keep up with the train. In the U.S. a single-engine Cessna would be enough. EDIT: Serves me right for commenting before watching the whole video. Yes, in this one the TGV passes a plane. You should still watch the record runs though. Absolutely insane speed.
@@GregInTokyo American's really excelled in large steam traction, Big boy is no joke, can out pull most modern Diesel unit's .. It could hit about 85 mph Due it's 68 inch wheels, sort of low Gearing to get up Sherman Hill with a mile long consist.. now I'm pretty sure a fully Loaded Hamilcar glider would fly at 85 mph, would be interesting to see it pull like 50 of them into a headwind, with like 1000 wake borders in water diches beside the track.. If I owned one I'd challenge any tractor to a pull of..in fact ..they could bring them all at once to save time, and throw in an SD40 for good measure..
I rode the Amtrak turbo from Montreal to Grand Central Terminal NYC. It was called The Adirondack. When I would walk through GCT, I would see it and dream of taking a ride on it. I never thought it would actually happen. I'm so happy I had the opportunity to ride the Amtrak Turbo Train.
It is. If the speed is right its the most comfortable options. Never got cramps on an intercity train. Many times on plane and cars. And no numbness as well. Plus you can get up go to the cafeteria and eat drink while enjoying the fast passing view table and wifi/mobile data.
Thanks Paul, that was great. I remember seeing the VIA Rail turbo in Union Station in Toronto, but never rode one. Two things - the PT6 was developed by Pratt & Whitney Canada and, still in use today, is one of the best turboprop engines ever. Also, to correct you, it is Grand Central Terminal - Grand Central Station is a post office.
I love how Amtrak tried it for a short time but it ended up being more sucessful in Canada until it was replace in the 80's witht he Bombardier/MLW LRC (Light, Rapid, Comfortable) which was another attempt at a "high speed" train with tilt, but could only run 180 km/h in certain area's with tilt enabled)
The LRCs were limited to 160 km/h in service, due to the numerous grade crossings, lack of in cab signaling, and mixed traffic with freight trains. Due to problems with the mechanism, like occasionally "locking up" in tilt position, VIA gave up trying to maintain the system in the early 2000s and permanently "straightened" them.
@@haweater1555 they could do 180 on some parts, but they got limited on most of the Windsor-Quebec Corridor. Kinda like how the Acela can't do high speed on most of its route, and only has some sections that it can go full speed.
I rode this train when it ran between New York and Boston. I was going to visit a friend on Boston, and was in about 6th grade at the time. I was already totally into trains, and knew what it meant to get a ride on the TurboTrain. In Grand Central I managed to get on the train ahead of most people and so was able to sit directly behind the engineer. The plexi partition meant that you could look past the engineer and see ahead, which was in itself an incredible thing. I recall the Mars light sweeping the tunnel as we left GCT, and there was at least one other person in the cab with the engineer and fireman, I don't know why. At that time, third rail ended at Woodlawn in the Bronx. At that point we changed over from third rail; the engineer started the engines, which were quite audible. As I remember it, we saw a top speed of 105, which was through Rhode Island and Massachusetts. It was a fairly rough ride, but I think that was due more to the deferred maintenance ( I stil love that euphemism) of the New Haven's trackage than the performance of the train itself.
Japan used largely small gauge tracks, while the US and North America in general use standard gauge. The Shinkansen uses standard gauge. Of course in the Japan they figured out that concrete track supports helped with warping. Anyway idk if what I just typed meant sene
Great content as always. I remembered seeing pictures of these when I was a kid in the late 80s but had forgotten about them. Thank you for keeping this awesome part of our history from being forgotten.
Amtrak operated Talgo train sets in the U. S. Pacific Northwest between 1994 and 2020. These were cantilevered tilting cars suspended over a single axle between cars, pulled by a conventional diesel passenger locomotive. They were successful, but limited in speed by the condition of the tracks. The series 6 cars were retired, but series 8 sets still run.
Well guess what all the aforesaid nations have in common? Monopoly capitalism. America is just the kingpin so to speak. The US dollar and Canada's is banked on fossil fuels, ultimately it doesn't matter much what the dominant transport industry is whether it's autos, aircraft, diesel (of some form or another) trains, it doesn't even matter that much if they're either petroleum or electric as 40% of electricity in the US is from natural gas.
I went on the TGV in 1984, from Lyons to Paris in 2hrs exactly - 500km at 250km/hr and I remember standing in the bar with a cold beer and not even noticing that I was traveling so fast-such a smooth journey !
Thanks for covering this obscure piece of North American high-speed rail history. Any chance you might do the successor projects to this such as the LRC or Metroliner?
When I was a kid, probably 1971 or 1972 my father took me to Montreal on the Turbo. It was extremely cool for a little kid but it broke down for 2 hours on route. It is a shame we didn't build the track needed back then, downtown to downtown on a bombardier high speed train now would be two hours or less.
Fun fact, Talgo continues to use the suspension system and variable geometry today in its 300kmh ++ very high speed trains, it is a great success for them.
8:50 The gas turbine TGV001 exceeded 300 km/h (186 mph) on 175 occasions and reached 318 km/h (198 mph) on 8 December 1972. That's the world record for a gas turbine train that still stands today.
I was unaware that the Turbo also ran in the U.S. I only rode on it once, going from Toronto to Montreal in 1977. It broke down outside of Toronto and all the passengers were transferred to another mostly full train going by way of Ottawa. My father was a locomotive engineer for CN and he drove the Turbo on several occasions.
I remember the Turbo trains in the Ontario/Quebec corridor. I was fascinated with them as a child, yet I never had the opportunity to ride one back-in-the-day. I do remember their mechanical shortcomings were never mentioned through the major media of the day. For some reason the Turbo locomotives were frequently left running while parked in Union Station in Toronto. One of them overheated, melting the roof of the locomotive causing a fire which gutted half of the train that was still connected in-full. They looked cool, but the technology just wasn't there yet.
It's a cool looking train. Like the sort of trains you'd see on monorails in the "future cities" in media like Godzilla films or on Thunderbirds. The idea of opening noses that can link to other trains was a sensible idea.
I used to pick up my Dad when he took the Turbo Train from NY to Boston. Real cool looking. I was too young to drive so my Mom and I would pick up my Dad. Brings back good memories.
Amtrak's Rohr Turboliners were a much more successful incarnation of the turbine engine train in America. Inaugurated in 1975, they ran in passenger service until 2003 with intentions to run much further, but a complete rebuild program was abandoned midway through and the trains scrapped a decade later. They didn't have aspiration to be true "high speed" and didn't tilt.
for about half a second I was thinking you were referring to the "harmonised sales tax" HST which I have to deal with and pay over here in Canadianaland haha I was thinking why the hell you or anyone else would think that it was a remotely interesting topic for a video... turns out? Im just an idiot. =)
@@ScumfuckMcDoucheface lol all good. The HST's were actually a big success and have lasted nearly four decades. Two of the great original design features were opening windows on the doors and no mufflers. If I ever feel bad about the world I pop the headphones on max and listen to the gentle clanking waiting for the tunnel. th-cam.com/video/y-St8pxUr0w/w-d-xo.html
Hang on, I thought that the TGV 001 prototype, which was also running on gas turbines reached 280 kph on his 20th of July 1972 trials... And reached up to 318 kph on the 5th of December of the same year... France also made the RTGs, the intercity turbotrains that were very reliable and that were sold to Iran later on. Amtrack even aquired some of them for testing if memory serves.
