6 ms·

Tesla Model 3 vs. Amtrak's Acela Express: The Electric Future Acid Test

39 points by HBlix 8y ago

melling 8y ago
It’s not a bullet train. NYC to Boston is about 220 miles. If it takes 4 hours... Try driving from New York to Boston at a normal hour with regular traffic. We flew to Providence over Labor Dat weekend to avoid the crazy traffic. Beijing to Shanghai is 800 miles and takes 4.5 hours. That’s a bullet train.
- hadrien01 8y ago
  Indeed. Real high-speed trains (up to 220mph) will arrive for the first time in the US in 2021.
  - Shelnutt2 8y ago
    I assume you are referring to the Avelia Libery[1] the replacement for the acela express. Unfortunately until track and signal upgrades happen (no date on when they will happen) the train is limited to 160mph. It's better than acela but not much. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avelia_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avelia_Liberty
    - tialaramex 8y ago
      Does this have in-cab signalling? Britain built 140 mph capable trains, but experience showed the existing 125 mph was the maximum at which a human looking out of a window at coloured light signals is truly effective and so they're operated at only 125 mph. (Trains on High Speed 1 from London to the Channel have signals displayed inside the cab like a TGV so it's safe to go faster)
      - gsnedders 8y ago
        The UK is actually unusual insofar as we allow trains as fast as 125mph (201km/h) without in-cab signalling; most other places in Europe require in-cab signalling at lower speeds (some as low as half of that!).
- IshKebab 8y ago
  It is a high speed train though. It got up to 150 mph. So if it was able to go at its top speed the whole way it could have easily done it in under 2 hours.
- alexhutcheson 8y ago
  The southern (DC-NYC) section of the Acela is significantly faster: It travels ~225ish miles in 3 hours, for an average speed (including stops) of ~75 mph. There are two major factors that slow down the Acela north of NYC: geography, and conflicts with Metro-North. There are several sharp curves that keep the Acela trains from running at full speed, and the current Acela rolling stock doesn't accelerate very quickly even after passing through these bottlenecks. In the stretch between NYC and New Haven, trains are limited to a 90 mph top speed by Metro-North, and often have to go slower than that. The curves are pretty hard to fix without buying up some of the most expensive real estate in the country, and dealing with the political battles that come with that. Fixing the conflicts with Metro-North is theoretically possible with just a bit of extra track to allow trains to pass, but operating that way would probably require more cooperation than either railroad has recently shown itself capable of. This blog post has a good overview (which includes issues south of NYC): https://pedestrianobservations.com/2012/07/01/plan-b-for-hsr/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2012/07/01/plan-b-for-hsr... This one has a deep dive on how to fix one of the curves, which might give you a sense for how difficult these issues are: https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/01/12/high-speed-rail-from-new-rochelle-to-greens-farms-impacts-opportunities-and-analysis/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/01/12/high-speed-rai...
alfanick 8y ago
-ENOACCESS [0], failure at implementing GDPR... [0]: https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-access.html https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-access.h...
rocky1138 8y ago
So weird to see mph used. It makes it difficult to compare to the rest of the world. How does the Tesla compare against a real high speed train like the HSR in Taiwan? That's a real test.
- adrianN 8y ago
  Kyoto - Tokyo: By car 5 hours plus breaks. By Shinkansen 3:20. A Tesla won't help you. Berlin - Munich: By car 5.5 hours plus breaks. With the ICE 4.5 hours.
  - hef19898 8y ago
    5 hours seems optimistic by car, 4.5 by train as well given DB, German railways, track record. The big issue in Hermany is that supposed higj speed trains have simply too many stops. As a result the ICEs last generation emphasizes acceleration instead of speed. France has it some how easier with dedicated higj speed tracks and basically no stops. Just as example, the one stop before Munichs central station is adding almost 10 minutes.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    I've done Berlin-Munich by car many times, maybe I managed that under 5 hours once, in the dead of night. But the usual is a couple (5 or so) construction zones which totally kill your average. 6.5 hours is fairly typical if you need to gas up once and take appropriate rests.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - ant6n 8y ago
