# Viewliner order awarded to CAF USA



## Trogdor (Jul 23, 2010)

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/breaking/amtrak-buying-130-passenger-rail-cars-99122964.html


----------



## rrdude (Jul 23, 2010)

Trogdor said:


> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/breaking/amtrak-buying-130-passenger-rail-cars-99122964.html


hallelujah!

Put a ticker on your site for October 2012!


----------



## Ispolkom (Jul 23, 2010)

What wonderful news!


----------



## Rob_C (Jul 23, 2010)

Just in time for the end of the world!! 

Rob


----------



## Ryan (Jul 23, 2010)

Nice!!! Good find, can't wait to hear some more details...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 23, 2010)

So this is something that will mainly/only affect east-coast trains? If so, is there likely to be another order to replace the Superliners with more dual-level cars?


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Jul 23, 2010)

Rob_C said:


> Just in time for the end of the world!!
> 
> Rob


According to the Mayan Long Count Calendar, we'll have about 2 months to enjoy them-hopefully they won't be falling apart by then :lol:


----------



## Rob_C (Jul 23, 2010)

Do we have any idea when either the exterior or interior design of these new cars will be released? Now I'm itching to start hacking up some Walther's Viewliners to turn them into baggage cars!

Rob


----------



## Donctor (Jul 23, 2010)

daxomni said:


> So this is something that will mainly/only affect east-coast trains? If so, is there likely to be another order to replace the Superliners with more dual-level cars?


Yes, there will be an order to replace the Superliner Is, though that is not of highest priority right now.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 23, 2010)

_from Amtrak, July 23, 2010:_



> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 23, 2010
> 
> ATK-10-101
> 
> ...


----------



## Acela150 (Jul 23, 2010)

Good to finally see that it's not just talk.

Steve


----------



## dlagrua (Jul 23, 2010)

Rob_C said:


> Do we have any idea when either the exterior or interior design of these new cars will be released? Now I'm itching to start hacking up some Walther's Viewliners to turn them into baggage cars!
> 
> Rob


Rumor has it that the design is very similar to the current Viewliners but the sinks and toilets have been removed from the roomettes. Whatever the design is, this is good news. Maybe if someone has the blueprint they can share it here. One hundred thirty cars is IMO a large order. Considering that the LSL, CS, SM, SS and CDL are only 7 or 8 car consists we must assume that some of these cars will be used on the NE regional runs.


----------



## Donctor (Jul 23, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> Rob_C said:
> 
> 
> > Do we have any idea when either the exterior or interior design of these new cars will be released? Now I'm itching to start hacking up some Walther's Viewliners to turn them into baggage cars!
> ...


How did you reach that conclusion?


----------



## Rail Freak (Jul 23, 2010)

I'm dreamin of PPC cars!!!!


----------



## fredevad (Jul 23, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> ... 25 sleeping cars, 25 diners, 55 baggage cars and 25 baggage / dormitory cars ...


Why is over a third of these baggage cars and not cars that passengers would use (over half if you count the baggage/dorms too)?


----------



## Donctor (Jul 23, 2010)

Rail Freak said:


> I'm dreamin of PPC cars!!!!


I'm dreaming of ATM machines and beef with au jus sauce.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 23, 2010)

fredevad said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> > ... 25 sleeping cars, 25 diners, 55 baggage cars and 25 baggage / dormitory cars ...
> ...


Because the the youngest baggage cars in the system are well over 50 years old and falling apart. They're desperately in need of replacement.


----------



## rrdude (Jul 23, 2010)

Ryan said:


> fredevad said:
> 
> 
> > PRR 60 said:
> ...


Maybe, *gets down on his worn out knees and prays to the Train God* they will outfit the baggage cars with bike racks and ski racks?

What a concept eh? Just think, how difficult could that be? It's not like they are designed to roll in modular units pre-filled with passengers luggage or something. Racks for storage, racks for bikes, and racks for skis.

Oh well, I'll keep dreamin'


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 23, 2010)

The only new passenger capacity is coming from the 25 sleeping cars and the 25 baggage/dorm cars (which will take the crew out of revenue space). The 55 baggage cars will replace the existing baggage cars on the Superliner trains (and some others). The dining cars will replace all the heritage diners, with a few extras.

Note that this order is being placed without having received the desired special funding. Amtrak gave up on getting the funding. The first (and smallest) year's cost is being paid out of normal revenue. The means of paying years 2 through 5 is a work in progress.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 23, 2010)

rrdude said:


> ...Maybe, *gets down on his worn out knees and prays to the Train God* they will outfit the baggage cars with bike racks and ski racks?
> 
> What a concept eh? Just think, how difficult could that be? It's not like they are designed to roll in modular units pre-filled with passengers luggage or something. Racks for storage, racks for bikes, and racks for skis.
> 
> Oh well, I'll keep dreamin'


Not sure about ski racks, but there will be bike racks in the new baggage cars.


----------



## MattW (Jul 23, 2010)

On the railroad.net, someone added up the number of trainsets and came to the number of 17 needed for the sleeper routes. 25 allows the addition of 1 sleeper per trainset with enough left over for maintenance/spares.

http://railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=72159#p831403 <- link to original post.

Also don't forget that the 55 baggage-only cars will also be used on Superliner trains as well, those are still single-level heritage fleet cars on the Superliner routes. I hope eventually, the Amfleets are replaced with 125mph-capable Viewliner coaches and lounges creating a more uniform fleet capable of 125mph running so the LDs don't tie up the NEC as much.

As for the company, I've got mixed feelings, it looks like they do trams, MUs, and are entering the high speed market, but we'll just have to trust Amtrak on their selection.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2010)

Oh Hell Yes! :excl: Finally Joe Boardman and the Board takes some bold action ! :wub: (read chances since political money is like dust, here today, gone with the wind tomorrow!)

I know the baggage cars and diners are almost as old as some of us, and replacing them is necessary but 25 Viewliners doesnt seem like enough with the current demand for sleepers on the single level trains! If you're gonna go bold go for it! They should have contracted for 50 sleepers IMO!25 Viewliners and 25 of the new Superliner IIIs! Hope the Aztecs were wrong!


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 23, 2010)

Glad to see this order has finally been placed. The baggage/dorm cars will free up capacity in existing sleepers. The existing baggage and dining cars have been run to death, so this will ensure the continuance of LD service. Adding bike racks to the baggage cars is also a good idea. The first cars are scheduled to run off the assembly line in 14-15 months. That seems pretty fast, but they will be building them based on existing designs. All in all some good news. Now let's get some new electric locomotives, cars for state-sponsored regional trains and a new breed of Superliners!


----------



## NE933 (Jul 23, 2010)

Finally!! OK, Joe, I am your top critic on here, but after reading this, I LOVE YOU!!

-rje


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 23, 2010)

So is the relief simply that _anything_ has been ordered or are these cars and/or supplier better than any car/supplier option available? Just trying to get a read on what is driving all the enthusiasm in response to this partially-funded release.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 23, 2010)

These cars will replace diners and baggage cars that have been on the rails from the '50's (or earlier in some cases), allow for either more routes or more sleeping cars on existing routes, and allow for more revenue pax in the sleepers by getting the crew into dorm cars. Winners all around.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 23, 2010)

daxomni said:


> So is the relief simply that _anything_ has been ordered or are these cars and/or supplier better than any car/supplier option available? Just trying to get a read on what is driving all the enthusiasm in response to this partially-funded release.


The relief is that ANYTHING has finally been ordered.

By now the Superliners and Viewliners are as old as quite a bit of the "Heritage" equipment that Amtrak started with. As has been pointed out already here, except for the sleepers, this equipment is replacing equipment that is 60 years old, or more. (Very little new passenger equipmetn was built in this country post 1950.)

Since it appears that ridership, particularly sleeper reidership, is capacity constrained on many lines, addition of this equipment could result in some increase in ridership simpy by its existance.

There is also the real hope that this is the start of a trend, as more equipment is a crying need before any realistic service expansion is possible.

From some of the issues raised here, inadequate dining car capacity is also an issue on many lines. Hopefull these cars will provide for more seating, and can we wish that the Baggage-Dorms include some space for a conductor's office so table space is not lost in the dining car due to the spreading out of the conductor's paperwork?


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 23, 2010)

George Harris said:


> By now the Superliners and Viewliners are as old as quite a bit of the "Heritage" equipment that Amtrak started with.


I initially mis-read this as saying the Viewliners were now equally as old as the heritage equipment and I was like "what?!" But now I get it.

It's hard to even remember that a lot of Amtrak's equipment in 1971 was still relatively new. (Ok, I wasn't born yet, but when I started riding in 1978 or so, everything already seemed very old.) And we're still eating out of those same dining cars 40 years later!

I wish I could see what these cars looked like... I guess it's too much to wish for Amtrak someday running matched consists again.


----------



## gaspeamtrak (Jul 23, 2010)

Does Amtrak have any options to add anymore cars to the contract once the inital order is completed... Sorry my question mark key is not working!!


----------



## nferr (Jul 23, 2010)

gaspeamtrak said:


> Does Amtrak have any options to add anymore cars to the contract once the inital order is completed... Sorry my question mark key is not working!!



I remember reading that they were going to keep an option for up to a total 350 new Viewliners if I recall correctly. But the additional cars were mostly going to be new coaches. The 25 new sleepers are a 50% increase and the baggage dorms will free up another eight or so roomettes for customer use on each train so it's not bad already.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 23, 2010)

George Harris said:


> Hopefull these cars will provide for more seating, and can we wish that the Baggage-Dorms include some space for a conductor's office so table space is not lost in the dining car due to the spreading out of the conductor's paperwork?


No office in the bag/dorm. Just linen closest, 9 roomettes, shower, 2 public toilets, and baggage racks.


----------



## sunchaser (Jul 23, 2010)

I'm glad they finally got the order in!!! I hope they get them finished quickly, & get the baggage cars taken care of too!!!

Next-Superliners please!!!


----------



## AlanB (Jul 23, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> rrdude said:
> 
> 
> > ...Maybe, *gets down on his worn out knees and prays to the Train God* they will outfit the baggage cars with bike racks and ski racks?
> ...


It's certainly possible that they've changed the plans, but last I knew the plans did not call for bike racks. At least not in the bag/dorm cars.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2010)

AlanB said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Hopefull these cars will provide for more seating, and can we wish that the Baggage-Dorms include some space for a conductor's office so table space is not lost in the dining car due to the spreading out of the conductor's paperwork?
> ...


Alan: does this mean they might do revenue rooms in the trans dorm like they do now on Superliners?The public bathrooms are what made me ask, normally passengers wouldnt be allowed into the baggage car nor the crew quarters, I know the cardinal doesnt have 9 OBS so perhaps this would provide a few extra rooms on the hard to get single level trains!


----------



## AlanB (Jul 23, 2010)

Guest said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > George Harris said:
> ...


