My grandpa was a businessman, he started out in the printing business and from the 30s until the 70s he traveled exclusively by train on out of town business. He refused to fly. He'd drive if it wasn't too far, but he liked trains.
That's sad dude. One of my grandfather's was really close to me. He died when I was ten but I remember a lot of the things he taught me about life. He served in Korea in the Navy.
Walt Disney had two miniature "Aerotrains" call Viewliners as a ride in Tomorrowland from 1957 to 1958. They were 5/8 scale and were powered by Oldsmobile "Rocket" V8's. Thank to Ryan for another great watch and for helping to keep history alive.........
we had a 12" gauge ride-on aerotrain at 'railways of america' in akron, ohio. the cars were styled like the converted aerotrain coaches. the power was probably a small FM or briggs & stratton motor. the coaches were named for ohio cities. we had a lot of fun riding the train, but the owner (who always operated the train) was a real SOB who seemed to enjoy yelling at kids. he used to yell at any of us kids who tried to touch anything on the huge O scale indoor layout. later on the train showed up at quaker square and was sold at auction a few years later- it was one of two trains that were built. the owner, mac lowery, had miniature crossing gates and signals custom-built to operate at the entrances to the place. those miniature gates and signals sold for more than the train sold for at the auction, which was held at quaker square when ownership of the square was passed on to the university of akron. today- the grain elevator towers there are converted college dorms. there were many older train items at ROA including a miniature B & O style train station and some pullman cars and a 4-6-2 (heavy pacific) locomotive. when i first saw photos of the disney train and the real prototype- i then realized the inspiration behind that little train.
I’m happy to have been able to ride on one of these when I was a little kid visiting my grandparents in Chicago. We would ride on the Rock Island from what is now the Metra 95th Street/Beverly Hills station, into downtown. I don’t remember much about the train other than how cool and futuristic I thought it looked. For perspective, we used to travel from Los Angeles to Chicago on the Santa Fe El Capitan every summer. One year, we came back via the original California Zephyr. Good times!
Yep. Americans forgot that fast trains need fast train infrastructure, long straightaways and wide curves... something that Japan had already prepared for the bullet train.
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle Meanwhile, and still, in America: ua-cam.com/video/EFk-yeGHn-o/v-deo.html I most countries street running trains are the result of very low traffic and a shared bridge (Australia) or uncontrolled city growth (some of the US examples, Thailand etc), but for wealthier countries you keep the trains right-of-way clear of other traffic (with the exception of those rural bridges).
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle You for get the most important, the wire above, with exeption of the major city's on the east coast the us is non electric, trains running on diesel !!!
I’ve been inside the Aerotrain at the Railroad Museum in Green Bay. The futuristic styling is cool. Would be amazing to see it’s appearance restored to how it would have looked when it was new.
GM launched the Aerotrain for a few reasons: 1. They saw an opportunity in the (train) passenger car market, and wanted to get into that game. 2. At the time, they were THE dominant manufacturer of diesel locomotives in the US: ALCo and GE were vying for second, while Baldwin, Fairbanks-Morse and others were picking up the scraps. Why not give the railroads "one-stop shopping"?
The guess is the major reason it failed is you can't have a high speed train without high speed track and track bed. China found this out the hardway. You need to lay a lot of straight, high tolerance, stabalized track before you can make a train go fast on it.
@@57thorns The engineers in Japan conducted in-depth studies of the suspension tuning required to provide a smooth ride at above 100 MPH. GM, not so much. The basic difference between a rubber-tired vehicle such as a motorcoach bus, many of which ride smoothly at high highways speeds, and a train is that the bus is steered by the driver making direction corrections through the steering wheel connected to the front tires. The train is steered by a cone-shaped wheel profile matched to the inward canted profile of the rail surface. As an axle-connected pair of wheels drifts to one side, the larger cone radius on the inner part of one wheel needs to travel farther than the smaller cone radius on the outer part of the other wheel, steering the axle back to center. This automatic steering of an axle on a train is unstable. It is rendered stable by resisting the resulting oversteer by placing a pair of axles in a truck frame. As the Japanese engineers learned, as did British engineers also working on this problem, stable running requires careful tuning of the stiffness of the truck resisting pivoting of the individual axles along with what they did in Japan of adding resistance to the entire truck turning as the train entered curves. The British had discovered a stable tuning of a two-axle, 4-wheeled railroad car as commonly used for freight cars in England and in Continental Europe at the time. It is possible that the GM engineers were simply unaware of this engineering research "across the pond" and that a 4-wheel train car has greatly different demands on its suspension that a 4-wheel passenger bus. Yes, high-quality track can be part of the equation. My father was a research engineer at the freight-car company GATX that was studying high-speed passenger trains under Federal contract, motivated by attempting to replicate the Japanese "Bullet Trains" here in the U.S.. He told me that the train cars went into the shop every night to "dress" their wheel profiles to tight tolerance and that the train line was shut down for 6 hours overnight, when track crews went over the entire line to correct any imperfections in the track. Owing to this level of maintenance being incredibly expensive, British research was focusing on wheel profiles that were more tolerant of less-than-perfect track. But high-quality track is not the only part of the equation. Keep in mind that the deterioration of track by the 1970s by US railroads deteriorating financial condition was not the case in the 1950s, where conventional passenger trains were still operated safely and smoothly at the speeds at which the GM train was operated. There was certainly an element of hubris by GM for not considering that stable tracking of a train car works on an entirely different principle than the stable running of an automobile or motorcoach bus. The sad part is that the energy-savings and cost-savings of lightweight trains are dismissed out-of-hand because the reasons for why the GM train rode roughly were never investigates. Furthermore, GM could have done testing of their new train to see if it rode smoothly before just throwing into service. This is in part why the Federal Railway Administration built its outdoor test track and indoor roller stand in Pueblo, Colorado, so that new high-speed train designs can be thoroughly checked out before being put into service under US conditions. My father contributed a high-power coupling to the roller test stand, which is like the half-axle with its CV joints in your front-drive car "on steroid" to meet the torque levels of a locomotive.
@@PaulMilenkovic That BR research into 4-wheel wagons was meant for stuff like motorrail or newspaper trains . It ended up as the class 14x Pacer. When it comes to moving passengers , perhaps Jacobs bogies could have helped both trains ?
The UK also found out the hard way, rather than build new track British Rail designed a train that would tilt, it worked, it could corner much faster, it could also make passengers sick and send your coffee and food across the carriage.
Great video Ryan! I grew up as a little kid in Lagrange and remember the old General Motors electromotive plant very well. As a young adult, and a friend of mine used to own an auto repair shop across the street from the property. It has been demolished and turned into a shopping center.
4:46: Cars, not carriages (British jargon) 8:11: Railroads, not rail lines. Next time you cross the tracks in your car, read the sign. Says Railroad Crossing. The REAL reason these ran so rough is that GM designers did not take into consideration track cushioning, which contributes a significant portion of the ride quality. These cars were too light to take advantage of that, so they simply bounced over them.
Some US 'Railroads' actually have (or had) 'Railway' in their titles. In the US, 'carriages' and 'coaches' is often used, but 'cars' is more commonly used. In the UK it is the other way round, 'cars' is mostly used on the London Underground (due to the US influence in early electric rolling stock and US investment), but 'cars' is also used for 'sleeping cars' and 'restaurant/dining cars'.
There is one is Ellis KS and this one in Oregon. “ The Zooliner is a 5/8-scale replica of the diesel-powered Aerotrain, which is famous for its unusual shape that was influenced by automobile designs of the period when it was built, considered futuristic at the time. The Zooliner was built in 1958, its mechanical parts by Northwest Marine Iron Works and its streamlined bodywork by the H. Hirschberger Sheet Metal company of Portland. It first carried passengers in June 1958. The Zooliner is powered by a 165 horsepower (123 kW) diesel engine with hydraulic transmission, which is WP&ZRy locomotive No. 2. The brakes are pneumatic, the same as on its full-size namesake. The train includes four or five streamlined passenger coaches pulled by matching locomotive No. 2. The rearmost car was rebuilt in late 2005 to resemble a dome car, in connection with installation of a larger and more powerful wheelchair lift. Track gauge is 30 inches, 2'-6".”
