Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
< 160 kph top speed is light or rapid rail turf

Well there is still a lot between < 100 km/h non-heavy-rail and 160 km/h (and why do you write kilopond-hours?). 120 km/h is pretty widespread for secondary mainlines (as well as regional trains running on them) in Europe; with an EMU of good acceleration, you can reach that top speed with stops 3 km away. Then again, one should consider running trains with different stopping patterns over the same track.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jun 2nd, 2011 at 01:10:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well there is still a lot between < 100 km/h non-heavy-rail and 160 km/h (and why do you write kilopond-hours?). 120 km/h is pretty widespread for secondary mainlines

For track design or rolling stock? I was under the impression that 160 km/h was standard for new heavy rail rolling stock these days.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Jun 2nd, 2011 at 04:43:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Track. I add that while 160 km/h top speed is pretty much standard for new vehicles, if put into all-stopper service, these same trains rarely go above 120 km/h, and can use top speed on suitable lines in limited-stop service (or thinly populated areas) only.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Jun 3rd, 2011 at 04:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display: