Talgos mothballed?

[Blue Marble Travel]

...wherever you put them, some specialized maintenance is required, usually provided by Talgo itself. But a $50 million maintenance facility is not. Talgos operate on a premier overnight sleeper service in Kazakstan. Here's betting that they didn't build a $50 million maintenance facility to take care of those first two sets. But they have been sufficiently successful that the Kazaks just placed a follow-on order for 420 more coaches.

http://www.railwayga...rain-fleet.html

A few questions that come to mind.

First, what differences are there between the Talgos bought for Kazakhstan and those being built in Milwaukee (differences that may alter the cost of maintenance)?

Second, what are the maintenance standards in Kazakhstan vs. those here?

Third, what are the relative costs (including labor) of maintaining trains in Kazakhstan compared to maintaining trains in Wisconsin?

Running the numbers, Wisconsin spent $72 million to buy (I think) 31 cars (I believe there were going to be 14 cars per trainset, plus 3 spares, could be off by a car or two). That amounts to $2.3 million per car. The Kazakhstan order was worth 300 million Euro, according to that article. At today's exchange rates, that would be $390 million. That amounts to less than $1 million per car.

So, saying that Kazakhstan didn't build a $50 million maintenance base is kind of disingenuous because I doubt you could build a $50 million anything in Kazakhstan (not literally, but you get my point, things are a lot cheaper over there).

The simple fact is that things cost a heck of a lot more to build here than many other parts of the world, for a number of reasons.

Milwaukee's train station cost over $16 million to renovate, and there wasn't even a new building built. They just extended the facade of the existing structure and redecorated the interior. So, to build a brand new building, and one that needs to be able to accommodate the maintenance of two trains, it's not out of the question to believe a $50+ million price tag.

The difference in the per-car price is substantially accounted for by scale of the order. That's not to say that Kazakhstan's manufacturing costs are not lower than those in the US, but recent large car builds across the world show the advantage of ordering in quantity. If you doubt the premise, I'll supply some examples.

I certainly believe that we can spend $50 million, on anything. We could probably spend $50 million on paper clips. And only wind up with a handfull of the things.

What I am saying is that there is no need to spend that. The new, dedicated maintenance facility is not needed at all, in reality or by contract, let alone at that price.

Having said all that, we agree on one point: the trains were never a good choice for this route, and should not operate there. I feel sorry for Wisconsin's taxpayers, and her traveling public. I have family in Wisconsin, and feel sorry for them, too. But WI has gone strange on itself, and has to sort out its own problems. In the mean time, there are a couple of slick trains for sale, probably cheap, and I'll bet that the maintenance cost issue will mysteriously disappear for whomever buys them.

 

[Ozark Southern]

I think that the Talgos should be used on any one of these routes:

...

CHI-KCY

CHI-STL

...

Very large amount of ideas, but at least a few of them are feasible.

No to CHI-KCY. The Chief already runs Superliners, and there is nothing but nothing once you leave Chicagoland until you reach KCY. Corridor service should never and will never happen on this route.

Now, CHI-STL-KCY, on the other hand, would be an excellent candidate for Talgos. The route is pretty crooked, lots of curves where the tilting could really make a speed difference. However, 2 MORRs and 4 Lincolns is probably not enough to justify a maintenance facility in STL. Combined with other CHI corridor trains, perhaps, but then the order gets really big and really expensive, since you'd want to convert them all for lower maintenance costs.

On the other hand, IL, MO, and MI are getting bi-level cars in the next couple of years, so they wouldn't buy the Talgos now anyway. In fact, it's probably a better deal for WI to cancel the Talgos and just go with the bi-levels on the Hiawatha.

 

[afigg]

On the other hand, IL, MO, and MI are getting bi-level cars in the next couple of years, so they wouldn't buy the Talgos now anyway. In fact, it's probably a better deal for WI to cancel the Talgos and just go with the bi-levels on the Hiawatha.

The problem is that it is far too late for WI to cancel the Talgo order because the cars have been built. From the public photos of the trainsets or trainset, the Talgo facility may be in the final stages of fitting our the cars and subjecting them to testing. The 4 Talgo trainsets get completed, delivered to Oregon and Wisconsin and then it is probably lights out for the Talgo assembly facility in WI with layoffs unless it is repurposed to a maintenance facility.

