California's High Speed Rail

2012-07-19 13:08:52

#51

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

mtb0minime wrote:
Longer travel time (so long that they're worried it may not be under the limit required by the prop). Tens of billions higher cost. Don't care how many red dots in the middle it connects, still an awful idea.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I still think it's a tremendous waste of money. At least you guys outlawed all the redevelopment agencies.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-09-13 00:58:05

#52

bree09: Disabled; +0|4484

Ilocano wrote:
"While Stockton's bankruptcy troubles can be traced in part to the collapse of the housing market and the subsequent erosion of the city's tax base, for years city leaders also mismanaged and overspent funds, pushing the city into financial peril, analysts and current city officials say. Stockton cannot afford the $417 million it owes for retiree health benefits, city officials say, and this year a bank repossessed city-owned parking garages and a $40 million building the city had bought with plans for an upgraded City Hall. "

Stockton's bankruptcy case may become the single largest such case in history. But that is not its only Guinness-worthy record recently. It also received what amounts to the largest parking ticket ever written. And it reiterates a simple financial lesson for us all.

Article here: http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2012/04/17/stockton-parking-garage/

2012-11-23 09:48:51

#53

Extra Medium: THE UZI SLAYER; +79|4434|Oklahoma

Is it not possible to use existing rail lines or something? Don't know much about trains.

2012-11-23 10:12:45

#54

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

Extra Medium wrote:
Is it not possible to use existing rail lines or something? Don't know much about trains.

No. They need heavier rails in order to run at high speeds.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-23 17:31:36

#55

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
Extra Medium wrote:
Is it not possible to use existing rail lines or something? Don't know much about trains.
No. They need heavier rails in order to run at high speeds.

Its much much more complex than changing the rails to slightly heavier ones
The weight of the rail is the least significant part of the track design for high speed rail.

Please, stick to pastries.

Fuck Israel

2012-11-23 17:52:34

#56

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
Extra Medium wrote:
Is it not possible to use existing rail lines or something? Don't know much about trains.
No. They need heavier rails in order to run at high speeds.
Its much much more complex than changing the rails to slightly heavier ones
The weight of the rail is the least significant part of the track design for high speed rail.

Please, stick to pastries.

They have smaller tolerances, faster switching, better signals and thus require more maintenance. They also need to have better strain resistance due to thermal shock. Better? I was keeping it simple.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-23 21:42:10

#57

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

The weight of the rail is the least of the problems.

Track substructure, camber, curve design, bridge design and tunnel design are all far more important, all of the above need to be carefully engineered in harmony with the track design - its definitely more complex than simply bolting on heavier rails - if they're needed at all.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-11-23 21:53:36)

Fuck Israel

2012-11-23 21:56:21

#58

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
The weight of the rail is the least of the problems.

Track substructure, camber, curve design, bridge design and tunnel design are all far more important, its definitely more complex than simply bolting on heavier rails - if they're needed at all.

You need heavier rails to dissipate heat and prevent excess bending moments. But yes, there are about a million different things preventing high speed trains on slow tracks, just like you wouldn't want to race a car at 150+ mph on stock tires on a road designed for 30 mph speeds. Again, I was just keeping the answer simple.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-24 03:03:15

#59

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

What heat? Hysteresis heating in steel is trivial, what are you on about?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-11-24 03:04:22)

Fuck Israel

2012-11-24 03:36:04

#60

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|7011|PNW

Why isn't the desert xpress linked up with the other high-speed rail lines?

2012-11-24 08:05:43

#61

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
What heat? Hysteresis heating in steel is trivial, what are you on about?

μF_n will be higher than with a normal train. Trains wheels generate a lot of heat.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-24 10:22:39

#62

PigPopTart: Shotgun whore; +133|6528|Pacific NW, USA

All I'm really interested in is how fast the trains will be going.

Rufknsrsbro?

2012-11-24 12:47:37

#63

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|6910|UK

usually ~300km/h

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2012-11-24 14:15:18

#64

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|7011|PNW

m3thod wrote:
usually ~300km/h

California is also in the US.