    The sprinter can do Berlin-Munich in (barely) under 4 hours. https://www.bahn.com/en/view/trains/long-distance/vde8.shtml https://www.bahn.com/en/view/trains/long-distance/vde8.shtml
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  The rest of the world? The US is not the only place that uses mph...
toweringgoat 8y ago
Meanwhile in the developed world: TGV takes 2 hours from Lyon to Paris, google maps claims a car takes 4 hours. The French do like their train strikes though. Maybe let's try Japan. Tokyo to Kyoto: 2.5 hours train, 5 hours by car. Additional advantage: I can walk around, and get a meal (not sure about the Shinkansen, but the TGV does have a restaurant). And read, or work, or daydream.
- thrav 8y ago
  Japanese trains were lovely. Very comfortable. Great views of Mt. Fuji and the coast along that route. Definitely options for snack and drink. Don’t know about a full dining car, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
  - azernik 8y ago
    Japanese train food culture is all about buying stuff at the station. The packaged food you can buy at stores in Japan is shockingly good, and they're generally clustered at train stations. (A cultural note: eating on long-distance trains is expected (they have fold-down tables and cup-holders), but eating or drinking (other than water) on local trains is an EXTREME faux pas. Don't do it.)
    - bane 8y ago
      Here's a great video on this food culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l25iRW_-4vI&t=2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l25iRW_-4vI&t=2s
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- teej 8y ago
  This YouTube video is the best I’ve seen in explaining why things are the way they are in the US - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ
  - 8y ago
jonstewart 8y ago
This is a truly dumb article and I'm sorry I wasted time reading it. Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route will tell you that both the tracks and artificial speed limitations when going through Westchester suck. When you ride on the train, you can be productive the whole time.
- ndvgfts34 8y ago
  Absolutely. Even though it takes a bit longer, I prefer it to flying precisely because I can work the whole time rather than wait in long lines for TSA pageantry.
- madeofpalk 8y ago
  > Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route will tell you that both the tracks and artificial speed limitations when going through Westchester suck. If you're from the rest of the world and aren't familiar, maybe this would be a helpful article?
  - dsr_ 8y ago
    Starting in the 1940s, the USA stopped using passenger transport on trains in favor of automobiles. In the 1950s, a huge highway system was constructed/upgraded in order to make military mobilization effective. No similar program was ever executed for rail systems. Today, all long-route passenger service is handled by Amtrak, a for-profit corporation which is both a monopoly and subsidized by the Federal government. The only electrified Amtrak rails are in the northeast, running from Washington DC past NYC to New Haven, Connecticut, and then a different electrification scheme from New Haven to Boston, plus a route across half of Pennsylvania. Everywhere else across the country, long-haul rail is strictly diesel. The person you quoted is talking about the portion of the NYC - Boston route just north of NYC, going through a fairly expensive area called Westchester. It is noted for high incomes and high property taxes. The train tracks are not in good repair and there are too many at-grade road crossings. The result is that Amtrak is chronically late.
- efuquen 8y ago
  > Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route And that is literally like almost nobody. I bet less then 1% of anyone living in NYC or Boston metropolitan area have ever ridden on Amtrak, let alone the Acela.
ttul 8y ago
It’s really a shame that I could not finish reading the article because some spammy ad redirected me to a shitty lottery page.
muglug 8y ago
If everybody hopped in their Teslas instead of taking trains there’d be far more traffic on the roads, and slower commutes. But good to know that NY-Boston can be done on a single charge.
- hexane360 8y ago
  Yep. Both of these systems change as usage changes. More cars makes traffic worse. More public transit increases crowding, but it also allows more times and services to become profitable. This experiment doesn't tell us anything except that we're not currently in equilibrium. It doesn't tell us what any equilibrium is, or how many there are, or how many are stable.

