Talk:High speed tilting train

Merge or convert to a template

This article is a stub, has no references, and is only linked to from high-speed rail -- not even from tilting train. I think that its topic is useful, but I cannot really see that it justifies more than a section (or sub-section) in either or both of high-speed rail and tilting train. That said, I think the table may have a use, but as a template which may be used by both articles.

An alternative for the table might be to merge it into Template:High-speed rail, either by flagging the tilting trains in the latter, or by splitting the trains into "non-tilting" and "tilting" columns. I'd also suggest that the high-speed aspect could be merged into Template:Tilting trains, but there isn't one (at the moment).

I think that begs several questions:

• Should the article be essentially merged with high-speed rail or tilting train?
• Should the table be a stand-alone template, or merged with Template:High-speed rail (and a possible future Template:Tilting trains)?

Tim PF (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• Redirect to tilting train. This is merely a redundant stub; all tilting trains exist to increase average speed. And there's already a more comprehensive list at tilting train. There should be a link at high speed rail pointing to tilting train in the "technology"'section; surprisingly there's no memtion of tilting technology at all there, when it is not uncommon in high speed systems at all. oknazevad (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused. There is mention of among the advances being tilting trainsets in the "Technology" section, although it isn't wikilinked there (but is twice elsewhere -- once in History and then with Acela Express). Tilting technology is used more on classic twisty routes well below 200km/h, but it appears that the new tilting Shinkansen allow even faster speeds on older routes (designed for only 230km/h).

I'm sure I could expand this article here, but I'd rather incorporate aspects at both high-speed rail (tilting Shinkansen and the like allow even faster speeds on older high-speed lines) and tilting train (high-speed trains can continue their journeys at faster than normal speeds on legacy lines).

I'm guessing a bit here, and would have to check why each trainset tilts, and if they actually do so at high speeds (ie >200km/h on legacy lines and >250 on high-speed lines). As for the redirect, it's pretty much moot, as it only has one real link, but I suppose it needs a placeholder to stop anyone recreating it. Tim PF (talk) 21:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

D'Oh! Missed that. (That's what I get for quickly glancing while composing my response here.) But it seems we are in agreement; there's no need for this article, as cross links between high speed rail and tilting train are all that's needed, not a separate article. I'll leave it up to you as to how to link them and what needs to be added to each, as I apparently can't read ;-). oknazevad (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I've now rethought this, as below. Tim PF (talk)

My current plan is:

1. Create a new "High-speed trains" sub-section in the tilting train article to replace the text of this article. Done -- see Tilting train#HighSpeed.
2. Modify Template:High-speed rail to somehow annotate those trains that tilt (and possibly those that are diesel or dual mode), as mentioned previously.
3. Change this article to redirect to Tilting train#HighSpeed.
4. Add a new "Tilting trains" section in the high-speed rail article, probably a sub-section of the existing "Technology" section, with a {{see also}} to tilting trains. This will need to gather up most of the tilt rationale from elsewhere in the article, and needs a bit more thought.
5. Think again about a Template:Tilting trains, but that will be at Tilting train (Talk:Tilting train#Tilting trains around the world).

How does it look so far? Tim PF (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds solid, and the subsection at High speed rail is pretty good. oknazevad (talk) 18:40, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't think I'll have time to do much more until Monday. Now, did you really mean the [planned] "subsection at High speed rail", or were you referring to the new "High-speed trains" subsection at Tilting train#HighSpeed? Tim PF (talk) 08:07, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The later. I clicked the link above, and gave it a once over. Looks solid. oknazevad (talk) 14:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)