@@keithmoore5306 Bit too heavy and no finning for the cooling. But yes it is a radial something. However, so far as I know, ALL aircraft radials had an uneven number of cylinders per bank. Maybe General Electric (yes the narration clearly says General Electric at 0:08) had some weird product... Nah. Just incredibly sloppy editing.
@@cr10001 no most if not all radial aircraft engines have an odd number of cylinders on a single row although an even number per engine on double row engines with 7 or 9 per row, the Pratt and Whitney R2800 on the Corsair F6 hellcat and P47 is 18 cylinder in 2 rows of 9 the Wright R2600 on the B25 was 14 cylinder with 2 rows or 7 the Wright R1820 on the B17 again 14 2 rows of 7, where most get confused on it is most sources only list total number of cylinders and nothing on how many rows of cylinders the engine has.
I do not think the Aerotrain was a creation of GE. It was probably made by EMD since at the beginning of the video clip the narrator states, "From La Grange, Illinois..." That is where the main EMD plant was located at that time.
I grew up riding and watching those trains ; ) they Are both still in service to this day ! , However the Scaled GENERAL is only brought out 3 or 4 times a year ..... My understanding is for special occasions ;) . . .Always reminded me of The Original " Wild , Wild West * tv show featuring Robert Conrad .
I'm from St.Louis and I remember seeing The Aerotrain at The National Museum of Transportation as a kid in the late 1970s & 1980s when I would go there a couple times a year with my grandpa. I've not been there in the last 15 or so years but I still would say if you like trains or any other form of transportation you should go check it out if you're ever in St. Louis.
The LW12 was effectively an SW 1200 switch engine with a single power truck and a fancy body. For some time at least into the mid to late 80s a couple of the coaches could be seen from the Dan Ryan Expressway at the former Rock Island " Rocket House " facility. Think they disappeared about the time RTA/Metra rehabbed the old shops.
"The E and F are hugely successful locomotives. So lets make a cheap piece of shit that looks like a car and has all of the comfort of a transit bus." A fine example of how the railroad industry's worst enemy is its management
I can remember seeing that train at the Rock Island depot in Morris Illinois back in probably 57 or 58 . I was 5 yrs old and had a toy engine like that made out of rubber by the Auburn company 👍👍
Unfortunately, the AeroTrain failure was typical of GM. They, too often, relied on poor market research wrapped in sloppy engineering, floating on a cushion of deluded marketing BS - and failed. When will they learn?
Well... air and road transportation were HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED by the Goverment, and in the meantime railroads were all private companies without subsidies and with a lot of taxes and regulations.
Initially railroads were highly subsidized. When they were building the transcontinental railroad, the companies were "given" 12 square miles of land on alternating sides of the right of way to do with as they chose. Of course the government stole the land from the Indians so it was no skin off their noses.
Thank you, your channel is a favorite of mine as your professionalism and quality of research are unexcelled .I saw this on display at Grand Central when i was a kid !
There was another "future" train that the NY Central and the New Haven RR's got mixed up in that was a colossal disaster, they were called "Train X" and "Dan'l Webster" respectively. The Dan'l Webster caught fire during the Press rollout !!! @@ITSHISTORY
All trains in America were in trouble at that time in the 1950s and 60s. The Interstate highway system made driving by car more convenient than taking the train. For longer trips the rise of Jet travel became the dominant form of long distance travel. No train could compete with 550mph Jets.
@@desertmodern7638 It's a Nordberg Radial Two Stroke Diesel. That Thing is way too heavy to put on any Airplane, except maybe loading it into the Cargo Hold of an An-124. These Engines were initially designed to drive Water Pumps, but later used for Power Generation too. At least they got it right enough in the Sense that EMD Engines are Two Stroke Diesels too, but these are V-Engines and not Radials.
Fascinating, informative video, although the idea that the designer based it on "the Buick LeSabre, which was Jordan's favorite day-to-day vehicle" is absurd, as the model did not even exist until 1959. And why show a 1974 LeSabre? This and other errors are so blatant - could this be a strategy to optimize the UA-cam algorithm by generating more comments?
@@desertmodern7638 GM chief stylist Harley J. Earl used the LeSabre concept car as his personal automobile for two years after finishing its tour of the auto show circuit.
I remember watching a dvd about trains I bought about 20 years ago from the History Channel. I remember one old retired railroad worker saying that passenger trains always lost money. You simply couldn’t get enough passengers to make a profit.
That's because there was a conflict of interest in promoting train travel. Big companies save money shipping freight by train, and like to force others to buy the extra trucks for hauling, and cars for driving as another way to bolster profits. Most everything has the big seven globalist corporate conglomerates running them, one way or another. This includes politicians...
My next door neighbor was an engineer for the Rock Island and drove the Rock Island Rocket this train, from Chicago to Kankee. This train was more advanced than you said. It was the first American Talgo Pendicular train design. This type was used successfully in Spain. Amtrac is now using this Talgo design on the West Coast .
The Talgo train was a different set from the Aerotrain. The RI purchased a third LWT-12 engine and a Talgo train consist. I believe it was used on the Chicago to Peoria route. It wasn't successful on the RI.
Yep. That's a Nordberg radial diesel he's showing. That's a power plant motor. Had me worried for a second.How would you cram that into a train? The 567C power unit was an inline diesel,like the rest of world uses. Oh well
@@jimmcdonald9618 Aren't all EMDs V-Engines, ranging from 6 to 24 Cylinders? Never heard of an Inline-EMD. The only Locomotive Engines that I know to be built as Inline- and as V-Engines are ABC from Belgium. It's quite common for larger Marine/Stationary Engines to be built Inline with 4-9 Cylinders and then as V if you want 10+ Cylinders of the same Engine.
It's ok, i meant that the cylinders are in a row. Yes they're in a V. arrangement My only dealings with Nordberg was with their cone crushers. I wasn't surprised at their radial motor idea.@@Genius_at_Work
3:19: What the hell is THAT? Some sort of radial engine? That is certainly NOT a 12 cyl. Detroit 567, and considering how many pics there are online of Detroit Diesels, you should've had no problem finding a photo of at least SOMETHING close to what actually went into this locomotive. Your editing is SERIOUSLY lacking....
8:14: Once again, you are mentioning the Pennsylvania Railroad, but you're showing a photo from the Southern Pacific railroad, a railroad which had NO connection whatsoever with the Aerotrain. It's like you guys aren't even trying to be professional!
@12:29 Is a Flxible built bus (yes that's spelled right) . The carriages didn't mirror the interstate Greyhound buses. The carriages mirrored the General Motors intercity buses.
It's kind of a Frankenstein design to me, especially with the car-like cab stuck on top like an afterthought. Still trying to figure out the mechanics of how they would fit a horizontal radial engine...
If the passenger cars had not been single axle and designed like the modern high speed passenger car of today and did not have the cramped bus like interior they might have been a better sell. Trying to pull a series of buses behind a sleek locomotive doesn't quite work. The early Spanish Talgo trains worked out better.
The Aerotrain had a beautiful and futuristic style about it, but they should have done a lot more testing before putting in into service. I guess the designers were too greedy for immediate profits from to and as a result lost their butts.🙀😾
I remember Disneyland had built a smaller version of the areotrain after Walt Disney had seen and rode on this train, however it didn't last for more than a year or so as a ride in the Disneyland Tomorrowland area of the park. There is a u-tube video about the Tomorrowland areotrain!!
I had a model of this engine back when I was a child and was fascinated by it. However, I never thought it looked that good compared to the E and F EMD Diesel locomotives.
The E & F Diesels were so gorgeous! When I was a kid they were fairly common (1950'-60's). So many things from that era makes me so nostalgic, I almost cry.
