Fuck yeah MBTA!

Does Amtrak count? I live in New Hampshire, so the Downeaster passes through UNH going between Boston and Portland.

Westside Express Service reporting in!

Maglev.

Metra

for me commuter rail would I guess would be Metra, but what I actually use is the CTA

>>333873

theres no better metra picture opportunities than the electric line. last interurban in the USA I think

Took this about a week or two ago.

The Metro-North runs behind my building.

>commuter rail
OP that is a locomotive
that would be used for regional, or inter-urban done cheap
if you're using locomotives to go to and through suburbia from a city centre terminal then wtf
>>333872
boondoggle
the cost is mind boggling per km, look at that Chinese one
it consumes absurd sums of electricity compared to conventional rail being extremely energy efficient
it is not backwards compatible with existing railway infrastructure like high speed rail is, it would need all new right of ways or the conversion of existing right of ways rendering them unusable for everything that previously went on them not to mention the cost of converting
>>333873
another locomotive on comuter
wtf america?
>>333889
an inter-urban is a fast train, not high speed rail though, DMU or perhaps electric, that goes between a big city and one or more big town/small cities or some other sort of major population centre, with few stops in between and a fairly high frequency of service

>>333889
Why is there a large train on the street?
You run trains on railways and streetcars/trams/lightrail on streets
Might want to consider grade seperating that, put it in a subway or elevated

>>333901

Any self-respecting railfan knows all about the South Shore, its the last pure interurban in the USA. I honestly think it still exists just because foamers love it and, well, Chicago and northwest Indiana are a foamers paradise. The picture you're referring to is in Michigan City, a town hardly large enough to have a rail connection to a major city in a different state, let alone subway or L lines.

C'mon man, get on the level. That line is legendary.

>>333912
>The picture you're referring to is in Michigan City, a town hardly large enough to have a rail connection to a major city in a different state, let alone subway or L lines.
>Michigan City
>to a major city
>in a different state
>rail connection
yeah I cant imagine why you'd want a fast railway linking this

>>333899

'Interurban' in the context of the US specifically means a rural electric passenger line built around the turn of the 20th century. They ran down streets through town centers like a trolley and used trolley-style equipment, but connected different cities like a normal railroad. The South Shore grew up into an 80mph commuter railroad but was built as an interurban and still mostly operates like an interurban.

>>333901
> You run trains on railways and streetcars/trams/lightrail on streets
Have you not heard of street running?

its like a tram but with more comfortable seats and tables

>>333971
Or tram-trains. There are very few urban areas that absolutely require massive passenger capacity only achievable with grade separated trains. The others can couple tram-trains or run their trains on the street to massively save on cost to provide great service over the entire urban area, not just the lucky section along the only grade separated railroad.

334112 halfway through its repaint from SPT Carmine & Cream to the new Scotrail Saltire livery.

train from my little town in poland to the other little town

...sometimes must travel by bus

Fastest commuter rail line in the United States

>>333971
Yes
Trams/streetcars/lightrail run on the street
>>333976
Tram-Train is acceptable to, but they basically are trams that have had some track work down to their route to allow them to turn onto railways
>There are very few urban areas that absolutely require massive passenger capacity only achievable with grade separated trains.
>urban area
>doesn't require right of way for train
>urban area
even if it is not in a subway or elevated, and fair enough not everything does, the _surface_ railway will still be isolated in a right of way and not in the middle of the street

Double decker EMUs manufactured by Skoda.

>>333972
that's in Vienna; and all over Austria, it's red & grey.

>>333899
In the US, commuter rail is our regional rail.

>>333889
Completely unthinkable in 99% of this world's countries.

Interesting though. What is the top-speed on such a middle-of-the-road-train-track?

metro-north @manitou

>>334033
> Trams/streetcars/lightrail run on the street
Freight can, too. Pic related.

Also, to anybody who's not from the US, and doesn't understand the concept of the South Shore Line, please read and compare to your own native terminology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_rail_terminology

(e.g. a tram in the US is actually a bus)

>>334074

The posted speed limit of the street its running on

>>334065
and this is why passenger rail is fucked in the USA
>>334091
>Freight can, too. Pic related.
if its a freight tram like the VW CarGoTram in Dresden

>>334107

freight trams would only work in one tram network i.e. usually one city.