I was a newly hired Carman for CN cleaning coaches in the Spadina yard when the Turbo Train fire happened. We were told at the time that the fire was caused when a copper fuel line broke due to years of vibration. My question has always been what kind of engineer would design a fuel system with hard copper lines? I never made any sense then and still makes no sense. But according to the senior guys who had been maintaining the Turbo its was typical of the engineering on that train.
Such a shame that not one of these sets was preserved in a museum. They were well inside the era when rare trains were being preserved, and certainly unique enough to have merited the interest.
Hey Paul, this is kind of a great story for me. My dad was very involved in the Turbo project, as an engineer at United Aircraft in Montreal. He spent a lot of time in Hartford Connecticut working on this, before being one of the key sales engineers when the train came to CN. This is turning into one of my favourite channels, because I hadI suggested that you cover the Napier Deltic engines back a few months ago. The reason was my father was also very involved with that powerset, including the British Rail implementation, as well as marine engineering deployments. He in fact came back to Canada with a newly-minted marriage to my mother, expressly to sell the Deltic. But Napier's overall fortunes were not great in the fifties. He left Napier, and got his job at UA, largely on the strength of experience with the Deltic, and specifically to develop proposals for the PT6-ST6. In that capacity, he also worked on the PT6 Indy turbine car - another interesting story - and the DDH-280 Tribal Class destroyers for the Canadian Navy - again, in part through his experience with fast torpedo boats running on the Deltic. The story you tell is great, and a bit of a heartbreaker for dad. I think there was something about the Turbo that meant more to him than most of the other stuff. But he also understood that the conditions in Canada were pretty unpromising for it. What's not included in the story, is how rail traffic is allocated in Canada. The passenger services never made much money, so even when they were run by the same company - in this case, CN - economic realities meant that the passenger trains took second of third or fourth priority. A lot of work was done to overcome this on the crucial Quebec City-Montreal-Toronto-Windsor line, which was judged to be the only high volume corridor in Canada that could hope to justify this project. But Canada had two competing railways - CN and Canadian Pacific - both losing money of passengers. It seemed rational to spin off both services into Via Rail. But the problem immediately was (and still is), that after that, Via had to rent rails from CN and CP, whose power to reprioritize their use grew greater, now that they didn't have to take responsibility for unhappy passengers - "that's Via, madam, not us". This was also the transition era to welded rail, so a lot of the lines the Turbo ran on were waiting upgrading, or partly upgraded, meaning that track conditions could vary wildly, as the trains transitioned from the long ribbons to short, ill fitting, usually under maintained sections. The bigger backstory is that the original railways built in Canada were full of inducements to their private developers, of huge land grants, extending miles on either side of the tracks. This meant that the railway companies got the best routes at the very beginning in perpetuity, and had no interest in playing ball to allocate land to building a dedicated high speed line. After all, they might one day want to do that themselves, and they weren't giving up the control they had of prime routes. The maintenance issues were another thing, mentioned at the end. UA came up with a really innovative model for removing the power units completely, and swapping them in, rather than maintaining them in the units. Given their small size, and low weight, and their complete lack of fit to the existing railway maintenance infrastructure, this was a good idea, but still caused problems with unionized diesel mechanics who worked on the other trains. As with Napier before, dad left UA and went to another company that valued his experience. That company was Montreal Locomotive Works, who he'd worked with during the original construction of the Turbos. While he was there, they released the LRC, a conventional diesel-electric engine and linked car set, that like the turbo was supposed to use the shared bogie system. These trains, like the Turbo, were designed to be very lightweight, and had active banking mechanisms, powered by the diesel power unit. This meant, I think, that they were incompatible with normal engines in service, which was the beginning of the problem. Then, the banking mechanisms were not all they were hoped to be. And in addition, the same problems of shared rails, and subsidies to a domestic regional air carriers, airports, etc, mad this play at a med-high speed rail service a dead duck. The power units did live on, though, for a number of years after the carriages were done away with.Because of their low profile, they always looked a bit ridiculous, pulling the higher standard coaches. But they were fast workhorses, possibly because of the extended legacy, going back to the Royal Scot, that had shaped them. If you are ever looking for another Canadian-based subject - no, not the Avro Arrow - I'd love to see how you'd treat the Bras D'Or, Canada's hydrofoil, for quite a while the fastest warship in the world. Again, that was a project dad worked on, and the other thing he was most wistful about...
Don't forget a lot of VIA rolling stock is second hand from the Chunnel. Cars were built for the dash over to France but could not be used because they did not meet the specs. VIA came along and bought them and I see them here in Halifax all the time. Across from Pier 21. Like any other business you have to put money back into it to KEEP making money. Passenger rail anywhere in the world is no different. I would far rather travel by train. Given that driving and air travel are maxing out its simply a matter of time for passenger rail to revive.
The double-decker cars used by New Jersey Transit to NYC are extremely smooth compared to the old SEPTA trains I used to take in Philadelphia (since upgraded). Are modern passenger cars using a version of this system or something completely different?
The Bombardier/Alstom Multi-Levels don’t tilt, but they probably have a better suspension than the single-axle bogies between cars on the turbo-trains.
I'm surprised that this train wasn't nicknamed "The Dodo" since that's the first thing that popped into my mind upon seeing big red beak in the front...
Excellent video. In Canada the Turbo train sets were replaced with a more conventional diesel electric tilting train made by Bombardier called the LRC. Many of the LRC carriages (without the LRC locomotives or tilting systems active) are still in service today with VIA until they’re replaced with new sets in the next few years with their new HFR program (Dedicated tracks finally!!) and Siemens built locomotives. Cheers!
I remember this train being advertised in the station when I was little. I was enthralled, and wanted so much to see it. But, being on the Toronto - Windsor section of the corridor, never got the chance. Being older and wiser now, I realize the impracticality of turbine engines on rail vehicles. If you want to save weight, then electrification is the best route. And yes, you have to have to have a dedicated track. We’re now forty years behind in our infrastructure, and the cost to develop is huge. But the “401” corridor for passenger cars is almost at its max, and the corridor now needs the high speed train more than ever.
Great video. Learned a lot. I rode Canada from Montreal, Quebec, Ottawa and Toronto in 2018. As well as France, Japan, China and others over the years. What it taught me was you don't have to have highspeed to have reliable useful rail traffic. It is is more about running 60 - 80 mph consistently and station access that is located in the middle of town/ where people need to go. In other words, there nothing high speed about high speed rail. Sure faster is better, but cost effective? Historical example, Pennsylvania rr electric lines on north east corridor.
What it could have been? 200 mile an hour train tracks with level crossings on them? That would be a disaster. No high speed tracks. no high speed rail. period. end of story. we NEVER had the will to build custom track. These tilting trains were NEVER the future.
@@thereisnofinishline5773 No it doesn't. I ain't sitting on a bus with you. I'd rather spend more and use my own car. For longer distances, I'd rather take a plane that travels at 600 mph than a train going 180 mph. The USA is WAY bigger than Europe and has several mountain ranges. Trains are too slow and inefficient. It's expensive to build and maintain tracks that are smooth enough to travel 150 mph. Trains can't compete. But they are excellent at moving large amounts of freight long distances. The USA has the best freight rail system in the world.