39 points by HBlix 8y ago

It’s not a bullet train. NYC to Boston is about 220 miles. If it takes 4 hours... Try driving from New York to Boston at a normal hour with regular traffic. We flew to Providence over Labor Dat weekend to avoid the crazy traffic. Beijing to Shanghai is 800 miles and takes 4.5 hours. That’s a bullet train.

hadrien01 8y ago
Indeed. Real high-speed trains (up to 220mph) will arrive for the first time in the US in 2021.
- Shelnutt2 8y ago
  I assume you are referring to the Avelia Libery[1] the replacement for the acela express. Unfortunately until track and signal upgrades happen (no date on when they will happen) the train is limited to 160mph. It's better than acela but not much. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avelia_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avelia_Liberty
  - tialaramex 8y ago
    Does this have in-cab signalling? Britain built 140 mph capable trains, but experience showed the existing 125 mph was the maximum at which a human looking out of a window at coloured light signals is truly effective and so they're operated at only 125 mph. (Trains on High Speed 1 from London to the Channel have signals displayed inside the cab like a TGV so it's safe to go faster)
    - gsnedders 8y ago
      The UK is actually unusual insofar as we allow trains as fast as 125mph (201km/h) without in-cab signalling; most other places in Europe require in-cab signalling at lower speeds (some as low as half of that!).
IshKebab 8y ago
It is a high speed train though. It got up to 150 mph. So if it was able to go at its top speed the whole way it could have easily done it in under 2 hours.
alexhutcheson 8y ago
The southern (DC-NYC) section of the Acela is significantly faster: It travels ~225ish miles in 3 hours, for an average speed (including stops) of ~75 mph. There are two major factors that slow down the Acela north of NYC: geography, and conflicts with Metro-North. There are several sharp curves that keep the Acela trains from running at full speed, and the current Acela rolling stock doesn't accelerate very quickly even after passing through these bottlenecks. In the stretch between NYC and New Haven, trains are limited to a 90 mph top speed by Metro-North, and often have to go slower than that. The curves are pretty hard to fix without buying up some of the most expensive real estate in the country, and dealing with the political battles that come with that. Fixing the conflicts with Metro-North is theoretically possible with just a bit of extra track to allow trains to pass, but operating that way would probably require more cooperation than either railroad has recently shown itself capable of. This blog post has a good overview (which includes issues south of NYC): https://pedestrianobservations.com/2012/07/01/plan-b-for-hsr/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2012/07/01/plan-b-for-hsr... This one has a deep dive on how to fix one of the curves, which might give you a sense for how difficult these issues are: https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/01/12/high-speed-rail-from-new-rochelle-to-greens-farms-impacts-opportunities-and-analysis/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/01/12/high-speed-rai...

alfanick 8y ago

-ENOACCESS [0], failure at implementing GDPR... [0]: https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-access.html https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-access.h...

rocky1138 8y ago

So weird to see mph used. It makes it difficult to compare to the rest of the world. How does the Tesla compare against a real high speed train like the HSR in Taiwan? That's a real test.

adrianN 8y ago
Kyoto - Tokyo: By car 5 hours plus breaks. By Shinkansen 3:20. A Tesla won't help you. Berlin - Munich: By car 5.5 hours plus breaks. With the ICE 4.5 hours.
- hef19898 8y ago
  5 hours seems optimistic by car, 4.5 by train as well given DB, German railways, track record. The big issue in Hermany is that supposed higj speed trains have simply too many stops. As a result the ICEs last generation emphasizes acceleration instead of speed. France has it some how easier with dedicated higj speed tracks and basically no stops. Just as example, the one stop before Munichs central station is adding almost 10 minutes.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  I've done Berlin-Munich by car many times, maybe I managed that under 5 hours once, in the dead of night. But the usual is a couple (5 or so) construction zones which totally kill your average. 6.5 hours is fairly typical if you need to gas up once and take appropriate rests.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- ant6n 8y ago
  The sprinter can do Berlin-Munich in (barely) under 4 hours. https://www.bahn.com/en/view/trains/long-distance/vde8.shtml https://www.bahn.com/en/view/trains/long-distance/vde8.shtml
rootusrootus 8y ago
The rest of the world? The US is not the only place that uses mph...