2012-11-24 16:20:17

#65

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|6910|UK

why would the speed change because of US locality?

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2012-11-24 20:11:04

#66

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
What heat? Hysteresis heating in steel is trivial, what are you on about?
μF_n will be higher than with a normal train. Trains wheels generate a lot of heat.

I can't read whatever symbols you've used.

Train wheels generate a lot of heat, the rails don't see any of it, heating of the rails isn't mentioned anywhere that I can find as being a factor in rail design - whereas many other factors are.

So where did you get this idea from?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-11-24 20:12:50)

Fuck Israel

2012-11-24 20:43:38

#67

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
What heat? Hysteresis heating in steel is trivial, what are you on about?
μF_n will be higher than with a normal train. Trains wheels generate a lot of heat.
I can't read whatever symbols you've used.

Train wheels generate a lot of heat, the rails don't see any of it, heating of the rails isn't mentioned anywhere that I can find as being a factor in rail design - whereas many other factors are.

So where did you get this idea from?

Friction force, though apparently the wheel temperature levels off at around 130C, which is far below what I expected. The tracks will see it though, as friction works both ways. It's just not enough to significantly weaken the rails. Which makes me wonder why every article I've read on the subject says that heavier rails are necessary unless the weight of the electric motors and calipers etc. seriously dwarf present diesel models that run on those tracks Whatever, the original question has been answered in a satisfactory manner, yes?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-24 20:57:40

#68

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

No.

Friction force? I guess you mean frictional heating.

If the wheels - which are in continuous use - level off at 130C (a trivial temperature for steel) then the rails - which see the wheel for a fraction of a second per day, are not going to see any significant heating whatesoever, I doubt it would even be measurable.

'Heavier' would be used to mean thicker sections which can better resist the intermittent static loading and the increased dynamic loading (due to higher speed), and be stiffer to spread the load across more of the sub-grade, plus they should have a larger margin of safety for wear (wear being a function of speed), crack detection and so on - a high speed derailment being more serious than a low speed one.
If high speed trains are heavier, then thicker sections would be needed.

Heating has nothing to do with it, I'd suggest not jumping to conclusions in engineering.

Fuck Israel

2012-11-25 05:45:01

#69

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6736

you must admit, Jay's attempts to derail a thread about high speed trains is admirable . . .

2012-11-25 06:01:49

#70

Extra Medium: THE UZI SLAYER; +79|4434|Oklahoma

I thought these trains didn't even actually use the tracks. Like they hovered above because of magnets or some shit.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
fucking magnets how do they work?

2012-11-25 07:09:43

#71

Cheez: Herman is a warmaphrodite; +1,027|6678|King Of The Islands

Extra Medium wrote:
I thought these trains didn't even actually use the tracks. Like they hovered above because of magnets or some shit.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
fucking magnets how do they work?

MagLev. Effectively still in beta. There's like, two operational lines. Everyone else still uses traditional rail (France kicks everyone's arse in this area operating at over 300kmh/200mph).

My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.

2012-11-25 07:30:23

#72

-Whiteroom-: Pineapplewhat; +572|6898|BC, Canada

13urnzz wrote:
you must admit, Jay's attempts to derail a thread about high speed trains is admirable . . .

Is he an engineer or something?

2012-11-25 07:35:21

#73

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

Extra Medium wrote:
I thought these trains didn't even actually use the tracks. Like they hovered above because of magnets or some shit.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
fucking magnets how do they work?

Most highspeed rails still run on traditional rail lines.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2012-11-25 07:38:19

#74

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

-Whiteroom- wrote:
13urnzz wrote:
you must admit, Jay's attempts to derail a thread about high speed trains is admirable . . .
Is he an engineer or something?

Yes.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-11-25 08:30:14

#75

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|7011|PNW

m3thod wrote:
why would the speed change because of US locality?

unit of measurement

BF2S Forums California's High Speed Rail

mtb0minime wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Extra Medium wrote:

Jay wrote:

Extra Medium wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Extra Medium wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Extra Medium wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

Extra Medium wrote:

-Whiteroom- wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Board footer