Passenger Trains > New Amtrak Acela Renderings

I found this on Yahoo News - and it has a rendering of the new Acela Trains, due out in 2021.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/amtraks-186-mph-bullet-trains-140000551.html

Just when you thought the Talgos were ugly...

New Talgos are still uglier. And so are the Chargers. This is a small step back in the right direction.

Most of the articles I've read about these tout that they'll be able to reach 186 mph after track upgrades.
Are there any firm and funded plans to make those track upgrades?


DevalDragon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I found this on Yahoo News - and it has a
> rendering of the new Acela Trains, due out in
> 2021.
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/amtraks-186-mph-bullet-
> trains-140000551.html
>
> Just when you thought the Talgos were ugly...

Everyone who was used to E and F-units said F40s were ugly when they were new... Twenty years later when the P40 and P42 came out, the F40 was a considered a classic and everyone thought the Genesis units were ugly (I actually heard them given the nickname "Uglies" a few times by a few different fans)... Now that the Gennies are 20 years old (give or take) we've pretty much become accustomed to their looks... Wonder what we'll think about the ACS-64s, Chargers, and now these trainsets when they hit the 20-year mark?

1976 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> New Talgos are still uglier. And so are the
> Chargers. This is a small step back in the right
> direction.

That Talgo cab car has unsightly lines, but the lines of the Acela rendering seems more pleasant. Headlight placement on the Charger makes it ugly, but the lines are OK.

TO members need to articulate the difference between "I'm not used to the new look" vs. "ugly." 

 

i'm trying to figure out why the video has the train coming north out of 30th St station and heading west up the inbound connection to ZOO towards Harrisburg instead of heading north on 1 River to Trenton 

Anyone else see the resemblance?

/Mitch

---

---

Maybe there's a sponsorship deal in here somewhere....."The new Acela service presented by Converse All-Stars"?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/16 06:15 by masterphots.

I think they are quite good looking , certainly better than the current bland Acela.

Upgrades to  160.  South of trenton first section.

MC6853 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone who was used to E and F-units said F40s
> were ugly when they were new... Twenty years later
> when the P40 and P42 came out, the F40 was a
> considered a classic and everyone thought the
> Genesis units were ugly (I actually heard them
> given the nickname "Uglies" a few times by a few
> different fans)... Now that the Gennies are 20
> years old (give or take) we've pretty much become
> accustomed to their looks... Wonder what we'll
> think about the ACS-64s, Chargers, and now these
> trainsets when they hit the 20-year mark?

The P42's were drastically improved by the current paint job that camoflagued the nose profile. Still, put them next to an F59PHI or MP36 and it's not hard to pick a winner.  Actually the paint scheme is a surprisingly important to the overall look.  For example SEPTA and MARC AEM-7's never looked as good as the Amtrak ones.  Right now I think the ACS-86 is being let down by its paint scheme.

Safety mandates combined with less and less $$ being available for styling means that designs have gotten progressibly worse.  Today we've sort of bottomed out with new locomotives being pressy much variations on the same bland theme.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/16 07:48 by mbrotzman.

I actually thought this paint scheme looked pretty good - sinister and menacing, in a good way:

As for aestetics, recall the initiative that the Florida East Coast took with its Charger:
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4054462,4054462#msg-4054462

/Mitch

---

cutboy2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Upgrades to  160.  South of trenton first
> section.

​Actually, I thought is was north of Trenton.

sums007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cutboy2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Upgrades to  160.  South of trenton first
> > section.
>
> ​Actually, I thought is was north of Trenton.

County (Jersey Avenue) to Ham (near Hamilton), some parts of it, not all of it.

As one that would like to see LD Train equipment (P42s included) properly maintained as Amtrak's priority... The new Acela paint scheme and Amtrak logo is cool, but really the nose of the proposed new NEC unit kinda looks like an Anaconda!

As we have seen happen before with the ACS-64, the final thing might look quite a bit different.

Looks OK to me. Bring them on.

My interests are more in what it can do.

Yep.

Jishnu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sums007 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > cutboy2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Upgrades to  160.  South of trenton first
> > > section.
> >
> > ​Actually, I thought is was north of Trenton.
>
> County (Jersey Avenue) to Ham (near Hamilton),
> some parts of it, not all of it.

Try Ham to Midway/MP 40, maybe.

Posted from iPhone

Nomad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most of the articles I've read about these tout
> that they'll be able to reach 186 mph after track
> upgrades.
> Are there any firm and funded plans to make those
> track upgrades?

Not unless someone ponies up for a high speed bypass from Old Saybrook to Kingston.

Everything else is a total fantasy in a timeframe of the next 30 years.

Posted from iPhone