I haven't heard anything about that possibilty for these cars. And unlike the Superliners, these dorm cars will run largely full on many of the trains, even if the Card won't use it to capacity. Additionally, unlike the Superliner cars, there really is no dividing line as it were between the crew section and the passenger section. On a Superliner, you have the bathroom and the stairs that in effect create a dividing line.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 24, 2010)

MikefromCrete said:


> Glad to see this order has finally been placed. The baggage/dorm cars will free up capacity in existing sleepers. The existing baggage and dining cars have been run to death, so this will ensure the continuance of LD service. Adding bike racks to the baggage cars is also a good idea. The first cars are scheduled to run off the assembly line in 14-15 months. That seems pretty fast, but they will be building them based on existing designs. All in all some good news. Now let's get some new electric locomotives, cars for state-sponsored regional trains and a new breed of Superliners!


Whoops, this is 2010, so it's more like 26 months. Nobody told me there would be math on the test!

1


----------



## Shanghai (Jul 24, 2010)

An e-mail message I received from NARP.

I'm pleased Amtrak is getting some new rolling stock.

I prefer Viewliner sleepers as I'm on the East Coast and usually travel in a sleeper.

Perhaps there are Superliner cars being reconstructed at Beech Grove to improve that fleet.

I'm also happy the new cars will be manufactured in the USA!!

*Amtrak Purchases 130 New Single-Level Passenger Railcars*

*Amtrak today revealed the implementation of the first step in its long term fleet renewal plan, announcing the purchase of 130 new single-level railcars for the long distance network.*

* *

* *

*Amtrak President & CEO Joseph Boardman revealed that the 130 single-level passenger rail cars will be similar to the popular Viewliner model. Amtrak will get 25 sleeping cars, 25 diners, 55 baggage cars, and 25 baggage/dormitory cars, primarily for use on long-distance routes.*


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 24, 2010)

AlanB said:


> It's certainly possible that they've changed the plans, but last I knew the plans did not call for bike racks. At least not in the bag/dorm cars.


If the PR people have the story correct, it looks like bike racks are included with at least the full baggage cars. Considering how cheap it would be to add bike racks with the original build, it makes sense.

From the Amtrak press release:



> ...Passengers will experience many improvements with the new equipment including: modern interiors with better layouts; better lighting and more efficient air conditioning and heating systems; additional outlets to power personal electronic devices; *bicycle racks in the baggage cars*; as well as improved accessibility for passengers with disabilities.


----------



## Hamhock (Jul 24, 2010)

You know what I like? A baggage-dorm can easily be converted into a full sleeper car if they have sufficient Viewliner sleeper modules. As far as I'm concerned, those 25 baggage-dorm cars are all stealth sleepers if needed.


----------



## rolfecms (Jul 24, 2010)

May have missed this, but saw nothing in reference to new lounge cars. Are they now considered unnecessary in modern train consists?


----------



## Ryan (Jul 24, 2010)

rolfecms said:


> May have missed this, but saw nothing in reference to new lounge cars. Are they now considered unnecessary in modern train consists?



No, but the existing lounges aren't in desperate need of replacement like the diners and the bags.


----------



## rolfecms (Jul 24, 2010)

Ryan said:


> rolfecms said:
> 
> 
> > May have missed this, but saw nothing in reference to new lounge cars. Are they now considered unnecessary in modern train consists?
> ...


Are you referring to existing Amfleet equipment? Not exactly my idea of an acceptable long distance lounge car.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 24, 2010)

If that's your opinion, then we haven't seen one in a long time and this doesn't represent any kind of shift in Amtrak's thinking.


----------



## rolfecms (Jul 24, 2010)

The sightseer superliner loungers were, in my opinion, a real step forward. What better use of the 'viewliner' design than a lounge car?


----------



## Ryan (Jul 24, 2010)

> The sightseer superliner loungers were, in my opinion, a real step forward.


I'm sure that they are, but you'll never see them on a single level LD train.



> What better use of the 'viewliner' design than a lounge car?


Replacement of 60+ year old equipment?


----------



## Eric S (Jul 24, 2010)

rolfecms said:


> May have missed this, but saw nothing in reference to new lounge cars. Are they now considered unnecessary in modern train consists?


It's true that no new/additional lounge cars were included in this order. Neither were any coach cars. I have not seen anything indicating lounge cars (or coach cars or additional sleeping cars, etc) will NOT be included in any future orders. As others have indicated, this order was basically about addressing the most critical needs in the single-level fleet.


----------



## Bigval109 (Jul 24, 2010)

Rob_C said:


> Just in time for the end of the world!!
> 
> Rob


Now see I wasn't going to say anything.


----------



## Bigval109 (Jul 24, 2010)

Ryan said:


> > The sightseer superliner loungers were, in my opinion, a real step forward.
> 
> 
> I'm sure that they are, but you'll never see them on a single level LD train.
> ...


What train is consider a single level LD train? Are these all coaches or is there a sleeper in the bunch?


----------



## Ryan (Jul 24, 2010)

Lake Shore Limited, Silvers, Crescent, Cardinal. Of course they have sleeping cars.


----------



## MattW (Jul 24, 2010)

Single level trains are the ones that operate into/through New York Penn station plus some of the Midwest trains, though they do want to get Bilevel California-style cars on those routes out of Chicago.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Jul 24, 2010)

Is there any indication at this point of which types of cars are going to be built first? Are they likely to decide that they can keep some of the Heritage baggage cars rolling a few more years so that the new sleepers can start bringing in more revenue sooner, for example? Or will the bag/dorm cars get priority so that they can simultaneously retire a few Heritage baggage cars while also moving crew members out of the revenue roomettes?