toweringgoat 8y ago

Meanwhile in the developed world: TGV takes 2 hours from Lyon to Paris, google maps claims a car takes 4 hours. The French do like their train strikes though. Maybe let's try Japan. Tokyo to Kyoto: 2.5 hours train, 5 hours by car. Additional advantage: I can walk around, and get a meal (not sure about the Shinkansen, but the TGV does have a restaurant). And read, or work, or daydream.

thrav 8y ago
Japanese trains were lovely. Very comfortable. Great views of Mt. Fuji and the coast along that route. Definitely options for snack and drink. Don’t know about a full dining car, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
- azernik 8y ago
  Japanese train food culture is all about buying stuff at the station. The packaged food you can buy at stores in Japan is shockingly good, and they're generally clustered at train stations. (A cultural note: eating on long-distance trains is expected (they have fold-down tables and cup-holders), but eating or drinking (other than water) on local trains is an EXTREME faux pas. Don't do it.)
  - bane 8y ago
    Here's a great video on this food culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l25iRW_-4vI&t=2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l25iRW_-4vI&t=2s
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
teej 8y ago
This YouTube video is the best I’ve seen in explaining why things are the way they are in the US - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ
- 8y ago

jonstewart 8y ago

This is a truly dumb article and I'm sorry I wasted time reading it. Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route will tell you that both the tracks and artificial speed limitations when going through Westchester suck. When you ride on the train, you can be productive the whole time.

ndvgfts34 8y ago
Absolutely. Even though it takes a bit longer, I prefer it to flying precisely because I can work the whole time rather than wait in long lines for TSA pageantry.
madeofpalk 8y ago
> Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route will tell you that both the tracks and artificial speed limitations when going through Westchester suck. If you're from the rest of the world and aren't familiar, maybe this would be a helpful article?
- dsr_ 8y ago
  Starting in the 1940s, the USA stopped using passenger transport on trains in favor of automobiles. In the 1950s, a huge highway system was constructed/upgraded in order to make military mobilization effective. No similar program was ever executed for rail systems. Today, all long-route passenger service is handled by Amtrak, a for-profit corporation which is both a monopoly and subsidized by the Federal government. The only electrified Amtrak rails are in the northeast, running from Washington DC past NYC to New Haven, Connecticut, and then a different electrification scheme from New Haven to Boston, plus a route across half of Pennsylvania. Everywhere else across the country, long-haul rail is strictly diesel. The person you quoted is talking about the portion of the NYC - Boston route just north of NYC, going through a fairly expensive area called Westchester. It is noted for high incomes and high property taxes. The train tracks are not in good repair and there are too many at-grade road crossings. The result is that Amtrak is chronically late.
efuquen 8y ago
> Anyone who's familiar with the NYC->BOS Acela route And that is literally like almost nobody. I bet less then 1% of anyone living in NYC or Boston metropolitan area have ever ridden on Amtrak, let alone the Acela.

ttul 8y ago

It’s really a shame that I could not finish reading the article because some spammy ad redirected me to a shitty lottery page.

muglug 8y ago

If everybody hopped in their Teslas instead of taking trains there’d be far more traffic on the roads, and slower commutes. But good to know that NY-Boston can be done on a single charge.

hexane360 8y ago
Yep. Both of these systems change as usage changes. More cars makes traffic worse. More public transit increases crowding, but it also allows more times and services to become profitable. This experiment doesn't tell us anything except that we're not currently in equilibrium. It doesn't tell us what any equilibrium is, or how many there are, or how many are stable.