 

[guest]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texBM4f_w4Q

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=texBM4f_w4Q

Indeed.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

The Dining Car's 2x1 seating would yield far less capacity than Amtrak's 2x2 seating. Though, I thought the isle's seats flipping up, to allow easier access to the window seat, was brilliant.

Requiring passengers to listen to that music constantly on any LD train, will certainly start to drive passengers away.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texBM4f_w4Q

That's nice and all, but it's got nothing on Amtrak's brand new order of 130 Boxliners.

Just think... Forty years from now, in the early 2050's, Amtrak will still be running 1980's designs at 1980's speeds.

We don't need no stinking Talgos to accomplish that! :lol:

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

The Dining Car's 2x1 seating would yield far less capacity than Amtrak's 2x2 seating. Though, I thought the isle's seats flipping up, to allow easier access to the window seat, was brilliant.

Requiring passengers to listen to that music constantly on any LD train, will certainly start to drive passengers away.

The dining car on the Renfe "Trenhotel" is actually something of a luxury experience, and capacity is not the primary goal. Passengers do not generally sit "community style" — solo riders are allowed to sit at their own tables, and couples are escorted to 4-person tables unless the train is full. Diners who do not know each other may be asked to share on a crowded train, but it is the exception, not the rule, and the maitre d' knows the train's (and thus the diner's) likely occupancy, and spreads people out as much as he can.

The service is "black tie," and 3-course meals are the norm, plus an aperitif, and often an after-dinner drink and coffee (or tea). On some trains (Madrid - Paris, for example), the meal, including a bottle of wine, is included for "Gran Class" ticket holders (cabins with ensuite shower and WC), passengers in regular (non-shower) cabins are accommodated around them. On others, which carry only cabins with private ensuite facilities (like the one pictured), you may opt to pre-purchase dinner when you make your reservation, or not. If you pre-purchase, your space is guaranteed. Otherwise, you may make a reservation with the steward when you board.

Fairly few coach passengers go to the diner, and even most economy sleeper passengers prefer the café, so the car's capacity is approximately adequate for the ±80 sleeper berths, catered to in 2 or 3 seatings, as needed. A full 2 hours per seating is allowed... meaning that the last seating can be quite late on a full train (technically, 11p, though they seat people as diners from the 9p seating finish up). On trains with a 7p seating, the first service may start before the train even leaves its origin station. Some trains (the Barcelona - Galicia service, for instance) carry two dining cars (remember, these are talgo cars, so small: the kitchen for each is in the adjacent caré coach).

Indeed, the train additionally carries a café, and the café offers hot dishes as well as the usual more snack-y things. Even the dining car items can be served at the bar, à la carte (useful if you want a quick steak, but not the 2-hour experience).

As for the music: it is only played (when it is played at all) when the train is in its origin and destination stations. The one filmed appears to be the Barcelona - Gijon service: the music would perhaps be on as passengers board in Barcelona, but would be turned off with the first "welcome aboard" announcement. It might go back on once the train had come to a stop in the Gijon station, and play as passengers disembarked. Each sleeper cabin contains on / off switches, of course. The crew has an emergency override, allowing emergency announcements to be made even when the sleeper cabin setting is to "off."

It's a nice way to get around.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

While it may be uneconomical you could have multi-height platforms, that have low level and high level integrated into the same platform. You could make a platform that has "waves" in it and has low section every X number of feet and high section every X number of feet to match up with doors of 2 or more car designs. I would have to do the math, but it seems like it would be possible to accommodate Amfleets, Talgos and Superliners on the same platform. You could either do this with smooth transitions between the different height sections or you could separate each section with a railing similar to a wheelchair ramp. Of course for this to work trains would have to be precisely spotted for the doors to open on the usable sections of the platforms.

 

[Cascadia]

Talgo technology, which is brilliant, makes sense in 3 places:

...

bad track (independent wheel suspension makes the trains less subject to a rough ride)

I guess it depends on the track. Back when the Cascades had a bunch of jointed rail north of the US/Canada border, the Talgo ride was absolutely horrible on otherwise normal jointed rail (the trains weren't even going very fast through there).

Yeah when going through White Rock at a slow pace the cars would be thrown from side to side - it was very unpleasant until they fixed it and made me dislike the Talgos - they've grown on me a little bit more since then.