Something like a freight tram-train wouldn't work because of the smaller loading gauge of tram networks

pic related: street-running freight train sharing the alignment with a tram line, note the four-rail track to accustom the wider loading gauge

>>334074

posted speed limit. also they have to stop at red lights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUW606VXWsI

Japan has a few spots where they do the same thing so it's not such an unusual practice.

>>334119
>stop at red lights

That seems pretty inefficient, though
why no traffic light influencing?

>>334118
>note the four-rail track to accustom the wider loading gauge
thats called duel gauge you moron

>>334118
>freight trams would only work in one tram network i.e. usually one city.
relieving all the the trucking that clogs it up! oh boy who'da thunk it
use the existing passenger network, assuming its got good broad coverage like in Dresden as seen in the picture or elsewhere like Prague or Melbourne, just add sidings at the port and rail terminal and factories and plants
can also build intermodal depots where the goods are transfered to light trucks to continue their journey beyond the range of the network

>>334135

>use the existing passenger network

tram lines have restrictive loading gauges and low maximum axle loadings that make them a bad fit for meaningful freight traffic. dresden is the oddball because it just takes car parts from one VW plant to another, so they never interchange the cars and go straight from source -> destination with no transfers in between. anything more complicated or more frequent is better served with a heavy rail line.

>>334135
Freight trains in america literally transport more cargo than in Europe. We just use a LOT of massive point to point railroads going up and down the coasts, and to and from sea and shining sea. We have a lot of local trucks BECAUSE trucks work best for the final mile, from massive edge of city intermodal yard to people's houses, storefronts, places in say bad negborhoods.

Also, fuck mixing freight and passenger, because that literally involves either huge expensive can and block signaling, or forced separation, because deliveries and the first commuters.. happen to share the same times (4-5 AM before the majority of businesses open, so welcome to collisions!)

>>334157
This. Ever read how much cargo the US transports?

More than you do. A lot more than you do.

SEPTA (Philadelphia)

GO train. Never have used it myself.

Long Island Rail Road.

>>334091
Sup buddy!
Lets have a Hug!

well almost, the one I take has more wagons but it's the same model

>>334144
>tram lines have restrictive loading gauges and low maximum axle loadings that make them a bad fit for meaningful freight traffic.
they used to do it all the time and CarGoTram
it handles cars and trucks driving on it well enough
>dresden is the oddball because it just takes car parts from one VW plant to another, so they never interchange the cars and go straight from source -> destination with no transfers in between.
What do you think most intra-city freight is

>>334157
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel
this has been built to move freight
you're not even trying

>>334157
>because deliveries and the first commuters.. happen to share the same times (4-5 AM before the majority of businesses open, so welcome to collisions!)
yeah that 4am rush hour is a killer, all those workers on the trains and trams...

lovely

>>334421
> Henry Posner III, Chairman of the US Railroad Development
Corporation, compares the rail freight markets in the US with those in continental Europe, and provides some highly insightful analysis into why US rail freight market shares are significantly higher than those in Western Europe.

> Rail Freight in the USA: Lessons for Continental Europe
http://www.rrdc.com/position_papers.html

There are fundamental differences in the way US and European railroads are owned and operated. One isn't necessarily better than the other - yes, there are vast improvements to be made on both fronts, such as US passenger service or European intermodal freight - but let's not turn this into a "we're better than you are" thread because there isn't a point to be made.

Embrace diversity and learn from one another.

>>334422
If you've got local passenger service mixed with long-distance freight, a delay for either could be costly for both, especially if the commodities in that freight are perishable. By separating the two, passenger trains only have to worry about other passenger trains. Freight can move at the pace it needs to as well.

Quite [spoiler]fun[/spoiler]

>>334473
>are significantly higher than those in Western Europe.
cause rail freight in europe would be having to go through multiple countries, duh
each with own unique brand of signals, communications, safety systems, regulations etc
its why the high speed trains typically stop at the border

>>334473
>because there isn't a point to be made.
American cities with no rail public transportation that are entirely dependent on the car and constant freeway development say otherwise

>>334473
>If you've got local passenger service mixed with long-distance freight, a delay for either could be costly for both, especially if the commodities in that freight are perishable. By separating the two, passenger trains only have to worry about other passenger trains. Freight can move at the pace it needs to as well.
freight doesn't go fast
although it will in the Gottard Base Tunnel
sollutions to problems:
fix track, signals, crossings
quadruplicate
or perhaps they need separate railways

>>334473
>If you've got local passenger service mixed with long-distance freight, a delay for either could be costly for both, especially if the commodities in that freight are perishable. By separating the two, passenger trains only have to worry about other passenger trains. Freight can move at the pace it needs to as well.

