Previous Topic | Next Topic

Why do (some) railfans 'hate' the Acela Express, and Bombardier's JetTrain?Discuss.
Matt

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: Acela Express, jtr1962, Mar-19-03, 04:36 AM, (1) RE: Acela Express, IcyFire, Mar-19-03, 06:56 AM, (2) RE: Acela Express, Cell0518, Mar-19-03, 10:13 PM, (5) RE: Acela Express, Lone_Gunman_SG, Mar-20-03, 09:05 PM, (9) RE: Acela Express, metrolover, Mar-19-03, 05:35 PM, (3) RE: Acela Express, Matt Vince, Mar-19-03, 06:53 PM, (4) RE: Acela Express, jtr1962, Mar-20-03, 07:00 AM, (6) RE: Acela Express, AM_ROAD, Mar-20-03, 10:58 AM, (7) RE: Acela Express, Matt Vince, Mar-20-03, 08:42 PM, (8) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-20-03, 10:48 PM, (10) RE: Acela Express, JonN, Mar-22-03, 02:40 AM, (11) RE: Acela Express, metrolover, Mar-22-03, 08:21 AM, (12) RE: Acela Express, Matt Vince, Mar-22-03, 02:51 PM, (13) RE: Acela Express, jtr1962, Mar-23-03, 06:30 AM, (14) RE: Acela Express, Tim Frost, Mar-23-03, 06:57 AM, (15) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-23-03, 11:11 PM, (16) RE: Acela Express, JonN, Mar-23-03, 11:43 PM, (17) RE: Acela Express, jtr1962, Mar-24-03, 08:23 AM, (18) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-24-03, 11:07 AM, (19) RE: Acela Express, Matt Vince, Mar-24-03, 04:39 PM, (20) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-24-03, 06:06 PM, (21) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-24-03, 06:10 PM, (22) RE: Acela Express, Matt Vince, Mar-25-03, 06:28 PM, (26) RE: Acela Express, chucksc, Mar-24-03, 06:27 PM, (24) RE: Acela Express, chucksc, Mar-24-03, 06:14 PM, (23) RE: Acela Express, sd70mac6662, Mar-24-03, 11:08 PM, (25) RE: Acela Express, imprezzed, Mar-25-03, 08:09 PM, (27)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

LAST EDITED ON Mar-19-03 AT 05:31 AM (EDT)

While I can't speak for myself personally since I don't hate either of them, I think some of the reasons are:1)The Acela has had many bugs, and is well on it's way to becoming the Metroliner revisited. I think nearly all railfans get excited at the prospect of real high-speed rail finally coming to the US, so every time there's another abortive attempt the train in question becomes the object of their scorn. Sad to say, but Acela doesn't look like it will live up to it's promise. Part of this is due to the track it runs on which only lets it reach it's 150 mph speed potential for something like 14 miles out of over 450, and part of it is due to problems with the train itself. Given that France and Japan both have off-the-shelf systems that we can buy which work, I feel this is the route we should have gone. The FRA also should have relaxed it's crashworthiness requirements so that those trains could operate here unmodified. Part of the problem with the Acela is that it's just too damned heavy because of those requirements. The lines it operates on have no grade crossings, which is the primary reason for the crashworthiness requirements. Another problem was that the train was made too wide to use it's tilting feature between New Haven and New York due to the narrow track spacing, and this is the main place it would have benefitted from it speedwise because it's the curviest portion of the run. From a public relations standpoint, the designers look like a bunch of morons because of that.2)Both trains have a sleek, modern aerodynamic appearance. This doesn't go over very well with many railfans who prefer boxy looking diesels. This is of course just a matter of personal preference, but it is a reason nonetheless.3)The Acela is powered via catenery, and many purists insist that only diesels and steam are true locomotives because they generate their own power. A ridiculous reason in my book, but one that might very well also be responsible for the slow adoption of electrification even on heavily used lines in the US.4)The Jet Train uses gas turbines, and many purists insist that a "real" train must be steam or diesel. Some old timers in fact only consider steam trains "real". I personally dislike turbines(and diesels) because they're noisy and pollute, but I still like the trains they're in. Steam? I suppose it has it's charm, but it's passe. In my opinion pure electric is the only way to run a railroad.I suppose others will add to this list. What it all comes down to are opinions and preconceived notions of what a train should be. Many people, especially here in America, automatically think F7 whenever they hear the word "train", and this annoys the hell out of me. I'm thinking this dated image many people have of railroads is one reason why train travel in the states isn't as popular as in Europe and Japan, where many people think TGV or bullet train instead. Unless you're a railfan of the 1940s the idea of getting around on a pokey, dated F7 really isn't very appealing except in a retro sense. I might want a ride or two, but give me Acela or R-142 subway cars for my day-to-day travel.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I'm no fan of the acela, or anything high-speed, Here's why.
Slow down! theres so much to see, rather then getting from point A to B fast, Enjoy the experience! Give me a Red and Silver F7 any day over that acela, I'd rather go in style P.S. I'm not a 1940's railfan either
Sincerely,
Shawn Kenselaar
ShawnSSK@Yahoo.com

