What do you want in your armored train?

Quintillus said:
Which raises the question, how long and how frequently am I going to be on this train?
Click to expand...
I'm envisioning (a) I'm rich like Bruce Wayne and (b) it's a near future of environmental catastrophe where airplane travel is over, and you have people traveling on trains, airships and maritime ships again. (I read The Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson not too long ago. I'm also hearing stories about, for example, FIFA expanding its schedule, which will add something like a billion annual air-miles traveled by soccer/football clubs and basically working to hasten the end of civilization as we know it and bring on the next Age, whatever that will be.) If I were stupid-rich, I'd travel a lot. And if I wanted or needed to avoid using planes, I'd prefer a train to an airship, most of the time. Of course, if I were stupid-rich, I'd have both, but this thread is about the train.

According to Amtrak, a cross-country trip in North America currently takes 60-70 hours. That's with a handful of stops and a 4-hour layover in Chicago. Unless I was in a hurry to attend a Comic Con or take Melissa O'Neil to lunch (or, heck, to take Melissa O'Neil to Comic-Con), I would make a lot of stops along the way. I'd probably have a layover in Chicago of, like, 4 days rather than 4 hours. Crossing Europe by train must be similar. The modern Orient Express goes London to Venice in 2 days, or Paris to Istanbul - the classic route - in 6 days. I assume the latter must make a lot of stops where passengers can disembark for a few hours, kind of like taking a cruise ship. I would imagine even today you can get just about anywhere in N. America or Europe by train. So after Comic-Con, Melissa and I will be heading to Mexico City, 'cause you cannot get good Mexican food around here.

amadeus said:
I don’t know about how to power a train, but I found the Germans in the 1930’s tried to build one that had a propeller on the back. It was discontinued because you couldn’t connect anything to the back and having a giant propeller spinning around busy railway platforms was thought by some to possibly be unsafe.
Click to expand...
I like the outside-the-box thinking, though. :lol:

Snowygerry said:
And ofcourse with a royal train goes a royal suite, in several stations :

www.vrt.be

Markante plekken: het Koninklijk Salon, het geheim van station Brussel-Centraal

In de reeks "Markante plekken" gaat onze fotograaf Alexander Dumarey elke week op zoek naar een opvallende plek met een verhaal. Vandaag: het Koninklijk salon in Brussel-Centraal
www.vrt.be www.vrt.be
Click to expand...
Oh, yeah. Good idea. I hadn't thought of that. I wouldn't need a dining room or anything, but a private suite to sleep if I arrive in the middle of the night (sleeping in moving vehicles can be tough, and even on a fancy train, you'd probably be in a narrow bed) or just to take a shower before heading out into the city. Sounds good to me.
 
Last edited:
amadeus said:
Reading up on Kim Jong-un’s train, it moves at a lightning speed of 37 miles per hour (60km/h)—I think I’d want mine to go faster than that. It should do at least 120 (193) maximum, cruising speed 80+.

I don’t know about how to power a train, but I found the Germans in the 1930’s tried to build one that had a propeller on the back. It was discontinued because you couldn’t connect anything to the back and having a giant propeller spinning around busy railway platforms was thought by some to possibly be unsafe.
Click to expand...

There were quite a few attempts at propeller driven trains in the interwar years. The USSR had one they used as a high speed VIP transport for a short period, until it crashed, killing most of the people on board - which IIRC were mainly foreign diplomats and journalists. But they all suffered from the problems you identified, and none entered regular commercial service.

The idea of aeroplane propulsion on trains wasn't dead though, as the US, USSR and France all went one step further and tried jets. Don't think they tried armouring them up though...
 
Last edited:
Exterior: something art deco looking like



Interior: wood panelling, so much wood panelling.

And let's face it, if I have a personal armoured train, it will probably become my primary residence. So it will need to have everything I would want my house to have. Air conditioned, with nice kitchen, office, bedrooms, bathrooms, a carriage for entertaining guests with a guest bathroom and bedrooms, high speed internet of course, and lots of storage space, lots of little drawers and cupboards and shelves and hidden spaces behind panelling. It will also need a large-ish rear balcony.

Obviously it will need to be energy efficient and all that. Ideally I'd like it to operate with as few personnel as possible, with their own comfortable quarters of course.
 
Last edited:
Tee Kay said:
Air conditioned
Click to expand...
God, yes. Most of North America is already unlivable without it, and that's only going to get worse. I imagine Australia, Africa and most of Asia are too, and Europe won't be far behind.

Tee Kay said:
It will also need a large-ish rear balcony.
Click to expand...
A good thought. Depending on your power source, some kind of outdoor space might be much more practical than it was traditionally. In days of yore, with the coal-smoke-spewing engine at the front, you couldn't even open the windows all the time. Today, or in the near future, you might be able to have a train with a roof-deck without inhaling exhaust. A nuclear-powered train might be unlikely, because of the amount of water you'd need, but maybe there's a 'green' power source that could be made to work for a train.
 
EgonSpengler said:
A good thought. Depending on your power source, some kind of outdoor space might be much more practical than it was traditionally. In days of yore, with the coal-smoke-spewing engine at the front, you couldn't even open the windows all the time. Today, or in the near future, you might be able to have a train with a roof-deck without inhaling exhaust. A nuclear-powered train might be unlikely, because of the amount of water you'd need, but maybe there's a 'green' power source that could be made to work for a train.
Click to expand...

There is that solar-powered train in Byron Bay

Ideally though you'd electrify the entire rail network.
 
Greenhouse car with a roof that can be opened.
 
Would you want your train as few cars as possible or as many as you could practically tack on?
 