What is Chicago Illinois? No really, even if we get all the money from CREATE this problem is going to persist. The city and state government is unwilling to lay new track inside city limits because it devalues surrounding property and impedes the corrupt scam we call gentrification.

>>334494
I made no allusion to US cities and passenger rail needs. Rather, I was making the point "HURR DURR YUROP VS AMURIKA LOL" is a shit argument, implied or otherwise. You cannot equate apples to oranges; you can only compare and contrast.

>>334497
You're absolutely right. I was making more of a point that, under ideal conditions with modest resources, it's best to implement that way. In other words a pipe dream, at best.

>>334497
Such a bizarre world where low-impact, high access transportation devalues property *and* drives gentrification.

The central thing about gentrification, as far as I'm aware, is dramatically raised property values driving non-owning tenants away from their homes.

Just bizarre.

>>334497
>corrupt scam we call gentrification
>city planners/developers try to make area nicer/more desirable and it's a 'corrupt scam'

poorfag logic

>>334502
It goes beyond driving people out, its killing the lifeblood of the city. Everything is pushing towards tourism and service industry drives, which means driving out the stable middle class jobs that fuel a city. Logistics is Chicago, that's our identity, that's why we've survived without becoming the capital of the rust belt. We need to invest more in it, not less.

>>334506
How is gentrification corrupt? These developers were bribing city officials to rezone entire neighborhoods, buying out landlords and middle income job producers (steel, logistics, manufacturing), tearing down tons of ethnic history and century-old communities, rebuilding ugly monstrous condo's, bussing in yuppies from the suburbs and walking away with millions for just flipping real estate with no regards to how much theyre harming the city. Its giant wealth consolidation scheme. Once the yuppies move in the city injects a huge dose of budgetary heroin into city services in the area (which now has no poor people) to satisfy the upper class. Also anything that lowers property values (factories, noise polluters like rail roads) is sent away putting everyone who worked there on unemployment. Meanwhile 150 people a year die in Englewood and schools in East Garfield Park are basically recruiting grounds for the gangs, which have basically become paramilitary organizations.

At least ethnic segregation built communities and made people reluctant to deal drugs in their own neighborhood. Economic segregation makes some neighborhoods Yuppie Disney Land and others Mogadishu. It's sickening, even I got priced out of my old neighborhood where I spent my childhood.

>http://www.intermodalofchicago.org/terminals_map.cfm

pictured: an assload of jobs that cannot be outsourced and have no threat of being made irrelevant by technology.

Not even kidding.

>>334497
>The city and state government is unwilling to lay new track inside city limits
subway/elevated railway
streetcar on road
>because it devalues surrounding property and impedes the corrupt scam we call gentrification.
better transportation accessibility raises property value
more people living closer together in a city to businesses and retail is not a corrupt scam
>>334506
suburban anti-city hysteria
>>334508
>It goes beyond driving people out, its killing the lifeblood of the city.
In my city the best areas have readily accessible rail transportation and tram routes through them, a vast high street will develop along the street and in the lanes intersect it that the route is on
The parts without trams are like a ghost town
The suburbs without rail access (but plenty of freeways) are ghettos
And our rail move both passengers and freight
>Logistics is Chicago, that's our identity, that's why we've survived without becoming the capital of the rust belt. We need to invest more in it, not less.
And you need to move it about
And the people living there need to be moved about
And the people servicing them need to be moved about
And you need to halt suburban sprawl

>>334513
what is that coming out of the ground?

>>334515
I'm not talking about passenger rail. Trust me, as far as the USA goes only NYC has a comparable passenger rail network. Maybe some L extensions on the red and orange lines and MAYBE one day the Circle Line, but other than that we are fairly set. The issue is freight, as 30% of all goods shipped in the United States come through Chicago IL. A major issue right now is passenger and freight rail causes big delays for each other, slowing commutes and making Amtrak worse than it should be. Some cities can get away with combining the two, were one of the very few who should never have entertained the idea.

Underground is difficult. Chicago already has the world's largest underground railway, but its very old, has narrow gauged track, has been inoperational since the 30's and was completely wrecked by a massive flood that shut down the city in 1992. They've drained it and sealed it, but its still down there. It would take billions to make it operational again and its presence makes going underground for anything in Chicago a total nightmare.

