Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday December 06 2017, @06:24AM   Printer-friendly
from the quite-the-charge(r) dept.

Siemens SC-44 Charger seen rolled out across country to replace some older locomotives for corridor work.

The new Siemens Charger locomotives, with 16-cylinder, 4,400-horsepower engines, are both lighter and quieter, and meet EPA emission standards. The trains will travel the same speed as before—79 miles per hour—but they'll reach the top speed faster.

The new locomotives can also take you to from Chicago to Detroit, or Chicago to St. Louis, for example, and they can do it using one-third the fuel, emitting one-tenth the pollution, and at speeds up to 125 miles per hour. (The Chicago-St. Louis route has been cut from 5-1/2 hours to 4-1/2 hours thanks to the new engines and track improvements.

"A lot of our customers care about the earth and about pollution, and these are so much cleaner to operate, and they're better for our partners at IDOT and the customers because they're going to cost less to operate in that they get better mileage," said Marc Magliari, Amtrak spokesman.

Just saw one while I was out for a cigar and thought it was pretty cool, I figure others might find it interesting as well. I have been taking my kids to go watch them do trackwork on the north-south line in Oregon and was wondering why they were so extensive in replacing all of the old ties. Although the speed limit is 79 I wonder if this will be increased with updated track and new locomotives. Here is hoping someone models it soon so I can waste money.
4400 horsepower, top speed of 125, and meets EPA Tier VI emission standards.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday December 06 2017, @10:34AM (1 child)

    by c0lo (156) on Wednesday December 06 2017, @10:34AM (#606072)

    If not, how do they say "NO" to that?

    I reckon it's very simple: the universities, being non-for-profit institutions, trade in prestige - the better prepared graduates, the higher number of students will ask for them. I know, this centuries old traditionalism looks a bit out of fashion for the modern American.

    Anyway, back on track: one doesn't get much academic prestige if one engages in American football or communication with spirits.

    Ah, for the sports - there are academic institutions dedicated to these kind of studies. I reckon it wouldn't be uncommon for athletes that didn't reach a point allowing them to earn their living from sport to seek a tertiary education in this area. But, apart from this case, I guarantee you, the choice of a student of which university/institute to attend is in no way determined by the results of their "football" team.
    So most universities don't maintain a "professional level" sport team. True, they'll have facilities for anyone willing to play a sport as an amateur, but... "sports scholarships"? A waste of money

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Offtopic=1, Insightful=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06 2017, @09:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06 2017, @09:08PM (#606404)

    We have people who waste money on useless degrees. Some of them are very seriously stupid. No normal business finds value in an African Poetry graduate. That doesn't help design a truck, remove a cancer, or formulate gasoline. It doesn't do shit.

    If the USA taxed people to pay for college, we'd have even more people getting useless degrees. There would be zero fear of being unable to pay back loans. There would be very little pressure from parents to chose a useful subject to study.