@@marionette5968 Yea the only way it'd ever work is with dedicated track. You can't have a train screaming along at 100+ between smalltown and smalltown. That's got dumb idea written all over it.
The UKs West Coast Mainline, East Coast Mainline and Midlands Mainline have no new track alignments, yet just meet high speed rail definitions - 125 mph. These lines are _largely_ 4-track, with two tracks being fast tracks. If they had in-cab digital signals they would reach 140mph with existing track. But it is the *end to end* journey times that matter. If bottlenecks were removed with 160mph achievable on some sections of track and dedicated fast tracks, the _overall_ end to end journey times would be much faster. All _cheaply_ achievable. So they spend a fortune on a new track high speed line called HS2. This is *slow* end to end despite a claimed to speed of 250mph. The 100 direct miles between the London and Birmingham stations is covered at 113mph. In its busiest section HS2 is only 2-track - giving limited capacity. The Eastern leg of the _Y_ shaped network has pretty well been dropped, as existing lines can match it when upgraded using faster trains. Parts of the Western leg look like being dropped going on government leaks. There are constant protests and calls to drop the under construction horrendously expensive HS2. Tunnel construction is under way into London. There are calls to drop the whole project, but use the tunnels to connect onto a diesel line at Aylesbury, the Chiltern Line to Birmingham, but electrify the line. End to end journey time from London to Birmingham on an uprated Chiltern Line, will be pretty well the same as HS2. Taking the London-Birmingham trains off West Coast Mainline will release capacity on this line. All for a fraction of the price.
High speed rail is pointless unless you are going to avoid frequent stops at stations. In order to make it not pointless it needs to be able to run high speed for at least 15 minutes between each station. Which means the stations are positioned long distances apart. At least forty miles apart. And no one seems willing to do that. * I've ridden high speed rail in other countries and they all had so many stops at stations that the train only rarely gets up to a high speed and usually only holds that speed for less than five minutes. The whole trip was no faster than in a car on an interstate highway. If the train had not been "high speed" it would have added only about 5 or 10 minutes more travel time for a three hour trip. Fairly pointless for the big increase in cost. * They want a high speed rail from LA to San Francisco. The only way it would be worthwhile is if it was non-stop for the whole distance. That means no stations in-between LA and San Francisco. Don't forget that if you drive your car, when you get to your destination, you are exactly at your destination, and you don't have to take a cab, or walk a bunch of blocks. Nor do you have to rent a car because you already have your car with you.
Here in Australia we have 2 Japanese designed electric tilt trains still operating since 1998. They travel at a speed of 160km/h and tilt up to 5 degrees. They operate on standard narrow gauge tracks. In 2004 one derailed in a major incident, but they are still going. I wouldn’t say it’s hugely popular though as Australia has a highly competitive domestic Airline industry. Your video makes me want to go and book a ticket just to experience again!
Not having dedicated high-speed rails is also a huge problem here in Germany. Only the most important bussines routes connecting Karlsruhe, Frankfurt, Koeln/Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Berlin and Munich run on dedicated high speed networks. Most of the other lines run on standard rail, where they can't reach top speed even if the track is free.
Funny thing is it’s still better than our rail in the US. I know the Germans complain a lot about the rails there (and fair enough), but I’m always awestruck when I visit.
@@spartan117zm the biggest issue it has is reliability and dependency. I would never take a train to get to the airport because I’d be afraid to miss my flight if the train is delayed or simply canceled. DB Customer Service is also horrible and it takes ages to get any refunds. It’s also way to expensive. 4€ for a 20 minute one way trip just ain’t it.
@@TheBandit7613 You don't need coast to coast high-speed rail to have a good system. There's no reason to build a "next gen" Transcontinental Railroad, but go on, keep spewing anti-rail propaganda.
My dad and his Grandpa saw the Amtrak one on the northeast corridor. He said it must’ve been slowing down because he said that the sound wasn’t that bad. He saw another one while riding a Budd RDC and it flew by the RDC and it rocked the car because of the wind that the turbo train made.
It was at the Indianapolis Speedway in 1967 and 68 that the gas turbine powered racing car demonstrated superior performance. In both cases, with turbines leading in the final laps, the engines were shut down. Parnelli's car in 67 supposedly just slipped into neutral and stayed there. In 68 Pollard's car suffered a sheared fuel pump shaft, just as his teammate's car did, who was in 2nd place at the time. Big Oily wants piston engines (because of the friction and poor fuel mileage) and sooner or later they get their way. BTW, the marine industry has gone back to pistons as well. Petroleum fueled now; they pale in comparison to steam engines of the Titanic era.
so basically no high speed rail without high speed track? the APT ditched its turbines for 2 main reasons 1 the government thought nuclear power and electri trains were the future and 2 the APT was designed around old obselete turbines (ironic that the APT was built by British Rail in Derby which was also the home of Rolls-Royce aero engines yet it did not use a RR engine)
The current Acela fleet already has activate tilt system. As will the upcoming Avelia Liberty fleet have. Diffrent ones though. Current system is Bombardier made. Upcoming system will be by Alstom.
thats the problem, and its same here in australia too. a high speed line could easily run sydney - canberra - melbourne but no actual high speed track exists and would require construction, so they wont do it. So getting around the relatively compact south east corner of australia still requires a 90 min airplane flight with all the hours of pre and post travel waiting around that requires
The Australian high speed train, XPT, is designed to run on existing track. While it occasionally gets up to about 160 km / hr it is usually much slower and limited by track condition. It is diesel electric like most stock and is a sort of a knock off of the British version with improvements. It is now quite old and still runs. The Syd-Mel had a stack last year after giving it the gun to make up time and unaware that a speed limit was in place because the points had changed. Aussie is too poor for Tgv’s.
And yet here’s Amtrak, pouring out millions on flashy new Avelias that will never hit their top speed here in the US (unless CAHSR actually gets finished and decides to use them) instead of fixing the Hudson tunnels or doing any of the myriad other track repairs they could be doing.
French here to give you some extra comparing points, I can go tomorrow to a train station in Paris and take a TGV to go to Marseille (around 500 miles away, like San Francisco to San Diego), it would take me around 3h15 and cost me around 50$.
In the US a train takes about 10% longer than driving and costs around 10% more than flying. Sigh. Some commuter routes are quite a bit cheaper depending on how clever and flexible you are at sheduling. That said I do prefer the train over flying because I like the general experience better and enjoy the scenery... but only if I can get a direct route. Trians have more room than planes (for the tickets I can afford) and dont make me feel like crap. Once transfers are involved it has the same problem as airlines have: long wait times in uncomfortable waiting areas and possible missed connections and lost luggage. Not worth it. And unfortunately the East Coast routes are mess of connections with few functional Redeye services. And also unfortunately flying in the US on a budget ALWAYS means connecting flights, and often travelling in the opposite direction you are actually going. 🤦 Which all contributes directly to why many people in the US prefer to just drive. Because even flying can sometimes take just as long.
You should do a episode about the advances that France and Japan ( and now China too...) have done to their rail tracks over the years to get a safer rail system for higher speeds.