As for suburban sprawl. Chicago is half the size of New York and LA in land area, if we want to keep growing the options are: 1) up, we've gotten famous for doing that or 2) out, which is pretty feasible with Metra connecting everything and a decent highway system.

>>334516
What used to be a person. Now, its a collection of meatballs with a similar bloodtype.

>>334161
>>334161
Fuck you, Imma ride PATCO.

>>334519
Chicago's underground rail is not nearly the size you would need for anything..at all. That space is not much larger than can comfortably accommodate a human being - nowhere near useful size for a city like Chicago. It's also limited in its reach; what was good penetration into the business district a hundred years ago is meaningless today for everything except city center.

>>334544

FUCK YEAH PATCO

>>334548
What's your stop?
I hate when the dumb fucks on the train don't move for all the people getting on/off at Walter Rand

>>334547

Yeah well its all still there and makes tunneling difficult.

>Chicago has the worlds largest underground railway
>97km
oh lawdy!

>>334519
>A major issue right now is passenger and freight rail causes big delays for each other, slowing commutes and making Amtrak worse than it should be.
then with such high demand
new track and lines must be built
>Underground is difficult. Chicago already has the world's largest underground railway, but its very old, has narrow gauged track, has been inoperational since the 30's and was completely wrecked by a massive flood that shut down the city in 1992. They've drained it and sealed it, but its still down there. It would take billions to make it operational again and its presence makes going underground for anything in Chicago a total nightmare.
Build new
subway or elevated or mixed
>Chicago already has the world's largest underground railway
The metros of NYC, London, Paris, Moscow, and Tokyo are on lines 1 through 5 please pick up
>cost billions
if it was a freeway no one would bat an eyelid or care about how long it took to pay back
a railway costs something and everyone freaks out and demands it be in the black by the first financial quarter
>>334547
Build new
>>334551
Plenty of European cities have hundreds of years worth of shit under them and they still get it done
In Japan they have massive structures over them and must engineer for earthquakes and they still get it done
Are you saying America is at the level of some African or Central Asian thugocracy and is incapable of building vital infrastructure?

>>334561
Which is what I said earlier, new track. Exactly, its just your suggestions range from unfeasible to crazy.

Freight rail cannot go underground in Chicago for a variety of reasons. Number 1, the cost would be insane. Maybe in Europe its possible for countries to allow their debt to double their GDP's, but for all the problems the USA has with its debt were not about to let that happen. Second, because there's so much existing underground infrastructure in the city (and its all interconnected) that if there is one derailment underground that leads to an explosion you're talking about a complete shutdown of the USA's 2nd busiest financial district, like what happened in '92 with the flood. Chicago has a higher GDP than fucking London*, its not worth risking all of that just to put a fraction of our freight rail underground. Get a grip man, we've had problems with this in the past and it'd be stupid to spend untold billions to just invite the problem back.

As far as elevated goes a vast majority of the L system is already elevated. Could we put more up there? I mean its definitely possible from an engineering perspective but the CTA owns a lot of those right-of-ways and if you thought grade level caused noise pollution stand underneath the Blue Line tracks at Armitage & Western for 10 minutes.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP

>>334581
continued

The days of freeway expansion are basically over, IDOT widened the Dan Ryan a few years ago and after doing so basically declared they would simply maintain and update the highway infrastructure in the city as opposed to expanding it further. People would throw a colossal fit if they bulldozed more neighborhoods to bring another interstate into the city.

The solution really is more grade level tracks and replaced crossings with over and underpasses. CREATE was supposed to do that, but the funding for those things is still being worked on in the US House so all we've thus far is new signals. What I was complaining about earlier also was a new anti-freight rail movement from inside the city because it makes prospective upper class neighborhoods less desireable. Honestly, after the 08 crash gentrification has ground to a halt and shows no signs of restarting, so even I was blowing that out of proportion.