Train-sim.com Lifer and Screen Shot Forum Mod
Repainter for YLW & TKW

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Same Sean. Chris
Content Manager @ MOWShed.com / Webmaster @ Midwest-rail.com
God Bless the USA

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

have commuters not benefitted from its creation?My new e-mail is Arcanine241@yahoo.com
premium add-ons

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

At first I was really excited at High-Speed rail in the US, but the Acela definitely did not live up to its expectations. Have you seen Crashela.com? I have nothing against the Jet Train though it better have less bugs than the Acela. Instead of the Amtrak buying Acelas I would have saved alot of money to wait and buy Alstom Pendilinos to run on the NEC.Alex

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I'd better give my own views. It seems people expect the trains to work 'out of the box'. This fails to take into account a number of vital factors:
a) Bombardier is 'new' to the US market. With the exception of the LRC and the commuter stock, Bombardier haven't built anything for the US.
b) Bombardier have little experience in high-speed Loco+Cars trains, if you look at most of what Bombardier has produced, it's high speed MUs, both Diesel and Electric.
c) The sets were commissioned on the NEC. Even Alsthom Pendolino UKs recieve 1000mi of running tests on a test track (Old Dalby), and that's every set. Not to mention the two pre-production sets which are still there. So there was a failure to iron out all the bugs before they went into mass production.
d) The concept of what is effectively a 'radical departure' working 'out of the box' is absurd. Where you have a decent test track, and trains built upon those that went before, it works. But with brand-new trains you cannot have that, there will be problems which may only arise six months later. It's why cars (autos) still come with 6-month warranty.
e) FRA rules requiring seriously tough trains. Probably the most difficult to overcome, it would require a complete re-writing of the rules, from 'impact protection' to 'collision avoidance'. That said, crashworthiness is an issue - particularly after Chase.
f) The 'product'. Amtrak stipulated the trains should be US-built, something the competitors could not achieve to the required standard. Even if Pendolinos or X2000s were wanted, it wouldn't have happened, due to it lacking the 'made in America' sticker. Lets face it, Amtrak is a US Gov. agency, so is inherantly 'political'.As for the JetTrain, even Bombardier accept it is only for places where OHL is unsuitable/uneconomic. If it gets passenger on trains (and I don't mean railfans) then it's a good thing. Aesthetically, it aspires to be Acela, which to 'normals' (non-railfans) appeals. No-one wants to drive a 3.5t pickup when you can have a Ferrari (the fact that the Ferrari costs many times more is the restricting factor).I like AE and JetTrain, it may be the thing which can change US passenger rail for the better. Once the problems are fixed things will improve, and 150mph in NJ may be possible, once Amtrak gets the cash to put up the new catenary. I don't buy the 'diesels should be boxy' attitude, it's absurd, particularly if you want to go above 125mph. AE and JetTrain are designed to compete with the airlines, which means you have a need for speed, and slowing down to take in the scenery does not appeal to the business-person with a meeting 2 hours and 200 miles away.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>I like AE and JetTrain, it may be the thing which can change
>US passenger rail for the better. Once the problems are
>fixed things will improve, and 150mph in NJ may be possible,
>once Amtrak gets the cash to put up the new catenary.I heard by 2010 it needs to be replaced anyway, and they're going to use newer style catenary good for 150 mph + running. A good portion of the NEC south of NY is straight enough to allow extended 150 mph running. This should hopefully take another 10 to 15 minutes off the schedule. The tunnels out of NY need to be fixed to allow something better than 60mph, and then you have that slow crawl near some of the cities, especially New York. They seriously need to get the NY-Washington running time down to 2 hours or less eventually. If they can do that, they may eventually get enough riders to justify building a dedicated high-speed line between Boston and Washington with 3 hours or less running time.
>I don't buy the 'diesels should be boxy' attitude, it's
>absurd, particularly if you want to go above 125mph. AE and
>JetTrain are designed to compete with the airlines, which
>means you have a need for speed, and slowing down to take in
>the scenery does not appeal to the business-person with a
>meeting 2 hours and 200 miles away.Agreed. The "taking in the scenery approach is fine" for railfan tours, but not for the business person who will likely spend the trip looking at his/her laptop instead of the scenery. Running an occassional F7 on a freight line with a nice consist of streamliners is a great idea(call it a retro rail tour), but it is hardly practical for business travel. Honestly, you can still see plenty even at 125 mph or over, you just need to be able to take it in faster. Much better than at 30,000 feet where all you see are clouds. I just don't buy the "you can't see the scenery at high speed" argument. Maybe when trains start running at 250 mph that will be somewhat true, but not now.As for the 'diesels should be boxy' attitude, that's equally silly, but given the prevelance of boxy SUVs on the road apparently many people here think boxy is better. I was personally aghast when I saw SUVs take to the road in large numbers. All that energy wasted just pushing air out of the way. It defies logic that automakers were even allowed to make something so glaringly inefficient, regardless of what their customers wanted. If aero vehicles were all that was made, the public would have to buy them, like it or not. As for trains, there are benefits to aerodynamics at any speed over about 50 mph, so even freight, particularly double stacks and TOFC, can benefit from some aerodynamic "tweaking".