@@bonniemoerdyk9809 Interestingly enough are "europeanised" Copies of the EMD F-Unit still fairly common in Europe today, named "NOHAB AA16". They sit on 12 Wheels instead of 8 to account for the lower Wheel Load Limits, have lower and narrower Bodies because of the smaller Loading Gauge and also have Cabs on both Ends as one-directional Locomotives would be really useless here. They were license-built by NOHAB in Sweden in the 1950ies and 60ies and initially sold to the National Railways of Denmark, Norway and Hungary (Sweden was neutral, allowing them to sell beyond the Iron Courtain). ABC in Belgium also built them as Sub-Licensee and sold to Belgium and Luxembourg. The National Railways have long retired them, but they sold well on the 2nd-Hand Market and are still around at Private Railways and on Construction Sites.
This is the most thorough documentary on the Aerotrain I have seen. I wondered if at some point the Rock Island line used cars from another experimental train the “X”. I think I have seen some pictures of the Aerotrain engine attached to a group of cars with square windows.
A $17 train ticket in 1956 adjusted for inflation is equal to a $192 in 2024. If that's a one-way fare, then it is similar to booking a ride on Amtrak's Acela.
I shudder to think what the crash worthiness that bus bodies fail to give. The railroad environment is dominated by heavy locomotives and cars and a bus body wouldn't stand a chance. Not mentioned was that the articulated design mean any failure on any car meant that the whole train would be unable to operate. True story>the Aerotrain even failed in low speed commuter operations. Ridership per train was much lower than average as many commuters would refuse to board the train and preferred to wait for the next train. And this was the Rock Island which offered worn out unairconditioned cars from the 1920s;;;;;hence their nick name as Al Capone cars!
Quoting from the magazine, "Remember the Rock" (Rock Island historical society), story on the "Jet Rocket" (Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer 2006), "Many of the problems that plagued the lightweight trains in their former career weren't an issue in suburban service. The rough ride was smoother at lower speeds and commuters loved the fact that the trains were air conditioned." "Unfortunately, though, the Rock Island couldn't solve all the problems of these experimental trains. For starters, they just were not designed for commuter service. The seat backs couldn't be flipped, resulting in commuters being forced to ride backwards sometimes. The Talgo cars also had only one set of doors for every three-car set. This made the loading and unloading of passengers at suburban stops a much longer ordeal than with conventional equipment."
I haven’t read all the comments, so I’m not sure if someone else has pointed this out, but you didn’t mentioned that there were three of these locomotives. Numbers 2 and 3 are the surviving locomotives but there was a number 1 which had a completely different set of passenger cars made by Talgo which were just as unsuccessful as the GM cars. Otherwise great video. Thank you for sharing this information with the world.
The Rock Island Railroad was the only railroad to purchase this basic design. Indeed, the CRI&P used the Spanish designed Talgo passenger cars for their Chicago to Peoria train named the "Jet Rocket" instead of the ones used on the two Aerotrain sets built by GM/EMD (it did use the same LWT locomotive). The "Jet Rocket" itself entered service on February 11, 1956. It too faced numerous problems like its similar looking Aerotrains with ride quality, interior noise levels and sometimes not shunting the wayside track signals due to its light weight. The train was taken out of service between Chicago and Peoria on May 10, 1957. It would finish its days in Rock Island commuter service between Chicago and Joliet along with the two Aerotrains the Rock also purchased in 1958 for commuter service. Unfortunately, the "Jet Rocket" was not preserved in any form and was scrapped at the Rock's Silvis, IL locomotive shops in April 1965.
The UK tried a similar trick in a very different area. A bus body on a wagon chassis for local rail services in areas where passenger numbers were relatively small. It was called the pacer and they were awful. Noisy and uncomfortable. They were our local trains for many years and though they did get better seats after a midlife upgrade, we were all relieved when they were finally withdrawn only about 2 or 3 years ago.
Not a Cameo pickup truck. The Cameo was a deluxe flat sided model (fiberglass sides), although the bed wasn't wide inside. Based on the new model shown though. 2:28
GM probably didn’t really want Aerotrain to work anyway. When the “train of the future” isn’t any better than the train of the past, passengers stop hoping, and get onto those new interstates…
I recall seeing an Aerotrain, many times, sitting forlornly on a siding in the Sunnyside Yard (near Newark,) in New Jersey, from an NJ Transit train, in the late 1970s. It was there for at least 6 months. I'm guessing it later became one of the museum trains mentioned here.
@@PRR-xx2hp - When I stand corrected. I thought Sunnyside was the yard where NJ Transit used to change to electric engines, before entering the tunnel to Penn Station?
Interestingly, at 2:25 Chuck Jordan is shown with the great Nuccio Bertone and a Lamborghini Miura (centre) and a concept car Lamborghini Bravo (right) + a Lamborghini Marzal (left) - another concept supercar. As for the train and its drawbacks, the Concorde supersonic passenger airliner was also notoriously noisy, cramped inside with its narrow hull, and far from comfort, but the hype around its design, speed and futuristic image prevailed and no major problems with ticket sale hindered its operation for c. three decades.
This video talks about the streamlined trainset "Aerotrain" built in the US, but the video description is that of the unrelated experimental hovertrain with similar name ("Aérotrain") built in France.
It's very misleading to say the train was limited by the technology of the time. Many companies around the world were building good high speed trains by this time. The Aerotrain was just badly designed.
Aerotrain’s motive power looks like the time from which it came, and it did not age well. It is so hideously ugly! I can’t help but love it. Ryan, have you told the story of when GM got a rail concept right? Take a look at GM’s Train of Tomorrow of 1945. Thanks for a good video.
Can tell you and the folks on your team aren't a car guys, Ryan as you all chose the year of LeSabre that looks least like the Areotrain. I suggest you look at the 1950 LeSabre show car...
3:18 This does not appear to be a 567C engine. It appears to be some sort of liquid cooled radial. According to the 567C maintenance manual, " The Model 567C Diesel engine is a "V" type, two-cycle engine,.."
The engine at 3:18 in the video IS a GM engine, but NOT a 567-c used in locomotives. This engine in the video here was put into Submarines, like the USS Albacore.
Arriving 4 hours late added to the suspense. picking up every mom and pop dairy milk can in Iowa and Minnesota while covering 370 miles in 12 hours with no diner was irrelevant, a maroon engine with a Mars light led the way
I am a bit of a train buff / collector AND I actually have a SET of the AERO TRAIN * From MTH *....... I first got the bug about the Aero-Train From being a young fella At the Local Portland , Oregon Zoo . . . Where we have a 5/8 scale Train running on the Tracks ! Since about 1963 :If memory serves me correctly ! ? ! ? ! . . . .The other Mostly retired Train at the Zoo railway is a scale General ... Excited to have found this show today !!!! Thanks for sharing ;)
Great video, thank you. I did think it was an odd choice that you depicted a 1970s automobile, when suggesting the car the designer drove influenced the train's cab design. The Aerotrain cab design does resemble a mid-1950s car's roofline, but by the 1970s...not so much.
👍😎 info. I have the HO scale electric train set of the Aero train 001 which includes the locomotive, passenger cars an the end president type car of sorts with a rounded end with panoramic windows
I have the MTH --- " O gauge " set . .. Originally it was the engine and three cars , ... I bought a fourth one - to match the Portland Railway - Zooliner * / Aerotrain . . .IT was a very pretty penny , but ? I figure it's something not just anyone has ..... unlike a lot of postwar Lionel Smokers ;)
When you showed a picture of the engine, why did you show a Nordberg 2 stroke radial used in power plants. When the engine used was the EMD 567 series V-12 and V-16
I rode on that Aerotrain on the Pennsylvania Railroad Philadelphia-Pittsburgh route in 1956, the route which was discussed in this video. It was particularly exciting to ride it around Horseshoe Curve. The train was a really big deal at the time and captured a lot of headlines and interest. They had it for testing on the New York Central for a brief time but I don't believe it ever saw any scheduled service on that road. There was a lot of interest in experimental trains during the 50's and 60's as railroads were trying to find innovative ways of competing with cars and airlines. The New York Central ran a different (single unit multi car) train (locomotive by Baldwin, cars by Pullman) called the "Xplorer" between Cleveland and Cincinnati from 1956-57 but which also failed. There was also consideration during that time of a US version of the Spanish "Talgo" train (1950's version) which had articulated cars capable of tilting around curves, as well as many other technologically advanced features for the time (and even now). It also never made it into US service. Finally, there was the United Aircraft Turbo train which also had tilt capability as well as a gas turbine engine. Amtrak actually ran that in service for a few years and I rode it between Boston and New York. The neat thing about that train was that it had cabs on both ends with raised passenger seating in each cab, like in dome cars. You could actually sit up high in passenger seats on raised areas of the cab cars along with the engineer and look out forward at the track ahead. You could also look backward along the top of the rest of the train (I did both). If you are interested, you can find information on any of those trains by doing an internet search on their names.