caltrain

>>334581
>Freight rail cannot go underground in Chicago for a variety of reasons.
when I say subway or elevated
I refer to passenger rail
that is what these terms typically refer to and what most people would assume
except you
>european debt
lolno nothing to do with this, and those in debt have followed american style principles where as those who have not are alright - and thats who is building the Gottard Base Tunnel and expanding their High Speed Rail and rolling out more metro and commuter and regional rails and trams
>but for all the problems the USA has with its debt were not about to let that happen.
military budget accounts for half the debt
waste and mismanagement of conducting healthcare through a privatized system accounts for most of the rest
slash the former
institute single payer for the latter
And furthermore public works programs like ramping up public transportation in American cities and their surroundings is exactly the sort of sound Keynesian economics that fixed America during the depression and would would again today.
>Second, because there's so much existing underground infrastructure in the city (and its all interconnected) that if there is one derailment underground that leads to an explosion you're talking about a complete shutdown of the USA's 2nd busiest financial district, like what happened in '92 with the flood.
While excavating you would make sure to dig up this goofy old railway, as was done with the Red line
>Chicago has a higher GDP than fucking London*, its not worth risking all of that just to put a fraction of our freight rail underground.
And yet London has the Under Ground & Above Ground and regional and inter-city railways and a High Speed Rail link to France
>and if you thought grade level caused noise pollution
trams/streetcars/lightrail are electric and cause very little noise
the car and truck traffic on the street causes far more noise than our trams

>>334598
>noisy elevated
problem of engineering
>The solution really is more grade level tracks
not in high density

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0_KyXvb_Ds


aw yeah melbourne

DART

>>333899
> wtf america?
Hey...go fuck yourself. We do things different. You don't like it? Tough cookies - you can't do shit except complain about it.

>>334599
Come now, replacing a mixed lane with a at-grade dedicated rail lane will increase journey speeds and capacity dramatically. Not as dramatically as a dramatically more expensive grade separated line? Tough.

>>334602
>Hey...go fuck yourself. We do things different.
so does someone with autism

>>334003
is this model or real locomotive?

>>334602
>>334602
>>334602

So much this.


Seriously I get so sick of these arrogant Europeans who think their way is the only way; that their trains are 'prettier' or some shit. It is really annoying.

I, sadly live in an area of the country with no commuter rail (it's been discussed multiple times, but politics don't allow it). So, I'll bump with a picture I took myself of what I consider (one of) the best commuter rail systems in the country:

>>334619
>Seriously I get so sick of these arrogant Europeans who think their way is the only way; that their trains are 'prettier' or some shit. It is really annoying.

I have no problem having a critical discussion with a European, but it's that very loud and vocal minority that just won't shut up about how they do things better, and how their buses look better, and how their trains look better, and so on. A reasonable debate comparing systems is fine (as long as they don't go all WTF AMURRICA/AMURRIFAT, etc), but boasting about how your trains look "better" than ours is just stupid.

We do things differently. Yeah, they do some things better than us (see HSR), but we also do some things a lot better than they do. It's not cool to be arrogant about it.

>>334618

Model.

>>334619
Thats not the Long Island Rail Road.

I'm done with this guy, he's some ESL European that is too stubbornly ignorant to really talk to.

Catalunya express here

>>334646
>>334646

Yep. And I love watching locomotives like the Dash-9...it's arguably my favorite diesel locomotive other than the MP36PH. Industrial enough to get the job done, yet the design is first class in my opinion.

I really like European trains too; I was in Sweden and the SJ/SL was damned sexy. The locals seemed to think very poorly of their service, but I was too into the sleek blue and white beauties to care.

I really like all trains, there's no need to sit around comparing them and trying to fight for which is 'the best', even though a strictly intellectual debate that's not arrow flinging is fine with me.

"WTF America" is a talking point used by people who have no real facts or logic other than 'America does it, therefore it sucks'.

>>333869
I love our TriMet WES DMUs...they ave sleek and actually not too noisy.

The only thing I'm pissed about is that Colorado Railcar went bankrupt right after we took delivery.

>>334703
Yeah, the GP40-2 and the Dash-9 are great looking locos.

I like the First Great Western livery very much. Their trains look really cool.

>>334588
bay area love.

BART

>>334619
>Seriously I get so sick of these arrogant Europeans who think their way is the only way; that their trains are 'prettier' or some shit. It is really annoying.
we, and the asians, move passengers
you do not
our cities with comprehensive systems are better for it
your citites with a shambles or not enough or nothing at all are a nightmare
the proof is in the pudding

>>334646
>and how their buses look better,
who said buses?
this is about rail
never bring a knife to a gun fight

even freight locomotives look better in Europe
why cant America
also, rolling highway
why cant America
get the trucks off the road

>>334922
>>334923
>>334924
Alright man...so what's up with you? English isn't your first language? Girlfriend dumped you? Hard times financially? I mean, tell us what's going on in your head because...you're not making any sense at all. You just proved his point to a T, and you're using inappropriate idioms in your responses, which really doesn't help your arguments at all.

