[HN Gopher] End of the line for Japan's only all-double-decker '...
___________________________________________________________________
End of the line for Japan's only all-double-decker 'Max' E4 series
bullet train
Author : dustintrex
Score : 53 points
Date : 2021-10-02 10:11 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (mainichi.jp)
(TXT) w3m dump (mainichi.jp)
| kunagi7 wrote:
| Thanks for all this years Max E4!
|
| This train was quite a jump on Shinkansens with double-decker
| cars.
|
| Sadly there are slower than more recent series, just limited to
| 240km/h compared to the 260km/h of the E7 series or the 320km/h
| of the E5 series.
|
| Also, the article contains some nice photos:
| https://mainichi.jp/english/graphs/20210930/hpe/00m/0bu/0010...
| SapporoChris wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E4_Series_Shinkansen Has a nice
| details and good interior photos. Even the exterior photos
| without much reference, the train appears massive!
| mym1990 wrote:
| The lines on the photo of the E5 next to the E4 are
| magnificent, beautiful engineering and design.
| jbm wrote:
| This is so sad. I used to take that bullet train back and forth
| to go skiing at Gala Yuzawa. My kids loved it.
|
| Unfortunately, the lack of any real cargo space meant people who
| were carrying their own equipment had to improvise (a lot). The
| lack of any service in car was probably a pain for JR too.
|
| I'll always have my Transformers representation
| (https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:MidnightExpressProto.jpg). Goodbye
| Max Toki
| suction wrote:
| You're taking kids to Japan?
| [deleted]
| tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote:
| The article doesn't mention the reason. Does anybody know more?
| Animats wrote:
| It's slower, which slows down trains behind it capable of
| higher speeds.
| kunagi7 wrote:
| The Joetsu Shinkansen (where most of the E4's operated) has a
| lower speed limit of 240km/h so these trains fitted
| perfectly.
|
| But this will change soon since JR East is adapting the line
| to go faster.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Yes, and the Shinkansen faces stiff competition from budget
| airlines, so speed has become a competitive advantage JR
| wants to push.
|
| There's also a couple more reasons, namely that a double deck
| train takes longer to board/deboard, and that they're not
| very accessibility friendly. Plus Shinkansen have drink and
| food carts and those don't go up or down stairs.
| bombcar wrote:
| A line built around double deckers could remove some of
| these (basically all you need is double decker platforms
| and upper doors) but it's also easier to just run more
| trains.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Food carts are no problem if the company wants to. Finnish
| IC2 trains have elevators for food carts in 2-decker
| railcars. Nothing inherently prevents same in Shinkansen.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| The VIRM double deckers in the Netherlands used to have
| those food cart elevators. Interesting to hear those are
| still in use in some parts of the world. The food cart
| service on our intercity expresses was removed, so in the
| course of the years those mini-elevators were taken out
| as well during scheduled revisions of those EMU's.
|
| Now some third party is allowed to provide a mediocre
| rail catering service, which amounts to students doing a
| side-job wearing backpacks with hot water and cups and a
| tray filled with instant coffee and tea and a few cans
| and packets of crisps and cookies strapped to their
| bodies making the rounds at seemingly random times and
| places on the journey. Not quite the same...
|
| Add to that the lack of the frankly brilliant concept of
| can-coffee (Fou kohi) from vending machines on the
| platforms and eki-ben (Yi Bian ) and I suddenly really
| miss the Japanese train experience.
| coryrc wrote:
| No problem except it was built without elevators...
| caseyross wrote:
| Not an expert, but I would guess it's a combination of:
|
| 1. Shinkansen trains are run on an extremely tight timetable
| (often 5 minutes or less between trains). It takes twice as
| long to load or unload a double-decker car, so this presents a
| significant risk for schedulers.
|
| 2. One of the key benefits of double-decker cars is that they
| save space by cramming two cars worth of passengers into a one-
| car footprint. This allows significant passenger service in and
| out of small stations with short platforms. But Shinkansen
| platforms are not hurting for space (nearly all of their usage
| is single-decker trains, sometimes quite long ones), so this
| benefit isn't worth much in practice.
| [deleted]
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| According to pedestrianobservations.com/ double decker is bad
| because the much increased loading/unloading times make station
| idle time the limitting factor reducing throughput of the whole
| system.
|
| But that might apply to metro and regional rail more than long
| distance, so it might not be relevant here.
| innocenat wrote:
| > But that might apply to metro and regional rail more than
| long distance, so it might not be relevant here.
|
| Shinkansen at peak time runs more frequently than even some
| subways line in Japan. The Tokyo-Omiya section (shared
| between Tohoku/Joetsu/Hokuriki Shinkansen, which E4 also ran
| on) runs at peak of 15 trains per hour per direction, or 4
| minute heading. (The Tokaido Shinkansen is even more
| impressive at peak of 16 trains per hour per direction.) The
| loading time is very, very relevant, and it's why E4 has been
| phrasing out for a long time already.
| ant6n wrote:
| In many instances, long distance lines have more than one
| platform track per line track. So dwell could happen in
| parallel. It's still an issue, but could be mitigated.
|
| My guess is that outside of the peak, these kind of trains
| are not necessary. And the peak can apparently be
| accommodated without them. So there may be some times where
| they would be economically advantageous, but not always -
| meaning it could make sense to have some double deckers.
|
| But for train services, it makes sense to have uniform
| fleets, both to reduce maintenance costs and increase
| dispatching flexibility. Trains should also have the same
| performance profiles and dwell times (as mentioned before).
| So any small peak time advantage is undone by the bad
| economics of having a non uniform fleet.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Nice idea on double platforms! It would be neat to see a
| world where that was done uniformly
|
| But I agree, that world is not ours.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Glad to hear it, thanks!
| jdavis703 wrote:
| CalTrain revenue service consists of exclusively double
| decker trains. It may be the fact that it reduces maximum
| frequency. But maximum throughput? I'm skeptical.
| [deleted]
| bombcar wrote:
| CalTrain has different "limitations" and fitting the
| maximum number of passengers in one train is an advantage.
| johncoltrane wrote:
| They simply reached their end of life and are progressively
| replaced with newer models.
| wayoutthere wrote:
| You can forgive an American not understanding this as most of
| our public transit vehicles are older than us because they
| never replace them.
| johncoltrane wrote:
| There are still very old trains in circulation on all sorts
| of lines in Japan, but I heard that 20-25 years is the
| baseline life expectancy for rolling stock. It is very good
| for business and for trainspotters.
| Tijdreiziger wrote:
| Wow, that's way shorter than here in the Netherlands.
| AFAIK, rolling stock over here is revised after ~20
| years, after which it goes back in service for another
| ~20 years before being retired.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-02 23:00 UTC)