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 24, 2010)

I think that you will still need a full baggage car on most of these trains, except for possibly the Cardinal. They will likely to try to get those Bag/Dorm cars done early as said early to free up revenue space in the existing capacity. However, on a busy train like the Silver Meteor you'd have a rough trip without a full baggage car. The baggage area as part of the dorms will allow for more space on the trains that need it and to help supplement the space lost by the bike racks. You can work your shorts out of the bag/dorm, and keep your longs in the full baggage car to make things simpler. The real question is did they order the full baggage cars like they should be with two full rolling doors, or are we going to see the failed design of the converted coaches in the 1700 series with the roll up doors.


----------



## bretton88 (Jul 25, 2010)

Does anyone think CAF will build a better product than the original viewliners? I sure hope so!


----------



## VT Hokie (Jul 25, 2010)

bretton88 said:


> Does anyone think CAF will build a better product than the original viewliners? I sure hope so!


I really liked the Viewliners when I took the Crescent a few years ago!


----------



## MattW (Jul 25, 2010)

With the Viewliner I and IIs being modular, does anyone think Amtrak will use new modules to upgrade the Viewliner Is? Since there's so much grumbling about the toilets in roomettes, if the modules are the same fittings, then couldn't Amtrak slide in new no-toilet modules in the old cars?


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 25, 2010)

I want to say the module concept worked for building them, but for maintenance failed epically. IIRC the original intent was to be able to have mechanical be able to slide in and out rooms for maintenance purposes, rather than making the entire car bad ordered. Well, like the modular rooms at Disney's Contemporary Resort, the rooms settled, and ain't going nowhere.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Jul 25, 2010)

battalion51 said:


> I want to say the module concept worked for building them, but for maintenance failed epically. IIRC the original intent was to be able to have mechanical be able to slide in and out rooms for maintenance purposes, rather than making the entire car bad ordered. Well, like the modular rooms at Disney's Contemporary Resort, the rooms settled, and ain't going nowhere.


The Modular concept was only for construction, once the module plug was welded into carbody that was it.


----------



## daveyb99 (Jul 25, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> Rumor has it that the design is very similar to the current Viewliners but the sinks and toilets have been removed from the roomettes.


If this is true, then I might ride one.....


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 26, 2010)

I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.

I realize it's far too early to answer this, I'm just wondering out loud.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Jul 26, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.
> 
> I realize it's far too early to answer this, I'm just wondering out loud.


Probably no way to tell, the ticketing process has no way to know how they're building a trainset. Especially as far out as a lot of us book.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jul 26, 2010)

Dutchrailnut said:


> The Modular concept was only for construction, once the module plug was welded into carbody that was it.


Where did you get that fairytale from, Dutch? They are bolted into place, no welding was ever done. I know you're usually well informed, but in this case you're far off base, according to every source I have ever heard. I can believe what Batalion51 says, however.

Of course, if you have hard evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.


----------



## WMJ_NJ (Jul 26, 2010)

I am willing to bet that we will not see Eastern LD trains running with additional sleepers when these new cars are released. Instead I think you will see the old Viewliners rotated out for refurbishment. If they decide to add sleepers or even new routes it will be some time later.

I for one don't have a problem with toilets in the rooms. Just my opinion.

Bill


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 26, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.
> 
> I realize it's far too early to answer this, I'm just wondering out loud.


Here's a paradox - I think that the toilets in the roomettes are cool, but I hate them. Get 'em out! Last time I was in a Viewliner sleeper, I found that the doors are not all that private (acoustic) and that the rooms aren't properly ventilated for a toilet. Besides that, you have to kick your roommate out whenever you want to use the loo...

Well kept, nice public use toilets in the new Viewliner IIs should be adequate.


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 26, 2010)

Are the Viewliners really as old as or older than the Amfleets? When are they gonna replace those? I'm all for a uniform-looking, consistent consist.

The existing cafe/business class cars could stand a replacement as well. And, back to an old subject, I'd like to see BC on trains that have sleepers.

Hey - so long as we're all in the same dream...


----------



## lyke99 (Jul 26, 2010)

VentureForth said:


> Are the Viewliners really as old as or older than the Amfleets? When are they gonna replace those? I'm all for a uniform-looking, consistent consist.
> 
> The existing cafe/business class cars could stand a replacement as well. And, back to an old subject, I'd like to see BC on trains that have sleepers.
> 
> Hey - so long as we're all in the same dream...


The Viewliners are newer than the Amfleets. The sleepers are not replacements, they are to augment the current fleet. The dining and baggage cars are to replace heritage fleet cars. The baggage-dorms are for getting crew out of rooms in the Viewliner sleepers. Since sleeping car passengers make up 15% of the long distance travelers and produce 36% of the revenue, making more rooms available is real plus.


----------



## alanh (Jul 26, 2010)

Essentially this is the other half (or 3/4) of the Viewliner order that's been hanging out there since the mid-1990s. The intent at the time was to retire all the heritage cars, but they only had enough money for 52 sleepers. This left them with the aging diners and baggage cars, and short on sleepers once the heritage sleepers were retired.

Here's an article from 1987 that describes the original plan.


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 26, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> > The Modular concept was only for construction, once the module plug was welded into carbody that was it.
> ...


I think it might be halfway. I could be messing up my modulars. The original intent I believe was to be able to move them in and out as necessary, but they may have welded them down when things didn't work out in the test bed (no pun intended).


----------



## nferr (Jul 26, 2010)

VentureForth said:


> spacecadet said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.
> ...


So instead of having your own private toilet you prefer one toilet shared by what twelve roomettes? No thanks. I like having a private sink and toilet in my room. I really hope this rumor is a bad one. Huge step backwards. If anything just put one public toilet in the car for those that are traveling two in a roomette and need privacy. If you're traveling alone the private sink and toilet is much better and convenient.