So let's give you the benefit of the doubt - where are you from? What is your native language? How can we communicate better with you?

I don't think you're trying to troll...I just think there is some serious lack of communication here. Hell, maybe you think we're trying to insult you...which, we're not...but perhaps you don't understand that?

>>334926
not him, but maybe it's people like you who think they're superior just because you're from MURRIKA and you get pissed when you encounter something (trains) that's actually better in other places of the world. But since it can't be that, it must be that the other guy is pissed, because HOW COULD SOMEONE ever find something american to be bad? HOW??

>>334924
thank you for proving my point. the appearance of a train has nothing to do with it's performance.

>who said buses?
Nobody said anything about buses, but I just KNOW that you would bring that up in a bus thread.

>we, and the asians, move passengers
Our commuter systems are very effective, and in the Northeast Corridor, intercity rail works. Intercity rail will never be as effective in the US as it is in the rest of the world. I never said that our passenger rail system is better than yours. It isn't. Your systems are far superior, I'm just asking you not to be an arrogant prick about it. The United States cannot be beat when it comes to rail freight, though. I know that's not what the point of this thread was, but neither was going "WTF AMURRICA" every time an American train was posted. The point of this thread was to post train liveries and have a nice discussion.

By the way, what are you talking about when you say that? How about coming up with a counter-argument instead of saying
>and this is why passenger rail is fucked in the USA
What's the problem with using locos for commuter rail? Would you prefer electric? Because there ARE a number of electric commuter lines (a few in Chicago and New York as far as I know), but infrastructure wise it's just cheaper to use diesel. It still gets the job done. Have you ever even taken a commuter train in the US? I'd like to know which city.

>>334952
>MURRIKA
I don't know how he feels, but >>334953 here.
Why can't we just get along? Why do we have to have a pissing contest over train systems?

>>334952
I wouldn't call one "better" than the other. The United States just uses rail differently. Our passenger rail focuses on rapid transit inside cities and a commuter rail network connection metropolitan areas to their principal cities. Intercity travel by rail, even HSR, is unfeasible. It would take a very fast train to make a Chicago to NYC or Miami to Los Angeles trip more efficient by rail than by air... the USA is simply too big.

On the other hand intercity freight is moved largely by rail from anywhere in the USA to anywhere in the USA. Our freight network is still without peer globally, and probably will be for a very long time.

europe's just jelly of all our delicious freight tonnage. the idea of hump yards makes them go cross-eyed with bitter anger because they will never have one.

Nice BART pic. Coluseam station with the heggenbegger over pass in the backround.

>>334917
BART is so ugly, yet I like their trains so much. They look so weird.

>>334970
coming from a daily rider it's probably one of the worst transit systems quality wise, yet there is just something about it I love. New stock can't get here fast enough

>>334952
> but maybe it's people like you who think they're superior just because you're from MURRIKA
Please. Go back and read this entire thread. If you can't do that, get the fuck out of here. None of us have done that, period.

> you get pissed when you encounter something (trains) that's actually better in other places
> _better_
And you have the audacity to accuse me of something you continue to do?. See my previous post >>334499

That's it. I'm done. I tried to be civil and understanding. I was hoping it was just a communication thing, but clearly this isn't going to work, so I'm just going to walk away from the conversation.

My apologies to those who wanted a decent discussion for shitting up this thread with drama.

>>334967
>no hump yards
lolno, pic

We do have a problems compared to US's freight traffic though, generally shorter trains, small loading gauge.
And overcrowded lines shared with regionals stopping twice in every village and long distance passenger trains.
One of those lines being the one leading to the aforementioned gotthard tunnel...

>>334952
>>334952

Moron, I wrote
>>334619

AND..

>>334703

I pretty much said I don't give a shit because I like trains period. You're the one pissing all over this thread with your false sense of superiority.

Unless you've done anything to make your country and its transportation infrastructure so great, SHUT THE FUCK UP. Seriously.

>>334981
Those are even uglier. The older trains would look okay if they had a second window in the front. They just look so weird with that lone window where the driver sits. You're right, though. There is something about it. I'd like to go to California and ride BART someday just for the hell of it.