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Because Talgo has better ones and we choose Acela sadly. LOL

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Talgo is good where you have the loading gauge to allow tilting throughout the journey. However, the Talgo fails on two accounts - there isn't enough 'dynamic envelope' along the the NH Shore Line to allow passive tilting, and the Talgo has no means of reverting to non-tilt mode, and by the same notion, restricting maximum tilt angles along certain stretches. Secondly, active tilt gives tilt angles much higher than Talgo, 6-8 degrees maximum compared to 3-4 degrees with Talgo, which makes the system more comfortable.
Talgo AFAIK didn't bid for the Acela contract, obviously because their product is unsuitable for the NEC. Why I personally believe JetTrain is an answer is on the economics of it. Clearly, wiring thousands of miles of track is not possible at the moment, the financial case for such a move collapses at the first hurdle, it isn't value for money. So, high speed developments in the short term means fossil-fuelled trains. RTLs are unsuitable, and if you want to go over 100mph (Can P42DCs do 110?) for any meaningful period of time you need either big curves or tilting trains. Therefore, JetTrain is an option, as it is a 'standard design', and, as I understand it, shares some components with the Acela HSEL. That's important, as it gives Amtrak the ability to have greater common component sourcing etc, also known as economies of scale - hence the reason why P32ACDMs share much of their design with P40/P42s, otherwise a small fleet would have not been bought (how they would have got round the steam ban is another matter, hiring traction of MetN?). Quite possibly the big savings from standardising parts amongst the HSEL/TEL fleets could offset the cost of turbine maintenance. If not, then a reciprocating IC engined version? This economies of scale extends to the cars, I am in no doubt the cars described by Bombardier are the same design as used by Acela.
I don't work for Bombardier (although if they offered me a job, I'd be a fool not to take it), but I understand that blurb I've just written, and for situations where 125mph+ running is envisaged, it's essential that the right stock is used.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Acela is a bunch of garbage.

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-03 AT 03:01 AM (EDT)

Thats right, they are junk. You know, on average, one Acela train breaks down EVERY DAY, out of about 20 trainsets! And we thought that GE's AC6000's were unreliable. Given the Acela's history, I wouldn't want to ride on Bombardier's Turbotrain, lest I get immolated.
P.S. Maybe Bombardier should go back to its roots and make nothing but snowmobiles.