 

[Trogdor]

While it may be uneconomical you could have multi-height platforms, that have low level and high level integrated into the same platform. You could make a platform that has "waves" in it and has low section every X number of feet and high section every X number of feet to match up with doors of 2 or more car designs. I would have to do the math, but it seems like it would be possible to accommodate Amfleets, Talgos and Superliners on the same platform. You could either do this with smooth transitions between the different height sections or you could separate each section with a railing similar to a wheelchair ramp. Of course for this to work trains would have to be precisely spotted for the doors to open on the usable sections of the platforms.

It would be quite impractical to have a wave-like platform like that. Passengers walking down the platform would have to go up and down the hill every few feet, not to mention that Talgos have shorter cars and would need to have low-level spots more often.

 

[Donctor]

Indeed, the train additionally carries a café, and the café offers hot dishes as well as the usual more snack-y things. Even the dining car items can be served at the bar, à la carte (useful if you want a quick steak, but not the 2-hour experience).

I dig the bar quite a bit, but in my experience the diner food has been atrocious.

 

[George Harris]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like:

When I see all this wonderful stuff, all I can say is before getting too wild about it, raise the hood.

This equipment as it stands will never run in the US, and IMHO should not. Here are a few points.

ADA: There appears to be no such thing in Europe. Look at the platform gap. Look at the restrooms. Look at the width of the aisles and doorways. Non-compliant.

Evacuation: at 47 seconds and 1:27: Look quick because it goes by quick. The cutesy little hammer on the wall is to be used to BREAK the window so you can go out it in case of the need to evacuate that way. Ever heard the expression, "crawling over broken glass?" That is what you do if you ever need to go out a train window in Europe. They seem to not believe in our zip strip pop out windows. I once heard something about cannot be used at high speeds due to the aerodynamic pulse. Been between New York and Philadelphia recently. With the close track centers you get about as much aerodynamic pulse there as you will anywhere at any speed currently operated.

We won't even discuss durability, and they sure hope we don't.

 

[Blackwolf]

Evacuation: at 47 seconds and 1:27: Look quick because it goes by quick. The cutesy little hammer on the wall is to be used to BREAK the window so you can go out it in case of the need to evacuate that way. Ever heard the expression, "crawling over broken glass?" That is what you do if you ever need to go out a train window in Europe. They seem to not believe in our zip strip pop out windows. I once heard something about cannot be used at high speeds due to the aerodynamic pulse. Been between New York and Philadelphia recently. With the close track centers you get about as much aerodynamic pulse there as you will anywhere at any speed currently operated.

The hammer exists in Canada as well, as our neighbor to the north follows European safety standards in many instances. Also note that not all of the windows are capable of being broken, only a few in each car are made of tempered glass that shatters while the rest are of the standard glazing that is shatterproof. One of the issues raised in terms of durability of the tempered 'evacuation window' in February's VIA Rail accident in Ontario was when a passenger, due to the force of the derailment, was ejected outside of the train car from his seat through the evacuation window. His body became that nice little hammer, and his back was broken as a result.

Not to say it cannot happen in any circumstance, but ejection due to shattering windows is not something you hear of in any Amtrak accident (that I am aware of.) Little consolation in a wreck, true, but the zipper-style window gaskets are much better IMO. Thank the stars I've not had to be involved with a real train wreck, but I have been trained in the emergency procedures of a first responder at a passenger train accident. FRA complaint glass is not something that breaks easily at all, even with a Fireman's axe. You're better off cutting through it with a circular saw, or better yet, just pulling the rubber gasket.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like:

When I see all this wonderful stuff, all I can say is before getting too wild about it, raise the hood.

This equipment as it stands will never run in the US, and IMHO should not. Here are a few points.

ADA: There appears to be no such thing in Europe. Look at the platform gap. Look at the restrooms. Look at the width of the aisles and doorways. Non-compliant.

I don't know ADA requirements, but the trains are certainly handicapped accessible. Not the whole train, mind: you can't wheel your chair from one end to the other. But then the Superliners don't do so well at that, either (I want to see the chair take those stairs! — heck, 10% of the population is too overweight to squeeze down a Superliner cooridor, forget the wheelchairs). There are individual cars (and toilets) that allow wheelchair access, and a ramp system to handle the platform gap.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

Now HERE is what a long distance train should look like:

When I see all this wonderful stuff, all I can say is before getting too wild about it, raise the hood.

This equipment as it stands will never run in the US, and IMHO should not. Here are a few points.

...

We won't even discuss durability, and they sure hope we don't.

Why not?

