Talk:LRC (train)

message: Riding LRCs over the last few years - since 2003 - I've noticed that the "banking" switch at the end of the carriage is quite often in the "off" position.  (Yes, I'm enough of a geek to scrutinise just about any control panel I pass!) Can anyone come up with an official line or other non-anecdotal sources on the current use or otherwise of the tilt system on the LRCs?  
I've also noticed that VIA doesn't exactly make a big deal out of having tilting trains, unlike most other operators, although that could just be Canadian attitudes to (not) marketing at work.
24.57.184.8 01:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I’ve heard (though without confirmation) that they aren’t bothering to maintain the tilting operation any more. As for the marketing, their newest carriages do not tilt, so that may be why they don’t draw attention to the abilities of older ones. Plus, there are other factors (mostly to do with the poor state of the lines themselves) that prevent even the tilting trains from reaching high speeds, and it’s really the speed that other railways care about, not the mere ability to tilt for its own sake. David Arthur 14:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize I am replying to an older post, but... I rode the Nightstar cars to and from Montreal earlier this year, and in several instances the items on our table were thrown off when moving through switches. I'm not sure the active tilt would react quickly enough to damp this out, but I'd certainly have been interested to try it. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Operation with tilt disabled

message: Is there any chance we could have the speed in Imperial as well as Metric please. I have no idea how fast 208km/h is.
Considering this article is about a Canadian train, used only in Canada, I don't see the point in using both unit systems. More so when the conversion between them does not work (i.e. the mileage per gallon versus the litres per 100 km). Moreover, Canada is using the metric system since the 1970's; therefore, the engineering specifications are probably in metric units as required by law. Anyways, that's my two cents on the issue. 75.98.19.140 (talk) 13:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Speed in English please

message: Does anyone have a reference to support the claim that the Super Voyager is LRC-derived? I know it tilts, but unlike the Acela/JetTrain, I’ve never heard anything to suggest that it’s actually related to the LRC, and it’s a much more different design than the U.S. trains, being a multiple-unit train rather than locomotive-drawn like the LRC. David Arthur 14:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Voyager 

message: I must say, the use of the infobox in place of any prose whatsoever to describe the LRC-2 and -3 locomotives make this article's layout look awful. It needs a strong rework, but I don't know enough about these trains (having never ridden on VIA before) to give it a proper re-do. 
For someone who comes here to learn about the class and its history, this layout is near useless. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a spotters' guide to locomotives. A more-descriptive text is absolutely needed.oknazevad (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I readjust my previous comment. Re-reading the article, it is more apparent to me that the real weakness is not the use of the infobox, as the text is pretty thorough. The problem is the "LRC Locomotives" section header, which creates an expectation of more text that simply isn't forthcoming. I'll remove the header.oknazevad (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: template:infobox train would be more relevant. Peter Horn User talk 22:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locomotive infobox 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LRC (train). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708113849/http://nbbusinessjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/654246 to http://nbbusinessjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/654246
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified