
Originally Posted by
conductorchris
In fact . . . while I have your attention Jerry . . .
I've been learning about cant deficiency ("unbalance") around curves. Too much unbalance causes overturning, but going faster requires more of it, within safe ranges. Thus tilt equipment, but actually regular equipment can run with much more cant deficiency than the usual US maximum of 3 inches. In Europe, their maximum is 6 inches. Talgo cars (and Amfleet) can go up to 8 inches, but 5 inches is the max for any regular north American diesel. Pretty much all single level equipment is also good for 5 inches cant deficiency. So are the lower height (14.5 feet) bombadier multi-level cars I think. Superliners good for 4 inches.
Anyway, the point of all that is it is possible to run passenger trains much faster than we do, by not going so slow. There is a cost of course, in more track upkeep. And it all has to be tested and FRA exemptions procured.
In the context of the rathole . . . if our hypothetical fictional passenger railroad free of the maddening limitations of Amtrak were to plan to speed things up, is it sensible to use superliners at 4 inch cant deficiency or is it so curvy that a much better timetable would be had with single level equipment at a 5 inch cant deficiency? (In reality, such a thing would be decided after hiring someone like you to do calculations for months, but this question is theoretical and for fun.)
Thank you for indulging me.
Christopher