ELECTRIFICATION OF ALL RAILROADS
- Thread starter BobCass
- Start date
Torpedo423
Steam Forever
in some ways it would, but electrifying 25,000 miles of track (something around that number) just isn't practical, plus, to get the trains moving faster, you would probably have to replace a good majority of that track too.
cascaderailroad
New member
I seem to remember a previous tread, that had a rather lengthly discussion on this identical topic ... I'm using he "Search" tab to find it ... Search: "Electrify"
Found it 24 seconds: http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=47213&highlight=electrify
I suggest we use the above thread, that was 19 pages long, in order to cut down on bandwidth and duplicate redundant posts, on a topic that has already been discussed, on RR Electrification. --->http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=47213&highlight=electrify
Electrification Projects and High Speed Rail in Pennsylvania is a dead issue, as Pennsylvania failed to get ANY High Speed Rail upgrade funding from the Federal Government this year, as PA is so broke, or PA doesn't care to apply for RR upgrades, as PA could not match the Fed Funds.
Found it 24 seconds: http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=47213&highlight=electrify
I suggest we use the above thread, that was 19 pages long, in order to cut down on bandwidth and duplicate redundant posts, on a topic that has already been discussed, on RR Electrification. --->http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=47213&highlight=electrify
Electrification Projects and High Speed Rail in Pennsylvania is a dead issue, as Pennsylvania failed to get ANY High Speed Rail upgrade funding from the Federal Government this year, as PA is so broke, or PA doesn't care to apply for RR upgrades, as PA could not match the Fed Funds.
Last edited:
Just electrifying won't really make that much of a difference in teh speed of things. I think in order to bring up transport speeds by rail; the best way would be to set up a few high speed 'corridors' criss-crossing the country which trains could run on and then "dump" their loads off at yards which would split them out onto slower speed lines (like what we use now) However doing so would require an almost complete rebuild of the rail system and so very highly unlikely.
Just electrifying the rails really only gives the company more "green" brownie points.
Also to bring up speeds the train cars (and engines) themselves would have to be replaced. I believe most freight cars are only certified up to 80mph or so.
peter
Just electrifying the rails really only gives the company more "green" brownie points.
Also to bring up speeds the train cars (and engines) themselves would have to be replaced. I believe most freight cars are only certified up to 80mph or so.
peter
qassaquyangli
The Flying Cloud
POWER
It would take alot of power from power plants all around the US.
yes thats true.
It would take alot of power from power plants all around the US.yes thats true.
Electrification of railways is only good for high speed rail services, such as the California High Speed trains project. It would be much cheaper for the railroads to stick with diesel powered locomotives than new high-tech electric locomotives that would obviously require overhead catenarys or 3rd rails.
However, electrification will probably become more popular on railroads as fossil fuels (diesel) runs out.
However, America's best railroad (Union Pacific
) appears to have tried out an electric loco. I've seen a photo of it, but I don't have it here.
Anyway, the loco looks sort of like this fella.
~ Chris, :wave:
However, electrification will probably become more popular on railroads as fossil fuels (diesel) runs out.
However, America's best railroad (Union Pacific
) appears to have tried out an electric loco. I've seen a photo of it, but I don't have it here.Anyway, the loco looks sort of like this fella.
~ Chris, :wave:
Electrification of railways is only good for high speed rail services, such as the California High Speed trains project. It would be much cheaper for the railroads to stick with diesel powered locomotives than new high-tech electric locomotives that would obviously require overhead catenarys or 3rd rails.
However, electrification will probably become more popular on railroads as fossil fuels (diesel) runs out.
However, America's best railroad (Union Pacific
Anyway, the loco looks sort of like this fella.
~ Chris, :wave:
"Best" would be a matter of opinion. Actually UP I would think would be one of the last RR over here to go Electric. That being said I do recall seeing a photoshopped HHP-8 in UP colors once....
peter
Here you go, about as good as it's going to get
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/5/6/6256.1283805511.jpg
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/5/6/6256.1283805511.jpg
strench707
TCR Content Creator
Yes kimo505 has posted one of the few American examples. That system only really has electrification and uses electric engines because its mostly a closed system, not really much interchange. They run down to a coal mine, then take the coal to a power plant. One of the customers of the plant happens to be the RR, so essentially they fuel their own power.
Having sub-stations and electrification along entire lines seems unfeasible and more prone to issues than the current system. Going out to fix downed wires or something would take a lot longer than swapping out a diesil that may have crapped out en route.
Also, I think the investment in the infrastructure wouldn't have much return to the railroad, it would probably be more of a burden with all of the extra maintenance and costs.
Davis
Having sub-stations and electrification along entire lines seems unfeasible and more prone to issues than the current system. Going out to fix downed wires or something would take a lot longer than swapping out a diesil that may have crapped out en route.
Also, I think the investment in the infrastructure wouldn't have much return to the railroad, it would probably be more of a burden with all of the extra maintenance and costs.
Davis
Having sub-stations and electrification along entire lines seems unfeasible and more prone to issues than the current system. Going out to fix downed wires or something would take a lot longer than swapping out a diesil that may have crapped out en route.
Also, I think the investment in the infrastructure wouldn't have much return to the railroad, it would probably be more of a burden with all of the extra maintenance and costs.
Yeah I can't imagine Tehatchapi or any Rocky Mountain route being electrified, it just wouldn't look right:hehe:
Also, I think the investment in the infrastructure wouldn't have much return to the railroad, it would probably be more of a burden with all of the extra maintenance and costs.
Yeah I can't imagine Tehatchapi or any Rocky Mountain route being electrified, it just wouldn't look right:hehe:
Steam engine's all over again:hehe: Just kidding.
It's mostly a question of economics. The operating costs of running an electric train are substantially lower than for diesel hauled trains. If you're running enough trains for the cost of maintaining OHLE to be small per train, then it's a matter of how long it takes the savings to add up to a business case for spending the huge amounts of capital required to electrify. In general, the busier the line (and also hillier), the shorter the payback.
From an environmental perspective, I understand that CO2 emmisions are lower from electric rail, even if supplied by coal fired power stations - it's simply a more energy efficient way to provide power...
From a practical perspective, few railroads could justify electrifying all of their route mileage (especially where some lines are only used once a week or so), so there is going to be an issue with changing motive power. The UK's railways have this problem, having one of the lowest percentages of route mileage electrified in Europe, and consequently end up running a lot of diesels under the wires just to provide a smooth service.
Paul
From an environmental perspective, I understand that CO2 emmisions are lower from electric rail, even if supplied by coal fired power stations - it's simply a more energy efficient way to provide power...
From a practical perspective, few railroads could justify electrifying all of their route mileage (especially where some lines are only used once a week or so), so there is going to be an issue with changing motive power. The UK's railways have this problem, having one of the lowest percentages of route mileage electrified in Europe, and consequently end up running a lot of diesels under the wires just to provide a smooth service.
Paul
Hi All: I think you are right it should be only the class 1's..You know I was just at the Navajo Electric RR (Which is a exception) but it looks like to me its a Win Win..Who else halls coal this way?? Sure it halls its own coal, look their is no pollution to speak of, they are helping them selves..Why wouldn't it be a Win Win..