Japanese tilting EMUs/DMUs took different approach. They are often referred as Pendulum Express due to the motion of carriages. Briefly speaking, upper body swings along a pair of arc-shaped linear motors which is transversely aligned on the axle unit whilst vehicle enters curve. Electromechanical actuation is only used during transition of entering and exit. Negative is heavier unsprung mass and maintenance cost. I have ridden both Talgos and Pendulum trains. Latter is far more comfort and enjoyable. No scare feeling!
Not well remembered, but one of these sets was used near the beginning of Amtrak's existence to placate the Chairman of the U. S. House Surface Transportation Subcommittee, Harley Staggers (D-WV), to operate service over the B&O between Washington, DC and Parkersburg, WV on an every-other-day basis, with a conventional train covering the schedule the other days. For much of the distance between Parkersburg and Cumberland, MD, the train ambled along at a leisurely 40 mph. I rode the train from Parkersburg to Grafton, WV in April of 1972 with other fans in the "dome" section of the power car, behind the operator's compartment. Inside the train, with the exhausts coming up through that section, it sounded like one was riding inside a vacuum cleaner. We returned on a conventional late-B&O passenger era train, powered by a C&O E-Unit, in which I got my first cab ride for a little while, walking through the engine compartment, past the twin 567 prime movers to get to and from the head end..
Standard EMD diesel locomotives pull passenger trains at 100 mph with standard passenger wagons as regional commuter trains. The locomotives here in Denmark are old now and polluting, they were delivered from 1984, so at the same time as the Turbo. It has to be much faster.
I rode the Turbo between Toronto and Montreal a number of times. I always dashed up to get a seat in the bar area behind the engineers. There was a glass partition so you could see ahead down the tracks and watch the crew operate the train.
So the Turbo was not a fictional reference in Red Barchetta. Never knew.
Cooool!
Chris Root, your profile picture is perfect for this video! Long live the Swayze Express!
Could you tell a little more about please?
Man that's cool! I would have loved to experience that!
Researchers have later found that one can overdo tilting on a train. A combination of tilting train and track can give you a sensation of a "level" floor when rounding a curve at speed, but a feeling of nausea when the view of the ground tilting outside becomes "disconnected" from your ear's balance sense accelerometer. Not much of a problem in a jet, banking into a turn above the clouds versus being a few feet from the ground on a train. The solution was to adjust the tilt mechanism to counter the centrifugal force by 70% instead of 100%, so people feel some cornering forces to correspond to the view outside.
Is that the Coriolis effect or something different?
@@eottoe2001 It's the same basic principle as to why people get sea-sick - the orientation the brain derives from the accelerometers of the inner ear and the one it derives from the eyes diverge too much, especially dynamically. Nothing whatsoever to do with coriolis.
@@KaiHenningsen I guess I over thought the problem. Thanks.
the urine stench that is standard in british trains does not help either
When Mercedes developed their air suspension for the S class, they initially set it to completely eliminate roll. Before starting sales, they reprogrammed the system to allow for a small amount of roll, because everyone who tested the car felt it behaved wrong
Man, it’s devastating to hear that not a single one survived. I would have loved to see it in person.
I saw it. Walk on its side while it was being scrapped in Laval, north of Montréal, but never ride it !
Very sad that this became its fate... it shows so much but not a single one survived, this train shows that you need high speed track and the train and not just the train its self. This seems like it would be awesome to ride. too bad we can't even see it.
So sad. Museums would have ate them up!
@@Superflight777geeven the rail museums didnt want them . They only wanted to preserve steam era stuff .
My dad's uncle was in charge of the Turbo at United Aircraft. One of the big problems they had was that the tracks were not welded like on dedicated high speed rails. They ran the train so fast that the vibrations would loosen all the spikes!
Thankfully the tracks along the Toronto-Montreal line (and all other busy passenger routes) have since been welded for a smoother ride
Took the Turbo a few times on trips to Toronto from Montreal (Dorval) when I was young. My brother and I would sit behind the engineer and conductor and watch in amazement as everything went by at 100 MPH. I do remember getting tossed around when you got up to walk through the cars.
The concept of high-speed rail in the United States was never really taken seriously after 1955. There were companies that researched it, but after the Interstate system was completed, heavy rail was only looked at as a means of transporting materials and goods, not people.
Quite right. It's too bad that passenger rail travel wasn't considered as a means to alleviate automobile congestion on the roads in those days. Today, the multilane freeways and other systems are highly inefficient and risky to travel on. For example, metro areas like Houston ,Texas has an ever expanding multilane system that gets worse as time goes on.
@@Reiman33 they also thought cars would become crashproof and travel at higher and higher speeds.
Same thing happened in Brasil sadly
@@Solnoric Computers will eventually do that. For now, not quite
@@midgetman4206 AI cars (if they ever arrive) can't solve the inefficiency inherent to cars, it takes a fucking amount of city space and a lot of energy, to move 1.15 people.
I remember watching the Turbo fly though the suburbs of Montreal as a kid. Amazing sound and looked really futuristic then! Like a 747 on the tracks...
it might have had its flaws, but it just looks so frickin cool.
My grandfather was the conductor on that VIA Turbo that burned to the ground. His brother-in-law was the conductor on the CN train that hit the meat truck on the inaugural run in Canada.
I take it your family avoids the lottery?
I'm curious about your father's and your own profession. Any outstanding stories to tell? 😁
@@Ganiscol Many I would think. A true CN family! My uncle Joe drove for the CNR for 52 years.
We like to keep it all in the family here in Canada lol
When Geddy Lee of Canadian band Rush sang "Jump to the ground as the Turbo slows to cross the borderline" I assumed it was an entirely fictional view of the future, I never realised there was genuinely a turbine train called the Turbo in Canada at the time!
I rode that train from Boston to NYC in the early 1970s. It was great trip. The observation decks at either end of the train also held the train controls and engineers. Passengers could talk to the engineers while they were operating the train.
The notion that going fast around a (relatively) flat curve would disturb passengers did not materialize. In the US, only the most senior engineers could bid on passenger trains. They were extremely skilled in train handling and could set up ahead of a curve to take it without slowing down.
While maintaining throttle, a quick reduction in brake pipe pressure would apply the brakes to the cars. In the time it took for the last car to apply its brakes, the engineer would release the brakes entering the curve. As a result, each car in turn would essentially float to the center line of the track without hitting the outside or inside rail with a wheel flange. To the passengers, the effect was as if they were riding on tangent track.
That's pretty cool. Railroading is a skilled profession.
@FT20 Adam Hlalip
A modern wheeled train might hit, let's say, 225mph. Even if you do everything right, you're still going to experience ten times the lateral force that you would at 70mph, on the same curve. Soup is going to spill.
BART ([San Francisco] Bay Area Rapid Transit) trains are horrendously noisy in curves because of flange rub. Especially inside tunnels. Makes for a very unpleasant ride.
@@ztoob8898 That's because of a horrible designed wheel that wears flat rather than remaining cambered.
Shame that none of the train is on display at a museum. I would love to see the drive trian they used from jet to wheel..
for sure, the PT6 ran at about 6000 rpm , think it's a single spool with a centrifical and axial section.. so the reduction gear must have been a sun and planet arrangement, turbines make better torque than you think, hence lm1500's used in marine applications and pumping natural gas etc.. cool thing is there's no physical connection from the turbine to the gas generator.. so even if things go bad down the line , your power plant's sort of protected..
