I would think that this is the initial testing phase for the PTC system. How else would you test a system that has not been operational at 110mph before? I believe this will be the first Wabtec I-ETMS system that will have trains running at speeds up to 125mph. There are lots of components to test, especially at the grade crossings.
if this is I-ETMS with ITCS on top then its been running in Michigan for 10 years at 110mph with testing done at that speed 20+ years
No ITCS here. The cab signal is FEC’s eATCS. My understanding is that I-ETMS is an overlay on FEC cab signals. The loco dashboard has both cab signals and I-ETMS display.
brightline will not hit that speed without electrification and all new train sets, 125mph is the best they'll get
ETCS is a specification, of which ERTMS (typically level 2 though there are a few level 3) is a commonly deployed implementation in Europe. Brightline has settled on I-ETMS overlay on eATC on FECR in Florida.
All new installations of PTC irrespective of the technology and implementation require extensive testing and certification irrespective of how many similar installations may be there elsewhere.
Brightline did a public presentation of their intentions to operate at speeds up to 150mph at a Hillsborough County (Tampa) government meeting this past spring. The link to the meeting video from March is buried here on this thread. I also have confirmed it with Brightline people that I have spoken with since it was announced.
We’ll see won’t we? eATC+I-ETMS is what we are talking about, not standard I-ETMS. I don’t know enough details to make any categorical statements this way or that without a better understanding the details of the implementation
Standard I-ETMS is only good for 110mph at best, right? If Brightline is planning on running 125 to 150 mph on passenger train only tracks, would that make it easier to adapt the current I-ETMS system for those higher speeds? And the FECR ATC system would not matter on the line west of Cocoa (City Point) anyway.
I found it.
they aren't going to hit 160mph with 9000hp, the acela hits that with 12,400HP and their weight is pretty close per loco and per car
at 40 miles its nearly the same distance as the section thats expected to be in I-4
I wish we had more public documents around these deployments and info about them
Fortress does not care what speed trains run at as long as they get their real estate returns.
The point is that Fortress would not let Brightline make claims that would open them up to lawsuits for potentially misleading investors and therefore threatening their future real estate investment returns. Building next to abandoned train stations isn't their gameplan.Fortress does not care what speed trains run at as long as they get their real estate returns.
And my point is that speed claims are irrelevant unless they affect the financials in any way. No one cares if it does not affect the financials. 25mph difference in speed is not going to be a showstopper as far as that goes. There will be no abandoned stations in Tampa or Orlando for that reason.
Where I come from plans are not promises, comments are not contracts, and dissolution/bankruptcy favors lenders over investors.
Will be interesting to see--when I rode the train they took their time pulling in and out of the stations. Curious if they will speed that up with more stops being added.