Thanks Ryan for another information I have never heard of, I think I will now start calling you Professor SoCash, I am in my 70's so by the end of my time left I might get my first degree in," IT'S HISTORY"...
Sounds like a swirly box with a LS. Being uncomfortable on a smooth track for 8 to 15 seconds is really fun. Barreling down a dirt road in an old bus @ 100mph for 40 minutes sounds like something most people do fleeing an active battle.
Also don't underestimate the use of bogies! The two axles in a bogie sort of act like a lever and fulcrum. Which means that -- theoretically -- only half of the vertical distance of every bump or gap each pair of wheels roll over is transferred to the carriage. Bogies also allow for less flange grinding in curves. Many high-speed trains at least partly use Jacobs bogies between the train carriages. This allows for fewer axles per carriage while (theoretically) retaining their comfort. From what I understand, trains with Jacobs bogies in the 1930s tended to have stability problems, so that comfort thing probably wasn't easy to achieve. An interesting exception are the Talgo trains which used sort of two-wheel Jacobs bogies.
This was also at the end of the train era. This was not even addressed. Train travel was not a primary method in the late 60s. Dc 10s, personal vehicles and even busses were more common than trains outside inner city railways
It's always frustrating when UA-camrs just drop random pics of something, in this case, a radial aero engine, into a video while the narrator mentions the "12-cylinder prime mover (engine)." GM's 12-cylinder was a huge hulking affair that had nothing in common with a radial aero engine, and pictures of them are readily available. But I guess an engine is an engine, and the viewers' intellect or accuracy of information just isn't a priority for some of these presenters. It's just lazy and sloppy.
The bogies and suspension were the problem. Standard trains have double axle bogies since the late 1800s. The only system ahead of this is Talgo of Spain, sporting independent wheel suspension.
It still boogles my mind that the rail companies didn't fught back harder against the Car/airplane boom of the 40s/50s/60s... they were so rich and powerful... you'd think they could have poured investment into highspeed lines decades earlier.... if they would have created HIGH speed rail in the 1950s in America instead of in the 1970s in France/Japan they could have saved their industry, at least on the east coast. Before the suburbs and interstate system had totally changed the living habits and population density, I would have been tough but with right investments in infrastructure and technology I think they could have done it...
Actually, despite a few lean years the railroads did "save their industry", and they did it largely by unloading passenger service altogether. As someone pointed out above, passenger service never really made much if any money on its own - it was pretty much always cross-subsidized by freight revenues; more or less a large scale version of Union Pacific's steam program.
@@anthonyvallillo422 well I was specifically referring to the passenger service. If they could habe created high speed limes in the 1950s they may have been able to keep some of the American transportation market from evolving away from them amd kept habits from changing. In especially the east coast and northern Midwest I think high-speed rail could have been a better option for mid distance trips that ended up going to the airlines.
@@daveweiss5647 You are right, and the already existing high speed service on the PRR electified route that is now called the NEC proves it. Of course, east and northern midwest stagnated into the so called rust belt in the 70's, so who knows how any of this would have ended up.
Well, there are reasons why people choose to use bogies, the Pullman system. I’m looking forward to use the new talgo trains from Berlin to Amsterdam next year…;-)
Light build train with construction similiar to buses being bumpy in high speed. There is reason other trains with similiar constructions were used on local slow railways (like British Pacer or Czechoslovakian M152)
My grandpa was a businessman, he started out in the printing business and from the 30s until the 70s he traveled exclusively by train on out of town business. He refused to fly. He'd drive if it wasn't too far, but he liked trains.
I wish there was more train routes. Like planes are expensive, it's a long drive to NY, but a train from Ohio to NY, that sounds great
@LS1056 that's pretty much the route he took. I lived in Denmark for 2 years and used the train system many times.
I never got to meet my grandfathers….
Did he make a good living for the time?
That's sad dude. One of my grandfather's was really close to me. He died when I was ten but I remember a lot of the things he taught me about life. He served in Korea in the Navy.
Walt Disney had two miniature "Aerotrains" call Viewliners as a ride in Tomorrowland from 1957 to 1958. They were 5/8 scale and were powered by Oldsmobile "Rocket" V8's.
Thank to Ryan for another great watch and for helping to keep history alive.........
Wish I could have ridden on them and the Aerotrain. I was born in 1955 so I was around, but too young.
1955 is a great year for Chevy.......@@aramboodakian9554
we had a 12" gauge ride-on aerotrain at 'railways of america' in akron, ohio. the cars were styled like the converted aerotrain coaches. the power was probably a small FM or briggs & stratton motor. the coaches were named for ohio cities. we had a lot of fun riding the train, but the owner (who always operated the train) was a real SOB who seemed to enjoy yelling at kids. he used to yell at any of us kids who tried to touch anything on the huge O scale indoor layout. later on the train showed up at quaker square and was sold at auction a few years later- it was one of two trains that were built. the owner, mac lowery, had miniature crossing gates and signals custom-built to operate at the entrances to the place. those miniature gates and signals sold for more than the train sold for at the auction, which was held at quaker square when ownership of the square was passed on to the university of akron. today- the grain elevator towers there are converted college dorms. there were many older train items at ROA including a miniature B & O style train station and some pullman cars and a 4-6-2 (heavy pacific) locomotive. when i first saw photos of the disney train and the real prototype- i then realized the inspiration behind that little train.
So much history, so little time......@@tommurphy4307
Here is a good comparison from my website:
mickeymousepark.com/disneyland/att/onstage/tms-532ad.jpg
MickeyMousePark.com
I’m happy to have been able to ride on one of these when I was a little kid visiting my grandparents in Chicago. We would ride on the Rock Island from what is now the Metra 95th Street/Beverly Hills station, into downtown. I don’t remember much about the train other than how cool and futuristic I thought it looked.
For perspective, we used to travel from Los Angeles to Chicago on the Santa Fe El Capitan every summer. One year, we came back via the original California Zephyr. Good times!
0:09 General Motors, not General Electric
Thank you.
That’s Generalisimo either way to you pal!
Thanks, I was confused!
This guy makes too many mistakes, especially when he doe stories about NY. He is a bs artist.
Read video description !
The irony of the Aerotrain was that a few years later, Japan would roll out its first bullet train, revolutionizing train travel in that country.
Yep. Americans forgot that fast trains need fast train infrastructure, long straightaways and wide curves... something that Japan had already prepared for the bullet train.
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle Meanwhile, and still, in America:
ua-cam.com/video/EFk-yeGHn-o/v-deo.html
I most countries street running trains are the result of very low traffic and a shared bridge (Australia) or uncontrolled city growth (some of the US examples, Thailand etc), but for wealthier countries you keep the trains right-of-way clear of other traffic (with the exception of those rural bridges).
@@57thorns ooooo I love that video, literally would buy a house there just to enjoy the train
agreed . .. . Ironic .
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle You for get the most important, the wire above, with exeption of the major city's on the east coast the us is non electric, trains running on diesel !!!
I’ve been inside the Aerotrain at the Railroad Museum in Green Bay. The futuristic styling is cool. Would be amazing to see it’s appearance restored to how it would have looked when it was new.
GM launched the Aerotrain for a few reasons:
1. They saw an opportunity in the (train) passenger car market, and wanted to get into that game.
2. At the time, they were THE dominant manufacturer of diesel locomotives in the US: ALCo and GE were vying for second, while Baldwin, Fairbanks-Morse and others were picking up the scraps.