I believe they run sort of like a helicopter, thing runs at it's peak speed all the time, and you sort of sap off the power you need.. most pt6 powered aircraft have a low idle, and high power lever to save wear and tare on the engine on the taxiway.. plus fuel..
Be interesting to know why they chose this power plant over others out there..
I always enjoy that footage of the TGV overtaking the aeroplane. What a wonderful bit of PR that was.
If you’re talking about the world record speed run, that was the plane filming from the air. They had to use a small, fast jet to keep up with the train. In the U.S. a single-engine Cessna would be enough.
EDIT: Serves me right for commenting before watching the whole video. Yes, in this one the TGV passes a plane. You should still watch the record runs though. Absolutely insane speed.
@@GregInTokyo American's really excelled in large steam traction, Big boy is no joke, can out pull most modern Diesel unit's .. It could hit about 85 mph Due it's 68 inch wheels, sort of low Gearing to get up Sherman Hill with a mile long consist..
now I'm pretty sure a fully Loaded Hamilcar glider would fly at 85 mph, would be interesting to see it pull like 50 of them into a headwind, with like 1000 wake borders in water diches beside the track..
If I owned one I'd challenge any tractor to a pull of..in fact ..they could bring them all at once to save time, and throw in an SD40 for good measure..
I rode the Amtrak turbo from Montreal to Grand Central Terminal NYC. It was called The Adirondack. When I would walk through GCT, I would see it and dream of taking a ride on it. I never thought it would actually happen. I'm so happy I had the opportunity to ride the Amtrak Turbo Train.
I love the whole style of traveling by train. Just feels more comfortable overall!
Unfortunately, wars for oil do not agree with you.
It is more comfortable
It is. If the speed is right its the most comfortable options. Never got cramps on an intercity train. Many times on plane and cars. And no numbness as well. Plus you can get up go to the cafeteria and eat drink while enjoying the fast passing view table and wifi/mobile data.
Thanks Paul, that was great. I remember seeing the VIA Rail turbo in Union Station in Toronto, but never rode one. Two things - the PT6 was developed by Pratt & Whitney Canada and, still in use today, is one of the best turboprop engines ever. Also, to correct you, it is Grand Central Terminal - Grand Central Station is a post office.
Right. Canadian gas turbine in a Canadian train!
@@michaelrmurphy2734 Absolutely!
I love how Amtrak tried it for a short time but it ended up being more sucessful in Canada until it was replace in the 80's witht he Bombardier/MLW LRC (Light, Rapid, Comfortable) which was another attempt at a "high speed" train with tilt, but could only run 180 km/h in certain area's with tilt enabled)
The LRCs were limited to 160 km/h in service, due to the numerous grade crossings, lack of in cab signaling, and mixed traffic with freight trains. Due to problems with the mechanism, like occasionally "locking up" in tilt position, VIA gave up trying to maintain the system in the early 2000s and permanently "straightened" them.
@@haweater1555 they could do 180 on some parts, but they got limited on most of the Windsor-Quebec Corridor.
Kinda like how the Acela can't do high speed on most of its route, and only has some sections that it can go full speed.
Amtrak ran their Turbo trains into the ground and never maintained them properly .
"rapid disembarkation"
"Oh my god the train is on fire" moment
The Chieftain?
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114My thoughts exactly
I guess that on-board fire extinguishing systems weren't that common back then. Another thing that has improved since.
I rode this train when it ran between New York and Boston. I was going to visit a friend on Boston, and was in about 6th grade at the time. I was already totally into trains, and knew what it meant to get a ride on the TurboTrain. In Grand Central I managed to get on the train ahead of most people and so was able to sit directly behind the engineer. The plexi partition meant that you could look past the engineer and see ahead, which was in itself an incredible thing. I recall the Mars light sweeping the tunnel as we left GCT, and there was at least one other person in the cab with the engineer and fireman, I don't know why. At that time, third rail ended at Woodlawn in the Bronx. At that point we changed over from third rail; the engineer started the engines, which were quite audible. As I remember it, we saw a top speed of 105, which was through Rhode Island and Massachusetts. It was a fairly rough ride, but I think that was due more to the deferred maintenance ( I stil love that euphemism) of the New Haven's trackage than the performance of the train itself.
re. new track - "shinkansen" literally means "new trunk line", which shows the relative importance of the track and the train
Japan used largely small gauge tracks, while the US and North America in general use standard gauge. The Shinkansen uses standard gauge. Of course in the Japan they figured out that concrete track supports helped with warping. Anyway idk if what I just typed meant sene
warai-otoko!
@@TheWizardGamez makes perfect sense
Paul Shillito is by far and away the best in the business. Plain and simple. 🥇
Great content as always. I remembered seeing pictures of these when I was a kid in the late 80s but had forgotten about them. Thank you for keeping this awesome part of our history from being forgotten.
Amtrak operated Talgo train sets in the U. S. Pacific Northwest between 1994 and 2020. These were cantilevered tilting cars suspended over a single axle between cars, pulled by a conventional diesel passenger locomotive. They were successful, but limited in speed by the condition of the tracks. The series 6 cars were retired, but series 8 sets still run.
It's so sad that not even a single unit was saved at a museum. 😥
Ya, the CN ones looked like airplanes with the red/orange noses.
The train museum has a turbo engine
@@Freedomfred939 So CD I actually wrong?
@@JohnJohansen2 an engine from a power car is only one small piece, although still important and historic.
Well VIA Rail offered one...and at the other end...none was interested....too modern.....
How have I never heard of this - this is awesome.
I had no idea about any of this - it seems very similar to the UK experience on the face of it.
It does doesn't it?
Well guess what all the aforesaid nations have in common? Monopoly capitalism. America is just the kingpin so to speak. The US dollar and Canada's is banked on fossil fuels, ultimately it doesn't matter much what the dominant transport industry is whether it's autos, aircraft, diesel (of some form or another) trains, it doesn't even matter that much if they're either petroleum or electric as 40% of electricity in the US is from natural gas.
I went on the TGV in 1984, from Lyons to Paris in 2hrs exactly - 500km at 250km/hr and I remember standing in the bar with a cold beer and not even noticing that I was traveling so fast-such a smooth journey !
TGV 40 years old as per yesterday
Drinking beer while someone else is getting you where you are going!
Thanks for covering this obscure piece of North American high-speed rail history.
Any chance you might do the successor projects to this such as the LRC or Metroliner?
Also the original Amtrak Acela, whose coaches were an updated version of the LRC coach
When I was a kid, probably 1971 or 1972 my father took me to Montreal on the Turbo. It was extremely cool for a little kid but it broke down for 2 hours on route. It is a shame we didn't build the track needed back then, downtown to downtown on a bombardier high speed train now would be two hours or less.
9:32 - "Jump to the ground as the turbo slows, to cross the borderline...."
Rush - Red Barchetta
I absolutely love the designs of these retro concept trains. One of which being the American Aerotrain.
Fun fact, Talgo continues to use the suspension system and variable geometry today in its 300kmh ++ very high speed trains, it is a great success for them.
Uhh all the American talgos were scrapped
Love when Curious Droid does trains. More ploise!