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 26, 2010)

I won't argue on the sink front. I think the fact that it's your only choice makes it tough. My girlfriend flipped when she found out the toilet was in the room (definitely waited until we were in the room to tell her that one). I think if the shower room were configured to where it's available there as an option if you don't want to use the one in your room you'd probably hit a happy medium. You wouldn't be _required_ to kick out your companion to have some privacy in taking care of business. As it is now, that trek back to the coaches can be not so fun if you don't want to do that in the room.


----------



## TVRM610 (Jul 26, 2010)

battalion51 said:


> I won't argue on the sink front. I think the fact that it's your only choice makes it tough. My girlfriend flipped when she found out the toilet was in the room (definitely waited until we were in the room to tell her that one). I think if the shower room were configured to where it's available there as an option if you don't want to use the one in your room you'd probably hit a happy medium. You wouldn't be _required_ to kick out your companion to have some privacy in taking care of business. *As it is now, that trek back to the coaches can be not so fun if you don't want to do that in the room.*


AMEN! Especially when your in the FIRST viewliner, on a Silver Trains with THREE viewliners, and its the middle of the night, and the Conductors stare at you like your crazy when you go through the diner, and the lounge, to get to a coach, where the restroom is busy, so you go to the next coach, ha. ok i might be exagerating a bit.


----------



## NE933 (Jul 26, 2010)

Sickening. It's uterly toxic and poison the attacks Amtrak and it's passengers took for over 23 years, the amount of time the Viewliner fleet was designed to what we have now. Intentions were in place to have 500 of them -- and what do we got? 50. All the issues of not having enough capacity and redundancy in place when a replacement car is needed right away should another get bad ordered, shortened consists, would never be if the full deployment was funded and allowed to proceed.

One of the hidden factoids about the Viewliner that has given it the status of legends (sort of like bigfoot and UFO's) is the blueprint for a lounge version. Those who have seen or worked on it's design, of a car destined to not get built 'til this day, say it would be spectacular. The elements of the Superliner sightseer lounges, namely the windows that wrap the floor thru part of the roof, along with innovative and attractive seating, would blow our minds away. Maybe, just maybe, we'll see it in our lifetimes..?


----------



## VentureForth (Jul 27, 2010)

Frankly, lounges don't produce revenue. The cafe car in the lounge does. But does it cover the cost to pull it? And pay the person to run it?


----------



## printman2000 (Jul 27, 2010)

Not sure where this quote came from but I have seen it referenced on a couple of other boards by Joseph Boardman...



> The specification gives the builder the flexibility for enhancements and upgrades, but we did not require the cars to have the same shape.


----------



## MattW (Jul 27, 2010)

VentureForth said:


> Frankly, lounges don't produce revenue. The cafe car in the lounge does. But does it cover the cost to pull it? And pay the person to run it?


But does not having a lounge reduce the overall revenue because people won't ride if they can't get anytime-food service?


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 27, 2010)

The only true non-revenue things in a consist are a locomotive (obviously a necessity), baggage car, and dorm car. The Diners typically do not make much money since their primary customer is sleeping car passengers who have their meals included. There is a small amount of revenue produced by sales of alcohol and sales to coach passengers. Overall I would argue that the lounge produces more revenue and lower direct expenses since it only takes one man to work it, more hours available to make sales, and everyone has to pay regardless of class of service. Granted the lounges are probably losing money overall, but its a necessity to remain competitive in the marketplace.


----------



## Chris J. (Jul 28, 2010)

battalion51 said:


> The only true non-revenue things in a consist are a locomotive (obviously a necessity), baggage car, and dorm car. The Diners typically do not make much money since their primary customer is sleeping car passengers who have their meals included. There is a small amount of revenue produced by sales of alcohol and sales to coach passengers. Overall I would argue that the lounge produces more revenue and lower direct expenses since it only takes one man to work it, more hours available to make sales, and everyone has to pay regardless of class of service. Granted the lounges are probably losing money overall, but its a necessity to remain competitive in the marketplace.


They probably make a tiny bit of revenue on the bag cars from people paying for extra luggage over their 3-bag limit and with Amtrak Express Shipping.


----------



## wrjensen (Jul 28, 2010)

From what I heard: The cars a slated to come out in this order, Baggage, Sleeper, Bag/Dorm. And very subject to change.

It based on design time and lead time for subassembly. It does not mean that all of one design will come out before the next, but the order the are released. If this schedule holds up the first cars (baggage) will go out west "to get some miles on them" also subject to change.


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 28, 2010)

VentureForth said:


> Are the Viewliners really as old as or older than the Amfleets? When are they gonna replace those? I'm all for a uniform-looking, consistent consist.


Me too, but I think this is one of those ideas that's considered obsolete these days, necessary for high speed rail but not really cost-effective at the speeds Amtrak's LD trains operate at. It was always sort of a marketing gimmick, having these matched consist streamlined trains, it wasn't for any real economic reason. The amount of money saved on fuel with the full streamlining is probably lost several times over in the additional time and energy required to wye entire trains and keep all the equipment in order (including having enough extra cars and locos of that same design at various points for protection). Plus you basically have to order full train sets all the time, which limits flexibility. (This is how most of the matched consists in the old days came to be; they were ordered in sets.)

I think the closest you're gonna get to a matched consist on an Amtrak LD train is one of the Superliners that runs without a dedicated baggage car. The loco still sticks out, but I don't mind that much anymore - that was the way things always were before the streamliner age (and still are in most other countries running low-speed trains).

Eastern trains are probably going to be a hodge podge of car types forever, given that the Amfleet cars still have probably 20 years of life left in them (and by then, who knows what Amtrak will look like?). At least the new Viewliners will cut the number of different types down to two, though, so it'll be a little classier looking. It's going to be sad seeing those heritage cars finally gone, though - I've got a lot of great memories on those old trains. I might have to take a trip somewhere before the final retirement just to have one last experience in a heritage diner.