When the "Catalan Talgo" Talgo III sets were retired from service in 2010, they were in their 41st year of operation. During most of that time, they ran 865 kilometers (about 535 miles) a day, every day (from Barcelona to Geneva, then later a Barcelona - Montpellier round trip). No "out of service for a month for FRA inspections." When they were retired, it was not because they were breaking down, but because the technology had moved on so far that they had become "commercially unacceptable."

Talgo takes great pride in its maintenance, and reliability. Indeed, if there is a problem, that is it: they typically refuse to sell their trains without a dedicated engineer aboard to keep the things running smoothly. So maintenance costs are high (see above in this thread). But durability doesn't seem to be an issue, unless you are talking about interior decoration (?). I can't say that the decals don't peel off, or whatever: I know nothing about that.

 

[guest]

I rode the Talgo IIIs as recently as 2008, and they ran like a charm. And the way the exit windows work is that you hit the window where the red target is, causing it to shatter, then turn the hammer around to the hook side, which you use to tear the plastic lamination open, so that there is no broken glass to crawl over. It shatters from side to side, and remains adhered to the laminate. Platform gaps across Europe are FAR more consistently "doable" than most Amtrak platforms outside the NEC. And if you take a spin on the Cascades sets, you'll find that a standard size wheelchair WILL fit virtually end-to-end in the train...

 

[jis]

When the "Catalan Talgo" Talgo III sets were retired from service in 2010, they were in their 41st year of operation. During most of that time, they ran 865 kilometers (about 535 miles) a day, every day (from Barcelona to Geneva, then later a Barcelona - Montpellier round trip). No "out of service for a month for FRA inspections." When they were retired, it was not because they were breaking down, but because the technology had moved on so far that they had become "commercially unacceptable."

Just interested in some operational details. How many consists were assigned to the Catalan Talgo service? I have no idea that is why I ask. The allocation would give us some idea about how much time was spent in maintenance by each consist and validate or refute your claim about how much time was taken up by the European equivalent of FRA stuff, and trust me there is quite a bit of it, even if you may think otherwise. Also would you happen to know how many rebuilds they went through in the 41 years?

Note that this is not a criticism of Talgo, either the train or the company or anything like that. All trains require preventive maintenance and rebuilds to operate well, and in service failures are more often than not caused by inadequate maintenance. It is just an attempt to get some real facts.

BTW, the out of service for months for FRA inspection had to do with cracks in the suspension which was caused by a manufacturing defect at Talgo, and Talgo did handle it with grace. But it was neither FRA's nor Amtrak's fault as you seem to imply.

 

[cirdan]

When the "Catalan Talgo" Talgo III sets were retired from service in 2010, they were in their 41st year of operation. During most of that time, they ran 865 kilometers (about 535 miles) a day, every day (from Barcelona to Geneva, then later a Barcelona - Montpellier round trip). No "out of service for a month for FRA inspections." When they were retired, it was not because they were breaking down, but because the technology had moved on so far that they had become "commercially unacceptable."

Just interested in some operational details. How many consists were assigned to the Catalan Talgo service? I have no idea that is why I ask. The allocation would give us some idea about how much time was spent in maintenance by each consist and validate or refute your claim about how much time was taken up by the European equivalent of FRA stuff, and trust me there is quite a bit of it, even if you may think otherwise. Also would you happen to know how many rebuilds they went through in the 41 years?

Note that this is not a criticism of Talgo, either the train or the company or anything like that. All trains require preventive maintenance and rebuilds to operate well, and in service failures are more often than not caused by inadequate maintenance. It is just an attempt to get some real facts.

BTW, the out of service for months for FRA inspection had to do with cracks in the suspension which was caused by a manufacturing defect at Talgo, and Talgo did handle it with grace. But it was neither FRA's nor Amtrak's fault as you seem to imply.

You can check out the equipment here

http://www.listadotren.es/talgo/index.php

The Catalan Talgo was a Talgo III - RD

The Montpellier- Cartagena trains were from a different pool (Talgo Pendular/ Talgo VII)

As far as the Catalan Talgo was concerned, I am not aware of any major rebuilds during their working lives. Their interiors were certainly very 1950s, which added to their charm.

 

[jis]

You can check out the equipment here

http://www.listadotren.es/talgo/index.php

The Catalan Talgo was a Talgo III - RD

The Montpellier- Cartagena trains were from a different pool (Talgo Pendular/ Talgo VII)

As far as the Catalan Talgo was concerned, I am not aware of any major rebuilds during their working lives. Their interiors were certainly very 1950s, which added to their charm.