8:50 The gas turbine TGV001 exceeded 300 km/h (186 mph) on 175 occasions and reached 318 km/h (198 mph) on 8 December 1972. That's the world record for a gas turbine train that still stands today.
I was unaware that the Turbo also ran in the U.S. I only rode on it once, going from Toronto to Montreal in 1977. It broke down outside of Toronto and all the passengers were transferred to another mostly full train going by way of Ottawa. My father was a locomotive engineer for CN and he drove the Turbo on several occasions.
I remember the Turbo trains in the Ontario/Quebec corridor. I was fascinated with them as a child, yet I never had the opportunity to ride one back-in-the-day. I do remember their mechanical shortcomings were never mentioned through the major media of the day. For some reason the Turbo locomotives were frequently left running while parked in Union Station in Toronto. One of them overheated, melting the roof of the locomotive causing a fire which gutted half of the train that was still connected in-full. They looked cool, but the technology just wasn't there yet.
It's a cool looking train. Like the sort of trains you'd see on monorails in the "future cities" in media like Godzilla films or on Thunderbirds. The idea of opening noses that can link to other trains was a sensible idea.
Such a beautiful design! 😍
Thank you, Paul, for another great report with excellent video and pictures.
I used to pick up my Dad when he took the Turbo Train from NY to Boston. Real cool looking. I was too young to drive so my Mom and I would pick up my Dad. Brings back good memories.
Amtrak's Rohr Turboliners were a much more successful incarnation of the turbine engine train in America. Inaugurated in 1975, they ran in passenger service until 2003 with intentions to run much further, but a complete rebuild program was abandoned midway through and the trains scrapped a decade later. They didn't have aspiration to be true "high speed" and didn't tilt.
Love the channel. Would it would be great to see a video on the UK's HST at some point. They're a bit of a favourite of mine
for about half a second I was thinking you were referring to the "harmonised sales tax" HST which I have to deal with and pay over here in Canadianaland haha I was thinking why the hell you or anyone else would think that it was a remotely interesting topic for a video... turns out? Im just an idiot. =)
@@ScumfuckMcDoucheface lol all good. The HST's were actually a big success and have lasted nearly four decades. Two of the great original design features were opening windows on the doors and no mufflers. If I ever feel bad about the world I pop the headphones on max and listen to the gentle clanking waiting for the tunnel. th-cam.com/video/y-St8pxUr0w/w-d-xo.html
I always enjoy your shirts. Big pimpin.
CONGRATS to Paul for achieving the magic milestone of One Million Subs.....Love your channel, your presentation and production value is top notch.
Hang on, I thought that the TGV 001 prototype, which was also running on gas turbines reached 280 kph on his 20th of July 1972 trials... And reached up to 318 kph on the 5th of December of the same year...
France also made the RTGs, the intercity turbotrains that were very reliable and that were sold to Iran later on. Amtrack even aquired some of them for testing if memory serves.
I was a newly hired Carman for CN cleaning coaches in the Spadina yard when the Turbo Train fire happened. We were told at the time that the fire was caused when a copper fuel line broke due to years of vibration. My question has always been what kind of engineer would design a fuel system with hard copper lines? I never made any sense then and still makes no sense. But according to the senior guys who had been maintaining the Turbo its was typical of the engineering on that train.
Such a shame that not one of these sets was preserved in a museum.
They were well inside the era when rare trains were being preserved, and certainly unique enough to have merited the interest.
Hey Paul, this is kind of a great story for me. My dad was very involved in the Turbo project, as an engineer at United Aircraft in Montreal. He spent a lot of time in Hartford Connecticut working on this, before being one of the key sales engineers when the train came to CN.
This is turning into one of my favourite channels, because I hadI suggested that you cover the Napier Deltic engines back a few months ago. The reason was my father was also very involved with that powerset, including the British Rail implementation, as well as marine engineering deployments.
He in fact came back to Canada with a newly-minted marriage to my mother, expressly to sell the Deltic. But Napier's overall fortunes were not great in the fifties. He left Napier, and got his job at UA, largely on the strength of experience with the Deltic, and specifically to develop proposals for the PT6-ST6. In that capacity, he also worked on the PT6 Indy turbine car - another interesting story - and the DDH-280 Tribal Class destroyers for the Canadian Navy - again, in part through his experience with fast torpedo boats running on the Deltic.
The story you tell is great, and a bit of a heartbreaker for dad. I think there was something about the Turbo that meant more to him than most of the other stuff. But he also understood that the conditions in Canada were pretty unpromising for it.
What's not included in the story, is how rail traffic is allocated in Canada. The passenger services never made much money, so even when they were run by the same company - in this case, CN - economic realities meant that the passenger trains took second of third or fourth priority. A lot of work was done to overcome this on the crucial Quebec City-Montreal-Toronto-Windsor line, which was judged to be the only high volume corridor in Canada that could hope to justify this project.
But Canada had two competing railways - CN and Canadian Pacific - both losing money of passengers. It seemed rational to spin off both services into Via Rail. But the problem immediately was (and still is), that after that, Via had to rent rails from CN and CP, whose power to reprioritize their use grew greater, now that they didn't have to take responsibility for unhappy passengers - "that's Via, madam, not us".
This was also the transition era to welded rail, so a lot of the lines the Turbo ran on were waiting upgrading, or partly upgraded, meaning that track conditions could vary wildly, as the trains transitioned from the long ribbons to short, ill fitting, usually under maintained sections.
The bigger backstory is that the original railways built in Canada were full of inducements to their private developers, of huge land grants, extending miles on either side of the tracks. This meant that the railway companies got the best routes at the very beginning in perpetuity, and had no interest in playing ball to allocate land to building a dedicated high speed line. After all, they might one day want to do that themselves, and they weren't giving up the control they had of prime routes.
The maintenance issues were another thing, mentioned at the end. UA came up with a really innovative model for removing the power units completely, and swapping them in, rather than maintaining them in the units. Given their small size, and low weight, and their complete lack of fit to the existing railway maintenance infrastructure, this was a good idea, but still caused problems with unionized diesel mechanics who worked on the other trains.
As with Napier before, dad left UA and went to another company that valued his experience. That company was Montreal Locomotive Works, who he'd worked with during the original construction of the Turbos. While he was there, they released the LRC, a conventional diesel-electric engine and linked car set, that like the turbo was supposed to use the shared bogie system. These trains, like the Turbo, were designed to be very lightweight, and had active banking mechanisms, powered by the diesel power unit.
This meant, I think, that they were incompatible with normal engines in service, which was the beginning of the problem. Then, the banking mechanisms were not all they were hoped to be. And in addition, the same problems of shared rails, and subsidies to a domestic regional air carriers, airports, etc, mad this play at a med-high speed rail service a dead duck.
The power units did live on, though, for a number of years after the carriages were done away with.Because of their low profile, they always looked a bit ridiculous, pulling the higher standard coaches. But they were fast workhorses, possibly because of the extended legacy, going back to the Royal Scot, that had shaped them.
If you are ever looking for another Canadian-based subject - no, not the Avro Arrow - I'd love to see how you'd treat the Bras D'Or, Canada's hydrofoil, for quite a while the fastest warship in the world. Again, that was a project dad worked on, and the other thing he was most wistful about...