----------



## MattW (Jul 28, 2010)

I wouldn't say it's obsolete, and wouldn't say you have to wye a matched consist like you're describing, nor should you have to order a full trainset. I could be wrong seeing as how I'm just a young computer science railfan, but if you specify a standard shape (which I'm afraid Amtrak hasn't this go-round), and build to that standard, things should still match up. In my field of computers, it's the exact same reason why an Asus ATX motherboard will work with a case made by Alienware with the ATX form factor, or why a Sandisk USB stick will work with an HP computer. As for keeping the consist matched, for the upcoming Viewliner II, it seems like it'd be the same they're doing now, having to keep the vestibules all facing one direction (till they meet the diner of course to give it two vestibules).

As for the locomotives, yea, you're right, but at the same time, I don't care as much about how they blend with the train until you get up above 79mph at which point the sometimes inconvenient laws of aerodynamics begin to have a greater effect, but beggars can't be choosers, you can either run flat-front dual-ended cabs like the AEM-7s and get hit with drag right up front, or you can run slope-nosed dual-ended cabs like the HHP-8 and ALP46 and get hit with the drag just behind the locomotive, or you can run single-ended cabs with flat-backs and and solve both problems, but lose the operational flexibility of the dual-ended cabs unless you put a power car or matching cab car at the other end such as Acela.

I don't think (hope) Eastern trains will (won't) remain the hodge podge for much longer. I'm holding out hope that after/part way through this initial order of 130, Amtrak will begin seriously looking at Viewliner coaches and lounges and relegating the Amfleets to either commuter startups looking for cheap well-tested cars, or short-run corridor "startups" like a Heartland Flyer frequency expansion, or Illinois/Michigan service frequency expansions until true corridor cars begin rolling out of the factories.


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 28, 2010)

MattW said:


> I wouldn't say it's obsolete, and wouldn't say you have to wye a matched consist like you're describing, nor should you have to order a full trainset. I could be wrong seeing as how I'm just a young computer science railfan, but if you specify a standard shape (which I'm afraid Amtrak hasn't this go-round), and build to that standard, things should still match up.


Well yes, if you *always* order the same stuff. The problem is Amtrak's orders are (historically) about 20 years apart, and in that time a lot of stuff changes - customer tastes, safety regulations, economic concerns, builder availability, technology, etc.

Also, there aren't a lot of car builders left in the world, so it's not always the most cost-effective to give someone a custom design that matches stuff you already have. That's why the Amfleet and Superliners look the way they do; in the former case, Budd basically just took the shell of their Metroliner and said "here, take it or leave it" and Amtrak took it. They just weren't building the old straight-sided passenger cars anymore. The Superliners were only a little more loosely based on the design of the SF hi-level cars. These were designs that came from the builders, not Amtrak.

Amtrak actually did experiment with trying to make Amfleet sleeping cars and I think even full dining cars, but it didn't work for various reasons. But they wanted to have a matched fleet; the cars just weren't suitable. So they went back to the drawing board for the Viewliners.

By the time they do replace the Amfleet cars, they may or may not even be buying low-speed LD equipment anymore. They may not be running LD trains at all. They may have new requirements for various reasons. There may be a new design somewhere else in the world that's clearly superior to the Viewliner and that they can incorporate elements from. Or there may not be a builder that can even build a custom design like that. I also think it's probably not that likely that the basic Viewliner design will withstand what by then will be about 40 years worth of use without the need for some basic design modifications.

We still haven't even seen these new Viewliners; we don't know if they'll look exactly the same. What I've read just suggests they're "basically" the same (I can't remember the exact wording, but it was something like that). But maybe they won't have fluted sides, or maybe the edges will be rounded off, I mean I don't think they're using the exact same blueprints.

The really famous old streamliners really were bought in full sets, usually with an extra set or two for protection. Lesser streamliners used more "off the shelf" cars but they were purchased with such regularity that the basic design didn't change much from car to car, even if they were purchased at different times. But Amtrak just doesn't buy often enough for that to really be the case.



> In my field of computers, it's the exact same reason why an Asus ATX motherboard will work with a case made by Alienware with the ATX form factor, or why a Sandisk USB stick will work with an HP computer.


Well there are standards, I mean an Amfleet car matches up with a Viewliner in the same way an Asus motherboard will fit into an Alienware case. They just don't look the same, is all.



> I don't think (hope) Eastern trains will (won't) remain the hodge podge for much longer. I'm holding out hope that after/part way through this initial order of 130, Amtrak will begin seriously looking at Viewliner coaches and lounges


There's just no money. They're sort of ramming this order through as it is. I personally think this might end up being Amtrak's last-ever LD car order. They'll stretch the Amfleet cars another 30 years (really beyond their lifespan, but they've done that with the heritage stuff now), and by then the whole system will just seem so ridiculously antiquated that it'll hopefully be replaced by HSR... though probably not with a fully national network.


----------



## battalion51 (Jul 28, 2010)

As excited as I am for the new order I do have to say some of the hodgepodgeness is actually kind of neat if you think about it. When you're sitting in the Dining car that's been around for 50 years, think about the thousands of people that have sat in the same seat and looked out that window and watched the country pass by. There's so much history in the cars, and all of the things that have happened in them (the "if these walls could talk" theory). They need to be in museums now, but in the mean time you're in a rolling museum.