Why not give the railroads "one-stop shopping"?
You need to delete this
@@lukasgestrine I'd love to know WHY I "need to delete" my previous comment.
The guess is the major reason it failed is you can't have a high speed train without high speed track and track bed. China found this out the hardway. You need to lay a lot of straight, high tolerance, stabalized track before you can make a train go fast on it.
Japan did this in the 1960s, only 15-20 years after being nuked. That was quite impressive to say the least.
@@57thorns The engineers in Japan conducted in-depth studies of the suspension tuning required to provide a smooth ride at above 100 MPH. GM, not so much.
The basic difference between a rubber-tired vehicle such as a motorcoach bus, many of which ride smoothly at high highways speeds, and a train is that the bus is steered by the driver making direction corrections through the steering wheel connected to the front tires. The train is steered by a cone-shaped wheel profile matched to the inward canted profile of the rail surface. As an axle-connected pair of wheels drifts to one side, the larger cone radius on the inner part of one wheel needs to travel farther than the smaller cone radius on the outer part of the other wheel, steering the axle back to center.
This automatic steering of an axle on a train is unstable. It is rendered stable by resisting the resulting oversteer by placing a pair of axles in a truck frame. As the Japanese engineers learned, as did British engineers also working on this problem, stable running requires careful tuning of the stiffness of the truck resisting pivoting of the individual axles along with what they did in Japan of adding resistance to the entire truck turning as the train entered curves.
The British had discovered a stable tuning of a two-axle, 4-wheeled railroad car as commonly used for freight cars in England and in Continental Europe at the time. It is possible that the GM engineers were simply unaware of this engineering research "across the pond" and that a 4-wheel train car has greatly different demands on its suspension that a 4-wheel passenger bus.
Yes, high-quality track can be part of the equation. My father was a research engineer at the freight-car company GATX that was studying high-speed passenger trains under Federal contract, motivated by attempting to replicate the Japanese "Bullet Trains" here in the U.S.. He told me that the train cars went into the shop every night to "dress" their wheel profiles to tight tolerance and that the train line was shut down for 6 hours overnight, when track crews went over the entire line to correct any imperfections in the track. Owing to this level of maintenance being incredibly expensive, British research was focusing on wheel profiles that were more tolerant of less-than-perfect track.
But high-quality track is not the only part of the equation. Keep in mind that the deterioration of track by the 1970s by US railroads deteriorating financial condition was not the case in the 1950s, where conventional passenger trains were still operated safely and smoothly at the speeds at which the GM train was operated. There was certainly an element of hubris by GM for not considering that stable tracking of a train car works on an entirely different principle than the stable running of an automobile or motorcoach bus.
The sad part is that the energy-savings and cost-savings of lightweight trains are dismissed out-of-hand because the reasons for why the GM train rode roughly were never investigates. Furthermore, GM could have done testing of their new train to see if it rode smoothly before just throwing into service. This is in part why the Federal Railway Administration built its outdoor test track and indoor roller stand in Pueblo, Colorado, so that new high-speed train designs can be thoroughly checked out before being put into service under US conditions. My father contributed a high-power coupling to the roller test stand, which is like the half-axle with its CV joints in your front-drive car "on steroid" to meet the torque levels of a locomotive.
@@PaulMilenkovic Just hitting 100mph is not longer high speed. It is just the minimal operating speed to beat a road car over any distance.
@@PaulMilenkovic That BR research into 4-wheel wagons was meant for stuff like motorrail or newspaper trains . It ended up as the class 14x Pacer. When it comes to moving passengers , perhaps Jacobs bogies could have helped both trains ?
The UK also found out the hard way, rather than build new track British Rail designed a train that would tilt, it worked, it could corner much faster, it could also make passengers sick and send your coffee and food across the carriage.
Great video Ryan! I grew up as a little kid in Lagrange and remember the old General Motors electromotive plant very well. As a young adult, and a friend of mine used to own an auto repair shop across the street from the property. It has been demolished and turned into a shopping center.
Curious where your repair shop was located. And what stores are at this shopping mall now.
4:46: Cars, not carriages (British jargon)
8:11: Railroads, not rail lines. Next time you cross the tracks in your car, read the sign. Says Railroad Crossing.
The REAL reason these ran so rough is that GM designers did not take into consideration track cushioning, which contributes a significant portion of the ride quality. These cars were too light to take advantage of that, so they simply bounced over them.
For me it was quite nice to hear a US guy say "carriages" :)
Some US 'Railroads' actually have (or had) 'Railway' in their titles. In the US, 'carriages' and 'coaches' is often used, but 'cars' is more commonly used. In the UK it is the other way round, 'cars' is mostly used on the London Underground (due to the US influence in early electric rolling stock and US investment), but 'cars' is also used for 'sleeping cars' and 'restaurant/dining cars'.
There is one is Ellis KS and this one in Oregon. “
The Zooliner is a 5/8-scale replica of the diesel-powered Aerotrain, which is famous for its unusual shape that was influenced by automobile designs of the period when it was built, considered futuristic at the time. The Zooliner was built in 1958, its mechanical parts by Northwest Marine Iron Works and its streamlined bodywork by the H. Hirschberger Sheet Metal company of Portland. It first carried passengers in June 1958. The Zooliner is powered by a 165 horsepower (123 kW) diesel engine with hydraulic transmission, which is WP&ZRy locomotive No. 2. The brakes are pneumatic, the same as on its full-size namesake. The train includes four or five streamlined passenger coaches pulled by matching locomotive No. 2. The rearmost car was rebuilt in late 2005 to resemble a dome car, in connection with installation of a larger and more powerful wheelchair lift. Track gauge is 30 inches, 2'-6".”
Thank you very much for filling in some ( lot ) of details that i had read before but couldn't remember ;))
In the over 23 years I was a locomotive engineer I never witnessed an EMD 567, prime mover that looked like the radial engine shot at 3:16.
i was thinking the same thing. what locomotive used a radial engine?
@@godoftheinterwebzI think that Nordberg was primarily used for stationary electric power generation.
it does look like an aircraft radial!!!
@@keithmoore5306 Bit too heavy and no finning for the cooling. But yes it is a radial something. However, so far as I know, ALL aircraft radials had an uneven number of cylinders per bank.
Maybe General Electric (yes the narration clearly says General Electric at 0:08) had some weird product... Nah. Just incredibly sloppy editing.
@@cr10001 no most if not all radial aircraft engines have an odd number of cylinders on a single row although an even number per engine on double row engines with 7 or 9 per row, the Pratt and Whitney R2800 on the Corsair F6 hellcat and P47 is 18 cylinder in 2 rows of 9 the Wright R2600 on the B25 was 14 cylinder with 2 rows or 7 the Wright R1820 on the B17 again 14 2 rows of 7, where most get confused on it is most sources only list total number of cylinders and nothing on how many rows of cylinders the engine has.
I do not think the Aerotrain was a creation of GE. It was probably made by EMD since at the beginning of the video clip the narrator states, "From La Grange, Illinois..." That is where the main EMD plant was located at that time.
I'm guessing he mixed up GE with GM.
Elon Musk invented it.
@@JayKarpwick , Look at the badging on the Sides of the engine ( AEROTRAIN ) GM....
@@timparhamsr9598 👍👍👍
I just saw the Aerotrain at the National Museum of Transportation in St. Louis and I thought it was peculiar. Thanks for this knowledge-packed video!
The lead image is with the Buffalo Central Terminal in the background. Neat to see,
I saw one of the Aero Trains you had a picture of! The one by the red building. It's at the Museum of Transportation outside of St. Louis.
The Portland, Oregon Zoo used a Streamline Train as the design for one of their miniature trains.
The Zooliner
I grew up riding and watching those trains ; ) they Are both still in service to this day ! , However the Scaled GENERAL is only brought out 3 or 4 times a year ..... My understanding is for special occasions ;) . . .Always reminded me of The Original " Wild , Wild West * tv show featuring Robert Conrad .