Dude, you need a Curious Droid segment of your own! The Avro Arrow, the Brad D'Or... I hear ya!
Don't forget a lot of VIA rolling stock is second hand from the Chunnel. Cars were built for the dash over to France but could not be used because they did not meet the specs. VIA came along and bought them and I see them here in Halifax all the time. Across from Pier 21. Like any other business you have to put money back into it to KEEP making money. Passenger rail anywhere in the world is no different. I would far rather travel by train. Given that driving and air travel are maxing out its simply a matter of time for passenger rail to revive.
Thank you for one more outstanding video.
The double-decker cars used by New Jersey Transit to NYC are extremely smooth compared to the old SEPTA trains I used to take in Philadelphia (since upgraded). Are modern passenger cars using a version of this system or something completely different?
The Bombardier/Alstom Multi-Levels don’t tilt, but they probably have a better suspension than the single-axle bogies between cars on the turbo-trains.
I'm surprised that this train wasn't nicknamed "The Dodo" since that's the first thing that popped into my mind upon seeing big red beak in the front...
Excellent video. In Canada the Turbo train sets were replaced with a more conventional diesel electric tilting train made by Bombardier called the LRC. Many of the LRC carriages (without the LRC locomotives or tilting systems active) are still in service today with VIA until they’re replaced with new sets in the next few years with their new HFR program (Dedicated tracks finally!!) and Siemens built locomotives. Cheers!
I remember this train being advertised in the station when I was little. I was enthralled, and wanted so much to see it. But, being on the Toronto - Windsor section of the corridor, never got the chance. Being older and wiser now, I realize the impracticality of turbine engines on rail vehicles. If you want to save weight, then electrification is the best route. And yes, you have to have to have a dedicated track.
We’re now forty years behind in our infrastructure, and the cost to develop is huge. But the “401” corridor for passenger cars is almost at its max, and the corridor now needs the high speed train more than ever.
Great video. Learned a lot. I rode Canada from Montreal, Quebec, Ottawa and Toronto in 2018. As well as France, Japan, China and others over the years. What it taught me was you don't have to have highspeed to have reliable useful rail traffic. It is is more about running 60 - 80 mph consistently and station access that is located in the middle of town/ where people need to go. In other words, there nothing high speed about high speed rail. Sure faster is better, but cost effective? Historical example, Pennsylvania rr electric lines on north east corridor.
Great video as always
Correction at time stamp 0:20
170mph is about 274kmh (not 247kmh)
Heartbreaking to see the state of American public transport today and then see what it could have been.
I agree it's corrupt and backward, controlled by the politicians
What it could have been? 200 mile an hour train tracks with level crossings on them? That would be a disaster.
No high speed tracks. no high speed rail.
period.
end of story.
we NEVER had the will to build custom track. These tilting trains were NEVER the future.
@@marionette5968 nah but public transportation still sucks in America
@@thereisnofinishline5773 No it doesn't. I ain't sitting on a bus with you. I'd rather spend more and use my own car. For longer distances, I'd rather take a plane that travels at 600 mph than a train going 180 mph. The USA is WAY bigger than Europe and has several mountain ranges. Trains are too slow and inefficient. It's expensive to build and maintain tracks that are smooth enough to travel 150 mph. Trains can't compete. But they are excellent at moving large amounts of freight long distances. The USA has the best freight rail system in the world.
@@marionette5968 Yea the only way it'd ever work is with dedicated track. You can't have a train screaming along at 100+ between smalltown and smalltown. That's got dumb idea written all over it.
The UKs West Coast Mainline, East Coast Mainline and Midlands Mainline have no new track alignments, yet just meet high speed rail definitions - 125 mph. These lines are _largely_ 4-track, with two tracks being fast tracks.
If they had in-cab digital signals they would reach 140mph with existing track.
But it is the *end to end* journey times that matter. If bottlenecks were removed with 160mph achievable on some sections of track and dedicated fast tracks, the _overall_ end to end journey times would be much faster.
All _cheaply_ achievable. So they spend a fortune on a new track high speed line called HS2. This is *slow* end to end despite a claimed to speed of 250mph. The 100 direct miles between the London and Birmingham stations is covered at 113mph.
In its busiest section HS2 is only 2-track - giving limited capacity. The Eastern leg of the _Y_ shaped network has pretty well been dropped, as existing lines can match it when upgraded using faster trains. Parts of the Western leg look like being dropped going on government leaks.
There are constant protests and calls to drop the under construction horrendously expensive HS2. Tunnel construction is under way into London. There are calls to drop the whole project, but use the tunnels to connect onto a diesel line at Aylesbury, the Chiltern Line to Birmingham, but electrify the line. End to end journey time from London to Birmingham on an uprated Chiltern Line, will be pretty well the same as HS2. Taking the London-Birmingham trains off West Coast Mainline will release capacity on this line.
All for a fraction of the price.
High speed rail is pointless unless you are going to avoid frequent stops at stations. In order to make it not pointless it needs to be able to run high speed for at least 15 minutes between each station. Which means the stations are positioned long distances apart. At least forty miles apart. And no one seems willing to do that.
* I've ridden high speed rail in other countries and they all had so many stops at stations that the train only rarely gets up to a high speed and usually only holds that speed for less than five minutes. The whole trip was no faster than in a car on an interstate highway. If the train had not been "high speed" it would have added only about 5 or 10 minutes more travel time for a three hour trip. Fairly pointless for the big increase in cost.
* They want a high speed rail from LA to San Francisco. The only way it would be worthwhile is if it was non-stop for the whole distance. That means no stations in-between LA and San Francisco. Don't forget that if you drive your car, when you get to your destination, you are exactly at your destination, and you don't have to take a cab, or walk a bunch of blocks. Nor do you have to rent a car because you already have your car with you.
Here in Australia we have 2 Japanese designed electric tilt trains still operating since 1998. They travel at a speed of 160km/h and tilt up to 5 degrees. They operate on standard narrow gauge tracks. In 2004 one derailed in a major incident, but they are still going. I wouldn’t say it’s hugely popular though as Australia has a highly competitive domestic Airline industry. Your video makes me want to go and book a ticket just to experience again!
Not having dedicated high-speed rails is also a huge problem here in Germany. Only the most important bussines routes connecting Karlsruhe, Frankfurt, Koeln/Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Berlin and Munich run on dedicated high speed networks. Most of the other lines run on standard rail, where they can't reach top speed even if the track is free.
Funny thing is it’s still better than our rail in the US. I know the Germans complain a lot about the rails there (and fair enough), but I’m always awestruck when I visit.
@@spartan117zm the biggest issue it has is reliability and dependency. I would never take a train to get to the airport because I’d be afraid to miss my flight if the train is delayed or simply canceled. DB Customer Service is also horrible and it takes ages to get any refunds. It’s also way to expensive. 4€ for a 20 minute one way trip just ain’t it.
You are an internet treasure!
I really enjoyed that. So well researched, just brilliant
I'm a Canadian and I had never heard of this. Thanks for covering this!
You must be young, right?
Congrats for 1 Mil!! Long time viewer, love your vids, and your shirts :)
Excellent video Curious Droid! As an American, I can tell you that it frustrates me to no end, that we don’t have high speed rail here in the 🇺🇸.
if we had high speed rail in the US , id go see the entire country by rail. ,. flying , especially now is a nightmare.