----------



## jphjaxfl (Jul 29, 2010)

The Burlington Route Zepyrs were streamliners that were ordered as whole trains specific to the route and type of trains they were (long distance overnight, shorter distance day). There were as many as 18 daily Zephyrs at one time on the CB&Q/C&S/FW&D routes. The trains generally ran as complete consists until around 1960 when some trains were discontinued and the cars added to other trains or ran in second sections in heavy periods. The new Denver Zephyr was the last of these complete streamliners in 1957.


----------



## NE933 (Jul 29, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> There's just no money. They're sort of ramming this order through as it is. I personally think this might end up being Amtrak's last-ever LD car order. They'll stretch the Amfleet cars another 30 years (really beyond their lifespan, but they've done that with the heritage stuff now), and by then the whole system will just seem so ridiculously antiquated that it'll hopefully be replaced by HSR... though probably not with a fully national network.


If ramming it in through out every-which-way is the only choice left, you do it, and do it with noise, charging forward to declare you refuse to die and give up. Sort of what a person would do if they were drowning, and it's become quite apparent the present fleet has vulnerable spots that would jeapardize an entire route or region. Amtrak did well by ordering the damned Viewliners, and let Congress pick up the tab. Their tabs have paid for unneeded wars, hookers, and confessions by lobbyists who in turn use our health insurance premiums to ram through a drug that may not be as harmless as the endless TV ads say.

A homeless person on the verge of starving is not committing a crime when he steals his first loaf of bread to feed himself, a drowning person is not doing any wrong when his or her shouts for help interupts the neighbors pod cast of the World Series, and Amtrak is not acting improper while buying new cars that shall replace 20 year overdue relics that are beloved, but can no longer stand up to the rigors of running thousands of miles a week. Anything else is courting failure.


----------



## Donctor (Jul 29, 2010)

battalion51 said:


> They need to be in museums now, but in the mean time you're in a rolling museum.


When they're not bad-ordered, that is.

I believe there are 24 active Heritage diners. Only 15 are required daily.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 29, 2010)

I have to wonder how hard Amtrak tried with the Heritage diners. Somehow VIA has been able to take cars of the same vintage, and restore them and maintain them to a very high standard for both operations and passenger comfort. Shiny new cars are great, but imagine for a moment Amtrak doing an in-depth restoration of the existing diner fleet (a real restoration, not the typical Amtrak "lipstick on pig" restoration), and then taking the savings and using the money for more sleepers or, dare I suggest, a proper single-level lounge.

File this under "wishful thinking."

VIA diner


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 29, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> I have to wonder how hard Amtrak tried with the Heritage diners. Somehow VIA has been able to take cars of the same vintage, and restore them and maintain them to a very high standard for both operations and passenger comfort. Shiny new cars are great, but imagine for a moment Amtrak doing an in-depth restoration of the existing diner fleet (a real restoration, not the typical Amtrak "lipstick on pig" restoration), and then taking the savings and using the money for more sleepers or, dare I suggest, a proper single-level lounge.
> 
> File this under "wishful thinking."
> 
> VIA diner


Some of these cars are almost as old as me (and that's old!) It's time to send them to the museums where they belong.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jul 29, 2010)

MikefromCrete said:


> Some of these cars are almost as old as me (and that's old!) It's time to send them to the museums where they belong.


I agree that the cars are old, and the Amtrak cars are wrecks, but my point is that VIA is using cars just as old, and those cars are in great shape. The difference is that VIA's restorations were real restorations that produced modern cars in an old shell. The VIA cars are also maintained meticulously. The same basic equipment provides first class cars for first class dining on VIA, and a junk cars for OK dining on Amtrak.

Amtrak has always loved buying new stuff and, better yet, new stuff that they have to design from scratch and no one else buys. Restorations are not as "sexy" and do not create as many jobs (important for political considerations). So, regardless of the economics, buying new is more attractive to Amtrak than fixing old. But, it certainly could be done and, if the result was anything like the VIA diners, how great would that be?


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 29, 2010)

NE933 said:


> If ramming it in through out every-which-way is the only choice left, you do it, and do it with noise, charging forward to declare you refuse to die and give up.


I don't disagree, but realistically, Amtrak usually doesn't even have a chance to ram an order through like this. From what I understand, they're able to do it this time with existing money (for the down payment; they're worrying about the rest later), because they got a *little* bit more of an appropriation this year than they usually do. It wasn't intended to pay for new cars but that's what they're going to use it for.

Usually they have barely enough money to even stay afloat, much less even make so much as a down payment on new cars. I mean usually the question is something like "do we repair this bridge that's in danger of falling into the river, or do we buy some new cars?" And the answer is pretty obvious.



MikefromCrete said:


> Some of these cars are almost as old as me (and that's old!) It's time to send them to the museums where they belong.


Delta is still flying DC-9's that aren't much younger


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jul 30, 2010)

Donctor said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > They need to be in museums now, but in the mean time you're in a rolling museum.
> ...


There are technically 19 cars still on the roster, 17 of them are actually roadworthy, 16 of which are required for service. Amtrak has a spare diner in NY, and if any of them fail in Chicago, Hialeah, or New Orleans, the train gets sent out without one. If two fail in New York, trains get sent out without them.



PRR 60 said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> > Some of these cars are almost as old as me (and that's old!) It's time to send them to the museums where they belong.
> ...


Bill, you know not of what you speak. VIA Rail operates two trains that require diners, and neither of those trains operate daily. Amtrak has been running the guts out of those cars. As I noted above, essentially all of the cars are on the road. They are having the wheels rolled off of them. It would not surprise me at all to know that the mileage on the Amtrak cars was double the VIA cars. Actually, yes it would. I would be surprised if it was only double.