>>334924
We DO get the trucks off the road. We haul more than 4x as much freight as all of western Europe.

>The North American freight rail system is so efficient that it is often more competitive than transporting goods by ship through the Panama Canal. Many Asian container ships bound for Europe make port in Seattle or Vancouver, Washington, and offload their containers onto trains. These trains then shoot across the continent to an eastern port, where the containers are reloaded on ships to continue their trip to Europe.

And by the way, that type of railway is not as efficient as a straight-up cargo train. In addition to the cargo you're carrying a lot of dead weight (tractors).

>>335044

DING DING
OH SHIT IT'S RTD DENVER'S LIGHT RAIL

>>335043
I like the sleekness. The interior I'm not so sure about, 3 different concepts. I like the interior now. Tbh, I would love it to stay the same and just get brand new Rohr trains.

>>334926
>English isn't your first language?
hint: my city has the worlds largest tram network
>you're not making any sense at all.
Extensive rail public transportation works
Which you all say nay
Or will only allow it if it has to been severely compromised form some reason not yet explained
>>334952
>but maybe it's people like you who think they're superior just because you're from MURRIKA and you get pissed when you encounter something (trains) that's actually better in other places of the world. But since it can't be that, it must be that the other guy is pissed, because HOW COULD SOMEONE ever find something american to be bad? HOW??
bingo
>Our commuter systems are very effective,
nope
>and in the Northeast Corridor, intercity rail works. Intercity rail will never be as effective in the US
There is no reason for this
The distances are no different: Paris-Marseilles is longer than Boston-DC
The populations and number of population centres are greater in the USA - which logically should be bigger incentive to do this
>>334959
>Our passenger rail focuses on rapid transit inside cities and a commuter rail network connection metropolitan areas to their principal cities.
Except, all the numerous cities with convoluted or little or no rail

Also the numbers for freight can be misleading, inside a single European country its going to be less - look at their size, they're the size of a region or a single state of the USA. Exclusively within a single state of the USA how much is exclusively moved by rail?
Trans-Continental in Europe is another matter however: the Gottard Base Tunnel has been motivated by a need to move for freight, by rail, across the Alps between Southern Europe and Northern
With the Channel Tunnel, Rolling Highways move freight on trucks all the way from Britain to Greece
And then of course there is the Trans-Siberian Railway.

>English isn't your first language?
>hint: my city has the worlds largest tram network

hint: you're just kind of arbitrarily talking about things nobody asked you about and nobody knows what point you're making.

have some F10.

>>335158
>>Our commuter systems are very effective,
>nope
What US cities have you visited? In what cities have you taken their commuter trains and subways? Answer my question. I don't care that you live in a European city with a great tram network. That gives you no right to incessantly bash our systems unless you have been on some US systems.

>>and in the Northeast Corridor, intercity rail works. Intercity rail will never be as effective in the US
>There is no reason for this
There is a reason for it. There are a lot of reasons why intercity rail is fucked in our country. We're behind Europe, I have already admitted it, but there are a lot of plans in the works to develop our rail infrastructure. We're going to get there eventually. Right now intercity rail only works in the best and easiest place it WOULD work, and that is called the Northeast Corridor.

>Also the numbers for freight can be misleading, inside a single European country its going to be less - look at their size, they're the size of a region or a single state of the USA. Exclusively within a single state of the USA how much is exclusively moved by rail?
I wasn't comparing the US to a single European country. So don't even start. I was comparing the US to Europe. Learn how to read.

>Except, all the numerous cities with convoluted or little or no rail
Yeah, that's because a lot of them are not big enough for such systems. There are exceptions to the rule, of course. Look at Los Angeles. Their entire rail system is awful.

>And then of course there is the Trans-Siberian Railway.
I thought we were talking about Europe in this thread. Half of that isn't even in Europe.

>>335112
Hey, at least the interior looks comfortable. Is it? Better than plastic seats I'm guessing.

God, I hate these Quietschies.

Still, I sit in them for at least 3 hours every week.

>>335012
>>334967
Germany alone has at least 11 "hump yards".

Humble Canadian train

>>335205

Wo im Rhein-Neckarnetz ist das?

>>335213
Keine Ahnung. Ich bin mehr NRW.

Loving the NRW Express, though.
Duisburg-Düsseldorf and Köln-Düren are a pure speed rush.

>>335247
pic