Brightline is now building high speed rail from Miami to Orlando eventually finishing in Tampa.
First sensible shirt I've seen you wear great episode as usual
I could watch you all day
Yes, we in the states are living in the train track FLINTSTONES era! Yabba dabba doo! Another great video sir. Thank you!
The USA is too big for coast to coast high speed rail. High speed rail is too slow to compete with planes that can go 600 mph.
WAY too expensive.
@@TheBandit7613 You don't need coast to coast high-speed rail to have a good system. There's no reason to build a "next gen" Transcontinental Railroad, but go on, keep spewing anti-rail propaganda.
@@TheBandit7613 yaba yaba doo enjoy your old shithole trains
@@randomscb-40charger78 he 3rd world
Only enable the tilting mechanism above a minimum speed. Sharp slow speed curves would no longer be a problem.
The whole thing was mechanical, derived from the suspension. In an "always active" condition.
My dad and his Grandpa saw the Amtrak one on the northeast corridor. He said it must’ve been slowing down because he said that the sound wasn’t that bad.
He saw another one while riding a Budd RDC and it flew by the RDC and it rocked the car because of the wind that the turbo train made.
The train museum in Ogden Utah has a turbo train in its collection. During the tour the museum said the noise from the turbo was its undoing.
It was at the Indianapolis Speedway in 1967 and 68 that the gas turbine powered racing car demonstrated superior performance. In both cases, with turbines leading in the final laps, the engines were shut down. Parnelli's car in 67 supposedly just slipped into neutral and stayed there. In 68 Pollard's car suffered a sheared fuel pump shaft, just as his teammate's car did, who was in 2nd place at the time. Big Oily wants piston engines (because of the friction and poor fuel mileage) and sooner or later they get their way. BTW, the marine industry has gone back to pistons as well. Petroleum fueled now; they pale in comparison to steam engines of the Titanic era.
Ahh...the past, neglected glory. Cheers.
Love your work as always.
so basically no high speed rail without high speed track? the APT ditched its turbines for 2 main reasons 1 the government thought nuclear power and electri trains were the future and 2 the APT was designed around old obselete turbines (ironic that the APT was built by British Rail in Derby which was also the home of Rolls-Royce aero engines yet it did not use a RR engine)
I could've sworn that the new Acela train that's going to start running in the US will be tilting too.
The current Acela fleet already has activate tilt system. As will the upcoming Avelia Liberty fleet have. Diffrent ones though. Current system is Bombardier made. Upcoming system will be by Alstom.
thats the problem, and its same here in australia too. a high speed line could easily run sydney - canberra - melbourne but no actual high speed track exists and would require construction, so they wont do it. So getting around the relatively compact south east corner of australia still requires a 90 min airplane flight with all the hours of pre and post travel waiting around that requires
very interessting, thanks a lot!
The Australian high speed train, XPT, is designed to run on existing track. While it occasionally gets up to about 160 km / hr it is usually much slower and limited by track condition. It is diesel electric like most stock and is a sort of a knock off of the British version with improvements. It is now quite old and still runs. The Syd-Mel had a stack last year after giving it the gun to make up time and unaware that a speed limit was in place because the points had changed. Aussie is too poor for Tgv’s.
Sounds a lot like the LRC train here in Canada, introduced in 1981. New trainsets are expected to arrive from Siemens next year.
What’s funny is that We still haven’t learned from the turbo train. Our trains are still limited by the track conditions
And yet here’s Amtrak, pouring out millions on flashy new Avelias that will never hit their top speed here in the US (unless CAHSR actually gets finished and decides to use them) instead of fixing the Hudson tunnels or doing any of the myriad other track repairs they could be doing.
I knew none of this. Why? Excellent video, well researched and narrated! Top marks.
French here to give you some extra comparing points, I can go tomorrow to a train station in Paris and take a TGV to go to Marseille (around 500 miles away, like San Francisco to San Diego), it would take me around 3h15 and cost me around 50$.
In the US a train takes about 10% longer than driving and costs around 10% more than flying. Sigh. Some commuter routes are quite a bit cheaper depending on how clever and flexible you are at sheduling.
That said I do prefer the train over flying because I like the general experience better and enjoy the scenery... but only if I can get a direct route. Trians have more room than planes (for the tickets I can afford) and dont make me feel like crap. Once transfers are involved it has the same problem as airlines have: long wait times in uncomfortable waiting areas and possible missed connections and lost luggage. Not worth it. And unfortunately the East Coast routes are mess of connections with few functional Redeye services. And also unfortunately flying in the US on a budget ALWAYS means connecting flights, and often travelling in the opposite direction you are actually going. 🤦 Which all contributes directly to why many people in the US prefer to just drive. Because even flying can sometimes take just as long.
Goes to show how complex and expensive it is to build a completely new transportation network.
Damn, amidst all this talk of the London toronto montreal corridor you realize all this has been done before, great video
Great video, just I don't think any decent engineering channel should take hyperloop seriously anymore. Even just in advertisements.
You should do a episode about the advances that France and Japan ( and now China too...) have done to their rail tracks over the years to get a safer rail system for higher speeds.
Japanese tilting EMUs/DMUs took different approach. They are often referred as Pendulum Express due to the motion of carriages. Briefly speaking, upper body swings along a pair of arc-shaped linear motors which is transversely aligned on the axle unit whilst vehicle enters curve. Electromechanical actuation is only used during transition of entering and exit. Negative is heavier unsprung mass and maintenance cost. I have ridden both Talgos and Pendulum trains. Latter is far more comfort and enjoyable. No scare feeling!
I used to sit by the water at Bay Ridges Ontario and remember CN railways turbos honking by in the distance. A long time ago .......
Not well remembered, but one of these sets was used near the beginning of Amtrak's existence to placate the Chairman of the U. S. House Surface Transportation Subcommittee, Harley Staggers (D-WV), to operate service over the B&O between Washington, DC and Parkersburg, WV on an every-other-day basis, with a conventional train covering the schedule the other days. For much of the distance between Parkersburg and Cumberland, MD, the train ambled along at a leisurely 40 mph. I rode the train from Parkersburg to Grafton, WV in April of 1972 with other fans in the "dome" section of the power car, behind the operator's compartment. Inside the train, with the exhausts coming up through that section, it sounded like one was riding inside a vacuum cleaner. We returned on a conventional late-B&O passenger era train, powered by a C&O E-Unit, in which I got my first cab ride for a little while, walking through the engine compartment, past the twin 567 prime movers to get to and from the head end..
0:17 There's a small number flip here: 170 mph is actuall 274 km/h, not 247.
Excellent! sad at the same time! Tech vs economy sometimes do not match! Thank you!
Congratulations for the 1 million subscribers best-dressed man on TH-cam! :-)
Really enjoyed that one
Good video, you always fail to disappoint!
this is an awesome looking train
Same problem in Portugal. Trains that reach 225 km/h (140 mi/h) don't have a dedicated track, something which hinders their potential.
Standard EMD diesel locomotives pull passenger trains at 100 mph with standard passenger wagons as regional commuter trains.
The locomotives here in Denmark are old now and polluting, they were delivered from 1984, so at the same time as the Turbo.
It has to be much faster.