I'm from St.Louis and I remember seeing The Aerotrain at The National Museum of Transportation as a kid in the late 1970s & 1980s when I would go there a couple times a year with my grandpa. I've not been there in the last 15 or so years but I still would say if you like trains or any other form of transportation you should go check it out if you're ever in St. Louis.
It's off to the side now and a little harder to get to.
The LW12 was effectively an SW 1200 switch engine with a single power truck and a fancy body. For some time at least into the mid to late 80s a couple of the coaches could be seen from the Dan Ryan Expressway at the former Rock Island " Rocket House " facility. Think they disappeared about the time RTA/Metra rehabbed the old shops.
"The E and F are hugely successful locomotives. So lets make a cheap piece of shit that looks like a car and has all of the comfort of a transit bus." A fine example of how the railroad industry's worst enemy is its management
I can remember seeing that train at the Rock Island depot in Morris Illinois back in probably 57 or 58 . I was 5 yrs old and had a toy engine like that made out of rubber by the Auburn company 👍👍
Unfortunately, the AeroTrain failure was typical of GM. They, too often, relied on poor market research wrapped in sloppy engineering, floating on a cushion of deluded marketing BS - and failed. When will they learn?
Apparently, sometime in the new millennium. 😂
Maybe after another multi-billion bailout. After all, what better way to 'learn' than with someone else's money?
... and Chrysler was the opposite.
Well... air and road transportation were HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED by the Goverment, and in the meantime railroads were all private companies without subsidies and with a lot of taxes and regulations.
Initially railroads were highly subsidized. When they were building the transcontinental railroad, the companies were "given" 12 square miles of land on alternating sides of the right of way to do with as they chose. Of course the government stole the land from the Indians so it was no skin off their noses.
Thank you, your channel is a favorite of mine as your professionalism and quality of research are unexcelled .I saw this on display at Grand Central when i was a kid !
Wow, thank you!
There was another "future" train that the NY Central and the New Haven RR's got mixed up in that was a colossal disaster, they were called "Train X" and "Dan'l Webster" respectively. The Dan'l Webster caught fire during the Press rollout !!! @@ITSHISTORY
Might not have worked well, but boy, it looked fantastic.
Indeed; I have a pic of one on my screen saver slide show!
All trains in America were in trouble at that time in the 1950s and 60s. The Interstate highway system made driving by car more convenient than taking the train. For longer trips the rise of Jet travel became the dominant form of long distance travel. No train could compete with 550mph Jets.
but the way they simply abandoned railways is insane
3:20 That is definitely not a 567. It is a radial aircraft engine.
I didn't catch that, but the internet says you're correct. I love this channel, but the sloppiness is disconcerting.
@@desertmodern7638 It's a Nordberg Radial Two Stroke Diesel. That Thing is way too heavy to put on any Airplane, except maybe loading it into the Cargo Hold of an An-124. These Engines were initially designed to drive Water Pumps, but later used for Power Generation too. At least they got it right enough in the Sense that EMD Engines are Two Stroke Diesels too, but these are V-Engines and not Radials.
Fascinating, informative video, although the idea that the designer based it on "the Buick LeSabre, which was Jordan's favorite day-to-day vehicle" is absurd, as the model did not even exist until 1959. And why show a 1974 LeSabre? This and other errors are so blatant - could this be a strategy to optimize the UA-cam algorithm by generating more comments?
yeah - the 1950 LeSabre show-car is the one written about.
@@tedsmart5539 Thanks, that makes sense chronologically, although calling that famous one-off a "day-to-day vehicle" is certainly not accurate.
@@desertmodern7638 GM chief stylist Harley J. Earl used the LeSabre concept car as his personal automobile for two years after finishing its tour of the auto show circuit.
I remember watching a dvd about trains I bought about 20 years ago from the History Channel. I remember one old retired railroad worker saying that passenger trains always lost money. You simply couldn’t get enough passengers to make a profit.
That's because there was a conflict of interest in promoting train travel. Big companies save money shipping freight by train, and like to force others to buy the extra trucks for hauling, and cars for driving as another way to bolster profits. Most everything has the big seven globalist corporate conglomerates running them, one way or another. This includes politicians...
My next door neighbor was an engineer for the Rock Island and drove the Rock Island Rocket this train, from Chicago to Kankee.
This train was more advanced than you said. It was the first American Talgo Pendicular train design. This type was used successfully in Spain. Amtrac is now using this Talgo design on the West Coast .
The Talgo train was a different set from the Aerotrain. The RI purchased a third LWT-12 engine and a Talgo train consist. I believe it was used on the Chicago to Peoria route. It wasn't successful on the RI.
@@jeffhergert4614 You are right. It was Peoria.
The engine pictured @3:20 is definitely not the power plant from this train. The 12-567C was a big V12, looks like an overgrown Detroit.
It looked like and road worse than a bus. What the heck, GMC.
@Ozzy-does-stuff But with more style.
Good job, Brian. I'd never heard of the Aerotrain until now. Thanks.
Ryan?
@@DeanStephen
Is it? I thought I heard Brian.
@@freedomforever6718 Yes, Ryan.
@@DeanStephen
Good to know. Thanks. I'm actually scheduled for ear surgery soon so, hopefully, this will shortly be less of a problem.
@@freedomforever6718 Best wishes for a safe and successful procedure.
Why show a Nordberg stationary diesel rather than an actual EMD V block engine?
Ignorance! Plus too lazy to do the necessary research!
Yep. That's a Nordberg radial diesel he's showing. That's a power plant motor.
Had me worried for a second.How would you cram that into a train?
The 567C power unit was an inline diesel,like the rest of world uses. Oh well
@@jimmcdonald9618 Aren't all EMDs V-Engines, ranging from 6 to 24 Cylinders? Never heard of an Inline-EMD. The only Locomotive Engines that I know to be built as Inline- and as V-Engines are ABC from Belgium. It's quite common for larger Marine/Stationary Engines to be built Inline with 4-9 Cylinders and then as V if you want 10+ Cylinders of the same Engine.
It's ok, i meant that the cylinders are in a row. Yes they're in a V. arrangement
My only dealings with Nordberg was with their cone crushers. I wasn't
surprised at their radial motor idea.@@Genius_at_Work
Because not everyone is a foamer weirdo who gets upset about the stock footage not matching the narration.
3:19: What the hell is THAT? Some sort of radial engine? That is certainly NOT a 12 cyl. Detroit 567, and considering how many pics there are online of Detroit Diesels, you should've had no problem finding a photo of at least SOMETHING close to what actually went into this locomotive. Your editing is SERIOUSLY lacking....
8:14: Once again, you are mentioning the Pennsylvania Railroad, but you're showing a photo from the Southern Pacific railroad, a railroad which had NO connection whatsoever with the Aerotrain. It's like you guys aren't even trying to be professional!
@12:29 Is a Flxible built bus (yes that's spelled right) . The carriages didn't mirror the interstate Greyhound buses. The carriages mirrored the General Motors intercity buses.
It's kind of a Frankenstein design to me, especially with the car-like cab stuck on top like an afterthought. Still trying to figure out the mechanics of how they would fit a horizontal radial engine...
They didn't because that's a Nordberg Engine, used to drive Water Pumps and Electric Generators in stationary Applications.
If the passenger cars had not been single axle and designed like the modern high speed passenger car of today and did not have the cramped bus like interior they might have been a better sell. Trying to pull a series of buses behind a sleek locomotive doesn't quite work. The early Spanish Talgo trains worked out better.
The Aerotrain had a beautiful and futuristic style about it, but they should have done a lot more testing before putting in into service. I guess the designers were too greedy for immediate profits from to and as a result lost their butts.🙀😾
It was very cool looking, but that's it .
I remember Disneyland had built a smaller version of the areotrain after Walt Disney had seen and rode on this train, however it didn't last for more than a year or so as a ride in the Disneyland Tomorrowland area of the park. There is a u-tube video about the Tomorrowland areotrain!!
I had a model of this engine back when I was a child and was fascinated by it. However, I never thought it looked that good compared to the E and F EMD Diesel locomotives.
The E & F Diesels were so gorgeous! When I was a kid they were fairly common (1950'-60's). So many things from that era makes me so nostalgic, I almost cry.
@@bonniemoerdyk9809 Interestingly enough are "europeanised" Copies of the EMD F-Unit still fairly common in Europe today, named "NOHAB AA16". They sit on 12 Wheels instead of 8 to account for the lower Wheel Load Limits, have lower and narrower Bodies because of the smaller Loading Gauge and also have Cabs on both Ends as one-directional Locomotives would be really useless here. They were license-built by NOHAB in Sweden in the 1950ies and 60ies and initially sold to the National Railways of Denmark, Norway and Hungary (Sweden was neutral, allowing them to sell beyond the Iron Courtain). ABC in Belgium also built them as Sub-Licensee and sold to Belgium and Luxembourg. The National Railways have long retired them, but they sold well on the 2nd-Hand Market and are still around at Private Railways and on Construction Sites.
Same era as this GM Aero Train, Disneyland featured a scaled down duplicate which was called the Viewliner Train of Tomorrow ran 1957-1958
This is the most thorough documentary on the Aerotrain I have seen.
I wondered if at some point the Rock Island line used cars from another experimental train the “X”. I think I have seen some pictures of the Aerotrain engine attached to a group of cars with square windows.
A $17 train ticket in 1956 adjusted for inflation is equal to a $192 in 2024. If that's a one-way fare, then it is similar to booking a ride on Amtrak's Acela.
I shudder to think what the crash worthiness that bus bodies fail to give. The railroad environment is dominated by heavy locomotives and cars and a bus body wouldn't stand a chance.
Not mentioned was that the articulated design mean any failure on any car meant that the whole train would be unable to operate.
True story>the Aerotrain even failed in low speed commuter operations. Ridership per train was much lower than average as many commuters would refuse to board the train and preferred to wait for the next train. And this was the Rock Island which offered worn out unairconditioned cars from the 1920s;;;;;hence their nick name as Al Capone cars!
Quoting from the magazine, "Remember the Rock" (Rock Island historical society), story on the "Jet Rocket" (Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer 2006), "Many of the problems that plagued the lightweight trains in their former career weren't an issue in suburban service. The rough ride was smoother at lower speeds and commuters loved the fact that the trains were air conditioned."
"Unfortunately, though, the Rock Island couldn't solve all the problems of these experimental trains. For starters, they just were not designed for commuter service. The seat backs couldn't be flipped, resulting in commuters being forced to ride backwards sometimes. The Talgo cars also had only one set of doors for every three-car set. This made the loading and unloading of passengers at suburban stops a much longer ordeal than with conventional equipment."
I haven’t read all the comments, so I’m not sure if someone else has pointed this out, but you didn’t mentioned that there were three of these locomotives.
Numbers 2 and 3 are the surviving locomotives but there was a number 1 which had a completely different set of passenger cars made by Talgo which were just as unsuccessful as the GM cars. Otherwise great video. Thank you for sharing this information with the world.
The Rock Island Railroad was the only railroad to purchase this basic design. Indeed, the CRI&P used the Spanish designed Talgo passenger cars for their Chicago to Peoria train named the "Jet Rocket" instead of the ones used on the two Aerotrain sets built by GM/EMD (it did use the same LWT locomotive). The "Jet Rocket" itself entered service on February 11, 1956. It too faced numerous problems like its similar looking Aerotrains with ride quality, interior noise levels and sometimes not shunting the wayside track signals due to its light weight. The train was taken out of service between Chicago and Peoria on May 10, 1957. It would finish its days in Rock Island commuter service between Chicago and Joliet along with the two Aerotrains the Rock also purchased in 1958 for commuter service. Unfortunately, the "Jet Rocket" was not preserved in any form and was scrapped at the Rock's Silvis, IL locomotive shops in April 1965.
Typical GM strategy: "We need a new train - let's raid the parts bin!"
The picture at 12:24 is right outside my hometown, Duncannon, PA.
@12:00 is a 1967 Buick Skylark . A top notch designed and styled car.
Not a 1980's Skylark
The UK tried a similar trick in a very different area. A bus body on a wagon chassis for local rail services in areas where passenger numbers were relatively small. It was called the pacer and they were awful. Noisy and uncomfortable. They were our local trains for many years and though they did get better seats after a midlife upgrade, we were all relieved when they were finally withdrawn only about 2 or 3 years ago.
At 3:16, why the picture of a Nordberg radial Diesel engine?
Don't pick on the poor little Corvair.....it was an awesome car. I had 2, and they hardly ever gave me trouble. Easy to work on, too.
@1:14 What does a map of Indians in the US have to do with trains?
“A company as massive as General Motors…”? Right there is your problem. Big companies are always looking for the quick buck. They feel entitled to it.
Not a Cameo pickup truck. The Cameo was a deluxe flat sided model (fiberglass sides), although the bed wasn't wide inside. Based on the new model shown though. 2:28
What in the hell was that weird old radial engine you showed,??? That's not a EMD 12V567!
I always start his videos and while its playing in the background go to the comments to read his errors. This one is a head shaker.
Yeah, that got a WTF from me, as well. Someone really goofed on the image search.
So what is the engine that was shown?
@@jbauern57 A Nordberg Radial Two Stroke Diesel, used for Pumping and Power Stations.
The MIT graduate predictably failed to consider the human customer in the equation. They did because MIT doesn't know crap about the human.
There - again . . .complete lack of research . . . .expecting good or better results , eh ?
I have this in HO scale from Varney it is great! Thanks for sharing this history!
MTH * also made an Aerotrain in " O gauge " ..... as you might guess : I had to have it .....
0 or O ?
@@lucasrem , Yes ... I believe the proper term is O - gauge //// As in reference to HO being 1/2 of O .
GM probably didn’t really want Aerotrain to work anyway. When the “train of the future” isn’t any better than the train of the past, passengers stop hoping, and get onto those new interstates…
I recall seeing an Aerotrain, many times, sitting forlornly on a siding in the Sunnyside Yard (near Newark,) in New Jersey, from an NJ Transit train, in the late 1970s. It was there for at least 6 months. I'm guessing it later became one of the museum trains mentioned here.
Sunnyside yard is in Queens, not New Jersey.
@@PRR-xx2hp - When I stand corrected.
I thought Sunnyside was the yard where NJ Transit used to change to electric engines, before entering the tunnel to Penn Station?
@@tanagerffolkes5180 That was probably Hudson Tower.
There were miniature versions created and at least one is still in service as a Zoo train.
Car guys, and train guys, are nothing like each other.
Interestingly, at 2:25 Chuck Jordan is shown with the great Nuccio Bertone and a Lamborghini Miura (centre) and a concept car Lamborghini Bravo (right) + a Lamborghini Marzal (left) - another concept supercar.
As for the train and its drawbacks, the Concorde supersonic passenger airliner was also notoriously noisy, cramped inside with its narrow hull, and far from comfort, but the hype around its design, speed and futuristic image prevailed and no major problems with ticket sale hindered its operation for c. three decades.
This video talks about the streamlined trainset "Aerotrain" built in the US, but the video description is that of the unrelated experimental hovertrain with similar name ("Aérotrain") built in France.
It's very misleading to say the train was limited by the technology of the time. Many companies around the world were building good high speed trains by this time. The Aerotrain was just badly designed.
Aerotrain’s motive power looks like the time from which it came, and it did not age well. It is so hideously ugly! I can’t help but love it.
Ryan, have you told the story of when GM got a rail concept right? Take a look at GM’s Train of Tomorrow of 1945.
Thanks for a good video.
The 1930 trains in Europe all did streamlines, steam engines too.
not testes in wind tunnels !
now we can do this, needing Down Force !
Can tell you and the folks on your team aren't a car guys, Ryan as you all chose the year of LeSabre that looks least like the Areotrain. I suggest you look at the 1950 LeSabre show car...
The 1974 Le Sabre wasn't it.. lol
3:18 This does not appear to be a 567C engine. It appears to be some sort of liquid cooled radial. According to the 567C maintenance manual, " The Model 567C Diesel engine is a "V" type, two-cycle engine,.."
The engine at 3:18 in the video IS a GM engine, but NOT a 567-c used in locomotives. This engine in the video here was put into Submarines, like the USS Albacore.
Arriving 4 hours late added to the suspense. picking up every mom and pop dairy milk can in Iowa and Minnesota while covering 370 miles in 12 hours with no diner was irrelevant, a maroon engine with a Mars light led the way
We’ve got one in the National railroad museum
I am a bit of a train buff / collector AND I actually have a SET of the AERO TRAIN * From MTH *....... I first got the bug about the Aero-Train From being a young fella At the Local Portland , Oregon Zoo . . .
Where we have a 5/8 scale Train running on the Tracks ! Since about 1963 :If memory serves me correctly ! ? ! ? ! . . . .The other Mostly retired Train at the Zoo railway is a scale General ...
Excited to have found this show today !!!! Thanks for sharing ;)
As a kid in the 1950s. I was gifted with an HO scale model of the Aerotrain. Thought it was really "neat".
This served as inspiration for the Disney Viewliner trains.
Living in Wisconsin Iv been able to go in this train at the greenbay railroad museum.
The carriage design clearly shows its connection to GM's transit buses of the era.
Great video, thank you. I did think it was an odd choice that you depicted a 1970s automobile, when suggesting the car the designer drove influenced the train's cab design. The Aerotrain cab design does resemble a mid-1950s car's roofline, but by the 1970s...not so much.
👍😎 info.
I have the HO scale electric train set of the Aero train 001 which includes the locomotive, passenger cars an the end president type car of sorts with a rounded end with panoramic windows
I have the MTH --- " O gauge " set . .. Originally it was the engine and three cars , ... I bought a fourth one - to match the Portland Railway - Zooliner * / Aerotrain . . .IT was a very pretty penny , but ? I figure it's something not just anyone has ..... unlike a lot of postwar Lionel Smokers ;)
3:16.. um what??
When you showed a picture of the engine, why did you show a Nordberg 2 stroke radial used in power plants. When the engine used was the EMD 567 series V-12 and V-16
I rode on that Aerotrain on the Pennsylvania Railroad Philadelphia-Pittsburgh route in 1956, the route which was discussed in this video. It was particularly exciting to ride it around Horseshoe Curve. The train was a really big deal at the time and captured a lot of headlines and interest. They had it for testing on the New York Central for a brief time but I don't believe it ever saw any scheduled service on that road. There was a lot of interest in experimental trains during the 50's and 60's as railroads were trying to find innovative ways of competing with cars and airlines. The New York Central ran a different (single unit multi car) train (locomotive by Baldwin, cars by Pullman) called the "Xplorer" between Cleveland and Cincinnati from 1956-57 but which also failed. There was also consideration during that time of a US version of the Spanish "Talgo" train (1950's version) which had articulated cars capable of tilting around curves, as well as many other technologically advanced features for the time (and even now). It also never made it into US service. Finally, there was the United Aircraft Turbo train which also had tilt capability as well as a gas turbine engine. Amtrak actually ran that in service for a few years and I rode it between Boston and New York. The neat thing about that train was that it had cabs on both ends with raised passenger seating in each cab, like in dome cars. You could actually sit up high in passenger seats on raised areas of the cab cars along with the engineer and look out forward at the track ahead. You could also look backward along the top of the rest of the train (I did both). If you are interested, you can find information on any of those trains by doing an internet search on their names.
Thanks Ryan for another information I have never heard of, I think I will now start calling you Professor SoCash, I am in my 70's so by the end of my time left I might get my first degree in," IT'S HISTORY"...
Best of luck!
@@ITSHISTORYThanks...
Sounds like a swirly box with a LS.
Being uncomfortable on a smooth track for 8 to 15 seconds is really fun.
Barreling down a dirt road in an old bus @ 100mph for 40 minutes sounds like something most people do fleeing an active battle.
Also don't underestimate the use of bogies! The two axles in a bogie sort of act like a lever and fulcrum. Which means that -- theoretically -- only half of the vertical distance of every bump or gap each pair of wheels roll over is transferred to the carriage. Bogies also allow for less flange grinding in curves.
Many high-speed trains at least partly use Jacobs bogies between the train carriages. This allows for fewer axles per carriage while (theoretically) retaining their comfort. From what I understand, trains with Jacobs bogies in the 1930s tended to have stability problems, so that comfort thing probably wasn't easy to achieve.
An interesting exception are the Talgo trains which used sort of two-wheel Jacobs bogies.
Lamborghini Bravo by Bertone in the background at at 2:04, very special car.
Ohhh wow I didn't know Chuck Jordan had a hand in this...that's my good friends Dad! How cool..he also had a big hand in the Corvette..
This was also at the end of the train era. This was not even addressed. Train travel was not a primary method in the late 60s. Dc 10s, personal vehicles and even busses were more common than trains outside inner city railways
I saw this in person and it truly is a marvel of the time
It's always frustrating when UA-camrs just drop random pics of something, in this case, a radial aero engine, into a video while the narrator mentions the "12-cylinder prime mover (engine)." GM's 12-cylinder was a huge hulking affair that had nothing in common with a radial aero engine, and pictures of them are readily available. But I guess an engine is an engine, and the viewers' intellect or accuracy of information just isn't a priority for some of these presenters. It's just lazy and sloppy.
@@wskinn bet you’re fun at parties
2:00 Concept car for a DeLorean? Cybertruck? 😁😁
Ya, i want to know more about that car
@@jameswilson5165 I saw it too
The bogies and suspension were the problem. Standard trains have double axle bogies since the late 1800s. The only system ahead of this is Talgo of Spain, sporting independent wheel suspension.
It still boogles my mind that the rail companies didn't fught back harder against the Car/airplane boom of the 40s/50s/60s... they were so rich and powerful... you'd think they could have poured investment into highspeed lines decades earlier.... if they would have created HIGH speed rail in the 1950s in America instead of in the 1970s in France/Japan they could have saved their industry, at least on the east coast. Before the suburbs and interstate system had totally changed the living habits and population density, I would have been tough but with right investments in infrastructure and technology I think they could have done it...
Actually, despite a few lean years the railroads did "save their industry", and they did it largely by unloading passenger service altogether. As someone pointed out above, passenger service never really made much if any money on its own - it was pretty much always cross-subsidized by freight revenues; more or less a large scale version of Union Pacific's steam program.
@@anthonyvallillo422 well I was specifically referring to the passenger service. If they could habe created high speed limes in the 1950s they may have been able to keep some of the American transportation market from evolving away from them amd kept habits from changing. In especially the east coast and northern Midwest I think high-speed rail could have been a better option for mid distance trips that ended up going to the airlines.
@@daveweiss5647 You are right, and the already existing high speed service on the PRR electified route that is now called the NEC proves it. Of course, east and northern midwest stagnated into the so called rust belt in the 70's, so who knows how any of this would have ended up.
So the Aerotrain was a parts bin wonder with a bit of modern or contemporary styling thrown in. It's a complete mystery why that didn't work ...
@2:28 NOT a Cameo Chevrolet
... and 30 years later, the UK gave us a similar approach.
Leyland National bus bodies on a 4-wheel wagon chassis ... the "Nodding Donkey" fleet.
Well, there are reasons why people choose to use bogies, the Pullman system. I’m looking forward to use the new talgo trains from Berlin to Amsterdam next year…;-)
Its a shame, rail traffic in Canada is very poor, they are not using the lines, 2 many trucks on the road!!
Reminds me of the Acela. Supposed to be high speed rail, but only does 150 mph for 49 miles of the trip.
Aero train was described as Atomic Powered Locomotive of USA in Japanese scientific magazine .
エアロトレインは日本🇯🇵の科学雑誌でアメリカ🇺🇸の原子力列車だと解説されていました。
Light build train with construction similiar to buses being bumpy in high speed. There is reason other trains with similiar constructions were used on local slow railways (like British Pacer or Czechoslovakian M152)
0:08 "General Electric Aerotrain" - Doh!
both, GM operated it