I am intimately familiar with the equipment having ridden in them. I was looking for some operational details, which is not to be found in any of the materials I have seen so far. Things like what maintenance schedules were followed, how many consist were assigned etc.

 

[cirdan]

I am intimately familiar with the equipment having ridden in them. I was looking for some operational details, which is not to be found in any of the materials I have seen so far. Things like what maintenance schedules were followed, how many consist were assigned etc.

There being 5 of each type of end car and 5 cafeteria cars would suggest there were five Talgo III-RD sets in total.

But these were not used exclusively on the Catalan talgo but also on inland services.

Furthermore, the sets were not permanently joined but individual cars were swopped around for repairs.

So it can get quite complicated to trace availability figures etc.

However, in the early days there was a mechanic on every train who would travel on the train and be able to fix things as required. This was probably because places like Geneva and Paris didn't have maintenance facilities or staff that were able to cope with this type of train.

 

[jis]

There being 5 of each type of end car and 5 cafeteria cars would suggest there were five Talgo III-RD sets in total.

But these were not used exclusively on the Catalan talgo but also on inland services.

Furthermore, the sets were not permanently joined but individual cars were swopped around for repairs.

So it can get quite complicated to trace availability figures etc.

However, in the early days there was a mechanic on every train who would travel on the train and be able to fix things as required. This was probably because places like Geneva and Paris didn't have maintenance facilities or staff that were able to cope with this type of train.

Thanks for the info.

Talgo seems to have a mechanic running with many of their trains, which makes one wonder about their reliability sans the mechanic on board. Just wondering. A run from Madrid to Paris and back should not really require mechanical attention in typical equipment. It may have something to do with the fact that they are out of the ordinary special equipment that is not too broadly deployed to make it worthwhile training sufficient maintenance folks to keep at various locations of travel. This was specially the case with the few Talgos used on overnight service. I suppose the situation is probably different in Finland where different sort of Talgo cars are used in frequent corridor service.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

I am intimately familiar with the equipment having ridden in them. I was looking for some operational details, which is not to be found in any of the materials I have seen so far. Things like what maintenance schedules were followed, how many consist were assigned etc.

There being 5 of each type of end car and 5 cafeteria cars would suggest there were five Talgo III-RD sets in total.

But these were not used exclusively on the Catalan talgo but also on inland services.

Furthermore, the sets were not permanently joined but individual cars were swopped around for repairs.

As Cirdan said, the Talgo III RD (gage-changing) equipment could form a maximum of 5 sets, but only 4 were ever diagrammed, as far as I know (and the 5 sets would have been pretty short had you formed them).

I'm not aware of any sets running in regular interior service, other than in an exceptional situation, or very late in their careers, once the night trains to Paris had both received next-generation equipment. That is not to say it never happened... I just don't recall it. They ran essentially on two trains: the "Catalan Talgo" to Geneva, and the Madrid - Paris night train. Once that was converted to a next generation set, I think that the Talgo III RD sets were cascaded to the Barcelona - Paris service, but I don't know how long they ran there.

I knew with certainty where they all were at one point in the late 1970's, or maybe the early 80's: 3 of the "unique" cars (ends & cafés) were stabled in Madrid, and 2 in Barcelona. The Barcelona cars worked the "Catalan Talgo," while the Madrid cars worked the Hotel Train "Francisco de Goya" (not yet called that) to Paris. I guess they kept the spares in Madrid because of the longer time "on the track" for the Paris sets?

Anyway, in normal circumstances the Barcelona-stabled cars had to run every day, because there was no spare available in the yard. You would have had to bring it from Madrid, then a 6+-hour trip (now down to under 3).

I have no information on maintenance cycles, but there were never any major renovations. One of Talgo's selling points has always been availability. Part of their way of attaining that was to keep a mechanic on board all services. At least at one stage, they refused to sell equipment at all: they would only lease it, and the mechanics (who remained Talgo employees) were part of the lease. This allowed Talgo to use a near perfect reliability record as a sales argument: "you don't need extra sets for spares: our trains always run."

But, as others have pointed out (and as Wisconsin laments) that mechanic has a cost...