Hygro said:
Would you want your train as few cars as possible or as many as you could practically tack on?
Click to expand...
I think it would depend on average platform lengths, but I can't find that number anywhere. A quick Google search doesn't turn up a minimum or typical platform length. It looks like India has many of the longest (Hubali Junction in Karnataka is the world's longest, 1505m / 4938ft), but I don't know if that indicates that Indian platforms are generally longer than in other places. Wikipedia says the Eurotunnel Folkstone Terminal in Kent has the longest platform in Europe, at 791m/2595ft, so you'd obviously want something a lot shorter than that to get around Europe. The Dutch have a thing for long platforms: Sittard, s-Hertogenbosch, and Nijmegen all stretch 699m. Australia has 3 stations with platforms over 700m, in Perth, Melbourne, and Port Pirie. (Conversely, Munich Central Station, Gare du Nord, and Grand Central Terminal in NYC all go for girth, with 30, 35, and 44 platforms, respectively, making them the 3 largest stations in the world by that measure. By contrast, London Waterloo Station has a mere 24 platforms.)

I found one train enthusiast site that said trains in the US are 'limited' to 180 wagons. :shifty: That's freight trains, obviously. The site notes that a train that large could need as many as 6 engines, and that some municipalities make it illegal for a train to block a crossing for more than 10 minutes at one time.

I'd end up going a little conservative here, so my train could comfortably fit the smaller stations. One site claims British coaches are between 19.5-22.5m long. Another site suggests 25m is an average. I figure an 8-car train, plus 1 engine, could probably keep it under 250m and slot in alongside most any passenger platform. Just a guess, though.
 
EgonSpengler said:
I think it would depend on average platform lengths, but I can't find that number anywhere. A quick Google search doesn't turn up a minimum or typical platform length. It looks like India has many of the longest (Hubali Junction in Karnataka is the world's longest, 1505m / 4938ft), but I don't know if that indicates that Indian platforms are generally longer than in other places. Wikipedia says the Eurotunnel Folkstone Terminal in Kent has the longest platform in Europe, at 791m/2595ft, so you'd obviously want something a lot shorter than that to get around Europe. The Dutch have a thing for long platforms: Sittard, s-Hertogenbosch, and Nijmegen all stretch 699m. Australia has 3 stations with platforms over 700m, in Perth, Melbourne, and Port Pirie. (Conversely, Munich Central Station, Gare du Nord, and Grand Central Terminal in NYC all go for girth, with 30, 35, and 44 platforms, respectively, making them the 3 largest stations in the world by that measure. By contrast, London Waterloo Station has a mere 24 platforms.)

I found one train enthusiast site that said trains in the US are 'limited' to 180 wagons. :shifty: That's freight trains, obviously. The site notes that a train that large could need as many as 6 engines, and that some municipalities make it illegal for a train to block a crossing for more than 10 minutes at one time.

I'd end up going a little conservative here, so my train could comfortably fit the smaller stations. One site claims British coaches are between 19.5-22.5m long. Another site suggests 25m is an average. I figure an 8-car train, plus 1 engine, could probably keep it under 250m and slot in alongside most any passenger platform. Just a guess, though.
Click to expand...
I am nor sure why I would care about the platform length. It is my train, I only need the car I am in to stop at the platform. The rest of the train can overhang, and if that gets in other trains way that is what the armor is for.

I am not sure why I would want it, but to have a train you could land a plane on would be cool.
 
Samson said:
I am nor sure why I would care about the platform length. It is my train, I only need the car I am in to stop at the platform. The rest of the train can overhang, and if that gets in other trains way that is what the armor is for.
Click to expand...
I prefer to go a little more incognito. I don't need HYDRA and SPECTRE knowing that I'm in town.

Samson said:
I am not sure why I would want it, but to have a train you could land a plane on would be cool.
Click to expand...
I bet a helicopter pad would be doable.
 
EgonSpengler said:
You could get a Harrier.

Click to expand...
This is not really the point. I do not really need a plane, I have already got a luxurious train to go places. It is that a train is like most of the way there, at least when it is going straight. Just add a few little additions and it is so much cooler.
 
Samson said:
This is not really the point. I do not really need a plane, I have already got a luxurious train to go places. It is that a train is like most of the way there, at least when it is going straight. Just add a few little additions and it is so much cooler.
Click to expand...
I'm just sayin', I think when those wasteland raiders show up, you're gonna wish you had that Harrier...

 
Okay, why not just have a place to park a TARDIS? I think there was an episode where that happened, back when Capaldi played the Doctor.
 
Birdjaguar said:
Amtrak runs double decker cars in the west and they go through tunnels.

I've been on this one many times to LA and Chicago.

amtrakguide.com

Amtrak routes with sleeper cars

An Amtrak sleeper car is a train car that contains restrooms, shower rooms and sleeping accommodations (not coach seats). Only the overnight and long-distance trains have sleeper cars, which contai…
amtrakguide.com amtrakguide.com

View attachment 653910
Click to expand...
From my knowlage, those cars can't be run on tracks on the Northeast Corridor due to the height of the cantinaries. The more common double decker cars that are routinely run by commuter rails like NJT and MBTA run these types:



 
Tee Kay said:
Exterior: something art deco looking like
Click to expand...

train.jpg


I came across this old Hungarian train, which I'd stretch out a little to add more of the intimidation factor. I'd go for a different color scheme, though this faded blue-green isn't bad.

As for interiors, this is the new Orient Express:

orient_express.jpg


Also, I want need this train to be very Bond villain-y, so that means at least one kind of hidden door in a bookcase. Preferably one that swings 360 degrees rather than slides sideways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom