Talk:SNCF TGV Atlantique

Do we have any details of suspension design, or radius of turn information for these trains? These speeds are spectacularly greater than one would expect from basic wheel on steel, particularly as the improvements in the design appear to have included increasing the rolling mass to vehicle mass - which usually reduces directional stability. Does it employ an active hunting suppression system? Gordon Vigurs 13:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The maximum speed achieved is consistent with most of the drag arising from rolling loss alone(i.e. proportional to the weight). The losses due to aerodynamic drag in a vehicle as dense as a train would appear tiny in comparison, so that it is difficult to see any requirement for aerodynamic refinement except for purely aesthetic reasons. Does anybody have any hard data on these trains? There is clearly some really innovative engineering employed in them. Gordon Vigurs 20:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Details of the suspension here . The author of that site, User:Ctillier, is in favour of copying its content over to Wikipedia, so if you want to do that feel free, perhaps to TGV SR10 suspension. There's a template - - which displays
 * This article was originally based on material from TGVweb, which is licensed under the GFDL.
 * Willkm 10:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, the web site is well worth a visit, but it is probably too detailed for Wikipedia. I was interested in how they suppressed hunting - it appears to rely on use of yaw constraint springs on the bogies, but this appears to be dynamically coupled into the suspension (not really surprising), so there has been some clever tuning of the lateral hunting modes and suspension to avoid their excitation. A very fine piece of design. Doubtless, of course, the credit for 'design' will go to the overpaid buffoon who decided what colour the train should be, rather than the unsung heroes who came up with this piece of brilliance. Gordon Vigurs 08:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Vague and Unsourced
This statement, near the end, is vague and unsourced: "Three carriages, including the bar carriage in the centre, is the minimum possible configuration because of the way the sets are articulated."


 * 1. Does this mean three carriages, exclusive of the power cars, or can the power cars be the other two carriages?
 * 2. Why are three carriages, including the bar carriage, needed? "The way the sets are articulated" makes no sense.

Given these problems, the statement should be sourced and clarified—or else deleted (probably the better option).


 * The above comment is also unattributable. This article should be included in the TGV article, where it is evident that the three car limitation arises from the shared bogie suspension arrangement. Gordon Vigurs 10:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)