Anecdote: I was on the La Coruña - Barcelona service this summer, when the toilet in my sleeper cabin failed. The on-board mechanic was summoned and I went to dinner. He basically dismantled the whole thing (I came back to my cabin for a book, and found the actual toilet sitting out in the corridor), replaced a part, put it back together, and then the whole rest room was thoroughly cleaned, all towels replaced, a new shaving kit provided... in sum, when I returned from dinner, the WC had been prepared as if for a passenger boarding. So, the mechanic may be the secret to the reliability, and not any superior construction.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

When the "Catalan Talgo" Talgo III sets were retired from service in 2010, they were in their 41st year of operation. During most of that time, they ran 865 kilometers (about 535 miles) a day, every day (from Barcelona to Geneva, then later a Barcelona - Montpellier round trip). No "out of service for a month for FRA inspections." When they were retired, it was not because they were breaking down, but because the technology had moved on so far that they had become "commercially unacceptable."

Just interested in some operational details. How many consists were assigned to the Catalan Talgo service? I have no idea that is why I ask. The allocation would give us some idea about how much time was spent in maintenance by each consist and validate or refute your claim about how much time was taken up by the European equivalent of FRA stuff, and trust me there is quite a bit of it, even if you may think otherwise. Also would you happen to know how many rebuilds they went through in the 41 years?

Note that this is not a criticism of Talgo, either the train or the company or anything like that. All trains require preventive maintenance and rebuilds to operate well, and in service failures are more often than not caused by inadequate maintenance. It is just an attempt to get some real facts.

BTW, the out of service for months for FRA inspection had to do with cracks in the suspension which was caused by a manufacturing defect at Talgo, and Talgo did handle it with grace. But it was neither FRA's nor Amtrak's fault as you seem to imply.

Not intending to imply much here, and I wasn't actually thinking of the cracks-in-the-suspension incident.

I know, because I have learned it here (on this web site, not in this thread), that the FRA requires equipment be removed from service on some prescribed cycle for heavy inspection, perhaps even requiring that that inspection take place in a major shop (I don't know, just guessing there — sounds like you might have info on that).

I do not dispute that European inspection is thorough. I have worked for four European railways, twice in jobs where equipment diagramming was a part of what I had to understand and follow. But it must be rare for a car to be pulled from service for even a 24-hour period (unless a defect is found): the longest I ever encountered (in France or Belgium) was 10 hours, and the inspections were performed in company yards where the cars were based. Of course, this is easier in Paris, Brussels, or even Oostende, then it would be in, say, Quincy, IL, because of the size of the shops. But I gather that FRA inspections can't even happen in Chicago (for example), that they have to be in Beech Grove, or Bear?

Anyway, equipment purchases can presumably be made with less "extra" required if equipment doesn't need to be removed from service and shipped somewhere for inspection.

 

[cirdan]

Not intending to imply much here, and I wasn't actually thinking of the cracks-in-the-suspension incident.

I know, because I have learned it here (on this web site, not in this thread), that the FRA requires equipment be removed from service on some prescribed cycle for heavy inspection, perhaps even requiring that that inspection take place in a major shop (I don't know, just guessing there — sounds like you might have info on that).

I do not dispute that European inspection is thorough. I have worked for four European railways, twice in jobs where equipment diagramming was a part of what I had to understand and follow. But it must be rare for a car to be pulled from service for even a 24-hour period (unless a defect is found): the longest I ever encountered (in France or Belgium) was 10 hours, and the inspections were performed in company yards where the cars were based. Of course, this is easier in Paris, Brussels, or even Oostende, then it would be in, say, Quincy, IL, because of the size of the shops. But I gather that FRA inspections can't even happen in Chicago (for example), that they have to be in Beech Grove, or Bear?

Anyway, equipment purchases can presumably be made with less "extra" required if equipment doesn't need to be removed from service and shipped somewhere for inspection.

Good observation. I believe DB's entire ICE fleet is maintained from two bases, one in Munich and one in Hamburg. The trains basically run into the facility between runs or at night. The modern shops allow work to be done on different levels at the same time, so while cleaners may be deep-cleaning the seats, another crew may be inspecting the undersides of the carriages and bogies and changing parts as necessary (with bogies being able to be dropped out without having to lift or even uncouple the coach) and another crew may be on the roof servicing the pantograph and the other equipment that's up there. The electronic on board system of the train keeps accurate track of the train's performance and can even diagnose problems before they occur so the shop staff can be pre-informed of what they need to do even before the train has left service. With both shops being at major hubs, there is no need for dead mileage or long transfer periods and trains can be back in revenue earning service within hours rather than days.