Jonathan N,
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>P.S. Maybe Bombardier should go back to its roots and make
>nothing but snowmobiles. I agree!!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Ever heard of 'New Train Syndrome'? Basically it means that you get new trains which are unreliable in the first few years of operation, then they improve. Here in the UK Bombardier's Voyagers are still suffering reliability problems (although not as bad as the old Class 47s - whoever said locos are better?), but even Alstom's Coradias have not entered full service, two years after delivery. Only Siemens' trains seem to be reliable, although the one of the two operators (Heathrow Express) will withdraw one from traffic if anything minor goes awry with it. TGVs do remarkably low mileages, certainly in terms of the number of duties performed, on a daily basis they are easily outrun (number of duties) by 30-year old IC125s.Success can only be measured at the end of service life, so I suppose the question must be asked in 30 years time.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Granted, any time you push the envelope you're going to have more breakdowns and equipment failures. My only beef with Acela is that in my opinion they did two really stupid things:1)It was made too wide to use the tilt feature on most of the New York to New Haven run, which is exactly the place where it would have provided the most benefit in terms of running time. Ostensibly, this was because a study on passenger comfort felt that 4 extra inches were badly needed(why I don't know). The seating is only 4 across. The Arrows have 5 across(3+2), and I find them perfectly comfortable. But then again I'm 5'9" and 165 to 180 lbs. Still, to actually need 4 extra inches for 4 across seating the designers must have expected a flood of 500 pound passengers. The stupidity of this decision still infuriates me.2)It was made too heavy because it had to comply with FRA crashworthiness requirements. This is responsible for the hunting at high speeds and also the cracking of the trucks. It is also why Acela will never get to run at it's 165 mph design speed. The FRA should have reduced crashworthiness requirements for any train running solely on a line without grade crossings and focus on crash avoidance instead, much as the French do with their TGVs. Something like the Chase, MD crash will probably never happen again, and even if it did I don't know that improved crashworthiness would make a difference. The majority(by a huge margin) of train accidents here are at grade crossings. The crashworthness standards are to keep a diesel locomotive from imolating itself and the rest of the train, and to keep passenger cars falling down embankments from splitting open. None of this is really applicable to Acela. It should have been made lighter. The Amfleet coaches in the Chase, MD crash were about 10 tons lighter than the Acela coaches, and held up remarkable well considering the magnitude of the forces involving(the train was still going 105 mph at impact). As our love of SUVs demonstrates, Americans still falsely believe that weight automatically makes you safer in a crash. Despite the extra weight built in to Acela, it will still be outclassed by an order of magnitude weightwise if it ran into a freight train. Here again the Acela designers, thanks to the FRA, shot themselves in the foot.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Bombardier makes plenty of quality train products. They needn't go back to making snowmobiles.Tim Frost

NVTA Subway routes for BVE: http://nvta.co.uk

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

yeah right
the only good thing they make is bi level commuter cars, ask any Canadian including myself. The Acela is just a bunch of bullshit on wheels. Why do you think David gunn is telling everyone I'm not ordering any more of those.

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-03 AT 11:51 PM (EDT)

My final post in this topic: A word to all the locomotive engeneers out there who hate GE's because of their reliability issues. Consider yourselves lucky that the GE's, for all their faults, are still far better than Bombardier's junk heaps. If they were as crappy as Bombardier's products, ALL of the Dash 9's and AC4400's would have been smelted into razorblades years ago. Last thing. The Acela has been a pain in the ass for Amtrak since day one, and everything on (including the doors) it breaks down. Let it die.
P.S. What is "hunting" when referring to locomotive trucks?.

Jonathan N,
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>P.S. What is "hunting" when referring to locomotive trucks?.It's when the truck oscillates in a side-to-side motion. This is usually caused by a combination of too much weight and/or too little damping. The Acela has this problem, but apparently not to the extent that they feel 150 mph is unsafe(although 165 mph running is out because of it). The E60 electric locomotive had a much worse case of hunting. So much so that it was limited to 90 mph.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I forogt Subway cars for Toronto and bi level commuter cars.
That's about it for Bombardier. I'm still sticking to the fact that yes I am Canadian, yes I was born and raised in Toronto and yes the acela is nothing but a bunch of cowshit on wheels.

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

So, how do you propose to accelerate certain trains to speeds greater than 110mph, which I'd like to remind you is the limit of GE's ability, the AMD-110 (Genesis-II, P32AC-DM, etc). GM has only ever been involved in one locomotive capable of 125mph in recent years, the JT42-HW-HS, which was assembled by Alstom in Spain for the UK market (and only able to do 125 with 4/5 Mail vans trailing). GM's only rival to the Genesis is the F-59PHI, also capable of 110mph. In order to get more market share, Amtrak needs speeds faster than 110mph, as service and scenery doesn't really count for the business market (and the business market is where the money is).How do you get that market? 125mph is the way to go in the midwest, and apart from the track, what needs to be done? New stock - the Genesis and F-59 is not capable of those speeds, therefore, either new locomotives (something from GE/GM?, or that 'Bomb-ardier thing'), or very fast Diesel MUs. Such DMUs exist, Voyagers and ICTs prove you can have 125mph tilting DMUs. However, you may not like to hear this, but both Voyager and ICT are built by, wait for it, Bombardier!
However, if US-German relations have improved by 2007, Siemens has something very clever in the offing...

