# MISC | TGV Trainsets



## De Snor (Jul 28, 2002)

Can someone tell me *with pictures* how many different types of TGV's there really are?


----------



## Coccodrillo (Sep 30, 2005)

There is a site about the TGV: http://www.trainweb.org/tgvpages/

And in particular: http://www.trainweb.org/tgvpages/spotter.html


----------



## Momo1435 (Oct 3, 2005)

^^ That list is not complete and up to date

my list: 

- TGV Sud-Est picture

TGV Sud-Est tricourant (Lyria services to Switzerland)
- TGV postal picture
- TGV Atlantique pictures
- TGV Réseau picture

TGV Réseau tricourant (for Services to Belgium and Italy)
- TGV Duplex picture
- TGV POS picture (uses new POS motor cars with old Réseau trailers)
- TGV Réseau Duplex picture (uses the old Réseau motor cars with new Duplex trailers)
- TGV Duplex Dasye picture (Duplex Asynchrone ERTMS: with new asynchronous motors and ERTMS)
- TGV Duplex RGV2N2 (on order)

- TGV TMST (Eurostar) picture
- THALYS PBA picture (tri-current version)
- THALYS PBKA picture (quadri-current version)
- RENFE AVE S-100 picture (Spain)
- RENFE Euromed S-101 picture (Spain, broad gauge version)

RENFE Euromed S-101.001 picture (One motor car was replaced after an accident by a new one with a new design.)
- KTX picture (Korea)

- TGV Duplex Morocco (on order)
- TGV Duplex Argentina (on order)


----------



## gramercy (Dec 25, 2008)

as complete a list as youll ever get

http://www.railfaneurope.net/list/france/france_sncf_vfe-mu.html


----------



## De Snor (Jul 28, 2002)

Thank you guys kay:


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

One question, How does the TGV bi level train which is significantly larger, both in the trailers and the power cars weigh less than than the single level train of the same length?


----------



## gramercy (Dec 25, 2008)

Jay said:


> One question, How does the TGV bi level train which is significantly larger, both in the trailers and the power cars weigh less than than the single level train of the same length?


aluminium


----------



## ETR401 (Apr 4, 2008)

Aluminium that, i'd add, was used not only for the carbodies but also for many tubes, cable conduits and every other possible item.
Even the seats had their structure made of magnesium (!!).

Forgive my "rusty" english...


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

seems like that would make the structure more dangerously weak? I mean I can see the appeal for building lighter trains, it's all good but 30 tonnes for a double decker car? Normal Bi level train cars even in europe and japan weigh 60-70 tonnes, granted the TGV's are shorter and have half the wheel weight but still.


----------



## gramercy (Dec 25, 2008)

theyve been running for quite a while, so i think those concerns are not validated

besides, they use aluminium in cars, even in building structures, etc


----------



## dl3000 (Aug 7, 2004)

ETR401 said:


> Aluminium that, i'd add, was used not only for the carbodies but also for many tubes, cable conduits and every other possible item.
> Even the seats had their structure made of magnesium (!!).
> 
> Forgive my "rusty" english...


Wow. Never hear of magnesium being a major structural component for something even as small as seats. Definitely an impressive train. And not to worry the english was perfect.


----------



## gramercy (Dec 25, 2008)

AGV will be even better


----------



## Songoten2554 (Oct 19, 2006)

isn't the British Rail Class 373 Eurostar also a TGV as well?


----------



## Tri-ring (Apr 29, 2007)

Jay said:


> seems like that would make the structure more dangerously weak? I mean I can see the appeal for building lighter trains, it's all good but 30 tonnes for a double decker car? Normal Bi level train cars even in europe and japan weigh 60-70 tonnes, granted the TGV's are shorter and have half the wheel weight but still.


You'll also need to take into consideration the electric transfers and motors into account since Velero and all Shinkansen series are EMUs with the above mentioned heavy electric circuitry, cooling mechanism, pantagraphs and necessary structrual reinforcements to mount these machinery into each passenger cart which is not required with the TGV since it is all located within the locomotive car.



gramercy said:


> AGV will be even better


I am not quite sure what you mean by "better" but, AGV passenger carts will be considerably heavier compared to the TGV carts due to the forementioned reason.


----------



## Momo1435 (Oct 3, 2005)

^^ But to compensate for the weight gain due to all the equipment they have to reduce the weight somewhere else in the cars. If they would use the same weight reduction on normal TGV cars they could easily become even lighter then they already are. 


Songoten2554 said:


> isn't the British Rail Class 373 Eurostar also a TGV as well?


Yes it is, it's just adapted to the smaller English loading gauge.


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

^^



Jay said:


> seems like that would make the structure more dangerously weak? I mean I can see the appeal for building lighter trains, it's all good but 30 tonnes for a double decker car? Normal Bi level train cars even in europe and japan weigh 60-70 tonnes, granted the TGV's are shorter and have half the wheel weight but still.


That's why TGV trainsets are not _"conventional"_ loco hauled trains ... :lol:


----------



## ETR401 (Apr 4, 2008)

^^ ...indeed they are not!!
TGV sets we know were born as a sort of compromise between what SNCF and Alstom had in mind (an electric-powered TGV-001) and what was technically feasible at the time.
TGV's are, in fact, two "conventional" high-speed locomotives "pushpulling" an unconventional (articulated) rake of coaches.
A very good compromise, as can be seen everyday, but a compromise nevertheless...
If one looks back to the original concept, AGV is what is nearest to it.
A fully-articulated high-speed EMU.


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

^^ That's precisely the point that most people here and there (around the HSR topics) seems to be trying to negate with all their breaths. :dunno:

In fact the original TGV's were more than locomotive hauled ... they had distributed power (6 bogies motored and 7 non powered) so the AGV is a return to the old ways. :cheers:


----------



## ETR401 (Apr 4, 2008)

Wait a moment.
If it's true that TGV-PSE's (the ones you seem to refer to) have 6 powered bogies out of 13, giving them a powered/unpowered bogies ratio of 1/1 almost, as contemporary EMUs (such as ICE3, Velaro, Albatros, etc.), is worth to notice that SNCF never claimed TGV PSE sets to be EMUs. This because the choice to spread the motive power over 6 bogies was a "fallback" solution: axleload restrictions forced them to do so.
In fact, when synchronous chains gave Alstom the possibility to concentrate all the motive power needed on 4 bogies only (from TGV-A onwards), the "6 powered bogies" solution was abandoned.

AGV can be seen as a return to original vision, but the original vision is TGV-001 (the turbine-powered prototype) not TGV-PSE.


----------



## Gag Halfrunt (Jun 25, 2006)

Songoten2554 said:


> isn't the British Rail Class 373 Eurostar also a TGV as well?


It's also officially an EMU under the British numbering system.


----------