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

wrong buddy, some of the JT42's were built in Canada at GM's london plant.

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Oh I also forgot the Genesis and F59 could do 125mph with a minor tweaking of the gear ratio. I've been here longer thatn you. Acela is another name that should be shot and pissed on

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I specifically referred to the JT42-HW-HS (Class 67). These were built by Alstom in Valencia in SPAIN, from 1999-2000. There are 30 in this class of 4-axle diesels, and have a GM 12N-710 prime mover, delivering 3200hp at 900rpm. The alternator and traction motors are GM, as is the electronics. But the trucks and bodyshells are Alstom built. The JT42-CWR (Class 66) is built in Ontario, but these are 6-axle locos using different alternators and traction motors, and are based on the La Grange Il./London On. built 'Class 59' design of 1985, a locomotive which used the 645 engine.
This is a JT42-HW-HS:
http://mercurio.iet.unipi.it/pix/gb/diesel/67/pix.html
This is the JT42CWR:
http://mercurio.iet.unipi.it/pix/gb/diesel/66/pix.htmlNo doubt an F-59 could do 125mph, but:
a) can it sustain that speed for long distances?
b) can it accelerate suitably fast for intercity travel - if you're going to have 125mph trains, you need to counter the speed deficit from 'New High Speed Rail' by accelerating well out of stations - that means quicker than existing trains.
c) can it perform 125mph duties day in day out all year round, and do it economically?
d) how will it affect the infrastructure? (track forces etc)>I've been here longer thatn youis that supposed to be a threat/offensive?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-03 AT 06:31 PM (EDT)

Gee if I had to guess I would say that you are one of the Canadians losing their jobs because of GM's virtual exit from the RR business???? Or are related to some one who is....Can you substantiate any of your allegations?
Probably not, since Bombardier is still in business and still making money... Unlike EMD which is continually plagued by shutdown/self destruction/sell off rumors which by their very nature become self fulfilling as they chase away customers.In case you have missed most of the background stories circulating about the Acela Express in the Trade and Technical Journals, it appears that most of the Engineering problems in the Acela Express were Amtrak Generated....
FWIW, I have a friend in US-DOT legal and he says Bombardier's case against Amtrak for contract breach is much stronger by far than Amtrak's case against Bombardier for late delivery.
IIRC The weight creep and width/dimension growth were both US-DOT/Amtrak generated (they upped the FRA Crash-worthiness standard in mid design and didn't grandfather the Acela) they insisted on strict ADA requirements which directly caused the 4" width problem... I understand this was because they thought they could get MN to waiver them and the Dept. of Labor who administers ADA compliance was absolutely intransigent about the 4" even though they were still exceeding existing ADA approved designs with out it. They did all this and signed off on change orders to the Acela with out going back and doing a regression analysis/thorough impact analysis on the change orders... All this was driven by George Warrington's BS promises to Congress to achieve self sufficiency and the apparent incompetence of his VP of engineering... (I wonder how long it will take them to bankrupt NJT?)
Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-03 AT 06:33 PM (EDT)

>Because Talgo has better ones and we choose Acela sadly. LOL Better how?
On European Rails under European operating conditions????Your sour grapes is hanging out all over the place.The requirement was to be Tier 3 (?) crashworthy...
The engineering behind this standard was based on the famous "ClownRail/Ricky Gates" incident where there was a differential velocity in excess of 100MPH IIRC.....Existing Talgos operate on a waiver... and the terms of that waiver are a strict grandfathering of existing equipment.Talgo offers a compliant train-set but has never built one.
They didn't even bid on Acela Exp/American Flyer IIRC.Face it, until the FRA Crash-worthiness standards are relaxed we only have the Acela Express as a choice and after all this time it appears that the bugs are being ironed out....
The Crews like them, The passengers love them....
BTW, I've ridden on Talgo's in Spain a few years back...
There is no comparison of the ride quality with the Acela Express' ride quality... They felt like a buckboard to me now that I can compare.... I'm not sure I would want to do 150 on one... on a line that CSX is hauling coal and trash parallel to me....Just my .02!
Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I read about that one bombardier should be able to win their case against Amtrak. George Warrington put Amtrak to hell.

formerly known as sd70mac666 until the forum software decided to hate me

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Christ, it's even WORDED like an Essay question.

I wanna highball it through Woodstock, Ont. on none other than...THE TURBOTRAIN!!!

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.