Its not just the age that are killing them. Its use. According to a friend of mine that works in Sunnyside, what remains of the once proud Heritage fleet suffers from one truly major and insurmountable problem- metal fatigue. Its not the trucks, nor the wiring, nor the interiors, nor the equipment. Its the cars basic shell that is wearing out. They are breaking apart. It would be more expensive to preserve these cars then to build new ones.

It would be like taking what remains of the third Bugatti Atlantic and "restoring it". It was hit by a train shortly after it was built. Restoring it would be taking the original front chassis rail, unbending it, and rebuilding one around it. It was actually the first car, the prototype, and it's body was built out of magnesium. The train caught fire on impact. Need I say more?

Rebuilding the heritage cars would be a similar effort.


----------



## Donctor (Jul 30, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Donctor said:
> 
> 
> > battalion51 said:
> ...


Ah, thanks for the correction.

How are 16 required for service? Crescent = 4, Meteor = 4, Star = 4, Lake Shore = 3, no?


----------



## SunsetLimited01 (Jul 30, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Donctor said:
> 
> 
> > battalion51 said:
> ...


All of that might be true, but it doesn't stop anyone from doing it anyway.


----------



## jis (Jul 30, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> I have to wonder how hard Amtrak tried with the Heritage diners. Somehow VIA has been able to take cars of the same vintage, and restore them and maintain them to a very high standard for both operations and passenger comfort.


The CP Budd cars are some 10 years younger than the Amtrak Heritage fleet cars, and in general the rate at which VIA runs up miles on them is nothing like what Amtrak does. Afterall, more than a third of their Budd fleet sits around doing nothing in the off season.

The other thing going for VIA's Budd fleet is they were from a single owner (mostly) which makes it s single uniform fleet. Even those that VIA acquired from others, were essentially converted to the same equivalent standard at significant cost. OTOH Amtrak got a mish-mash of stuff from many owners and multiple manufacturers, and generally in poorer condition than the CP Budd fleet when VIA got it.

BTW, having met many railfans in many countries, I find that it is a peculiar North American phenomenon to want to keep fixing up old equipment for premium mainline service. Of course everyone loves to restore stuff and run them on special heritage service. But I have not generally come across railfans in other countries who keep insisting that 50 year old stuff be fixed and put back to general use. Indeed many vocally criticize their railways when they try to do anything remotely like that.


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 30, 2010)

jis said:


> But I have not generally come across railfans in other countries who keep insisting that 50 year old stuff be fixed and put back to general use. Indeed many vocally criticize their railways when they try to do anything remotely like that.


I think that's a testament to how well built and designed the old Budd and Pullman cars were, though (I'm not sure about ACF; I've heard mixed things about maintenance on those cars). I've ridden in old trains in other countries and they just don't really compare.

You know, we were the world leader in rail travel up until about the late 1950's. And with the exception of speed, no other country has ever really equaled that standard of travel since then either (and neither have we). So I think there are perfectly rational reasons for wanting to preserve some vestige of that, especially in the absence of any better alternative. (Even for me, as a fan of heritage equipment, if the options were a) preserve the heritage fleet, or b) have a new, state of the art HSR system, I'd opt for the latter. But that's not the choice. The choice is between preserving old cars and buying new cars that do basically the same things, from a customer perspective.)

I like the Viewliners and I'm sure I will like the new cars, whatever they're actually called (and I read the press release again, it just says they're "similar" to the Viewliners). But those old heritage cars had real personality, which is one thing Amtrak has purposefully stripped out of all of their newer cars.

By the way, other countries do try to preserve modes of travel that they have led in. Look at England and the QE2, which is what, 50 years old now and still sailing? And they just recently produced the QM2, which is another true ocean liner (as opposed to a cruise ship, meaning it is designed for actual transport). This is also an outmoded form of travel, but they refuse to let it go, and they've proven that these ships can still be profitable regardless of how "obsolete" traveling by boat is seen by the rest of the world.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 30, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> You know, we were the world leader in rail travel up until about the late 1950's. And with the exception of speed, no other country has ever really equaled that standard of travel since then either (and neither have we).


Amazing, isn't it? In a country that has far fewer vacation days than many other industrialized nations, speed _is_ luxury, but most of our trains can't even give us that. Amtrak itself is admired more for what it is than what it does, and that's the problem. We used to be a leader in many areas of transportation technology and service. Now we're a has-been superpower blindly following our former sister-power into a budget-busting attempt to control Afghanistan.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Jul 30, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> By the way, other countries do try to preserve modes of travel that they have led in. Look at England and the QE2, which is what, 50 years old now and still sailing? And they just recently produced the QM2, which is another true ocean liner (as opposed to a cruise ship, meaning it is designed for actual transport). This is also an outmoded form of travel, but they refuse to let it go, and they've proven that these ships can still be profitable regardless of how "obsolete" traveling by boat is seen by the rest of the world.


The QE2 was retired over two years ago and has been rotting away in Dubai.

There is a new Queen Elisabeth II but its only 2 years old, built in Italy


----------



## Ryan (Jul 30, 2010)

Wrong again, Dutch. The new ship is the Queen Elizabeth (no "2" or "II") and Cunard hasn't taken delivery yet.


----------



## jis (Jul 30, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> You know, we were the world leader in rail travel up until about the late 1950's. And with the exception of speed, no other country has ever really equaled that standard of travel since then either (and neither have we). So I think there are perfectly rational reasons for wanting to preserve some vestige of that, especially in the absence of any better alternative. (Even for me, as a fan of heritage equipment, if the options were a) preserve the heritage fleet, or b) have a new, state of the art HSR system, I'd opt for the latter. But that's not the choice.


That is a good point.



> I like the Viewliners and I'm sure I will like the new cars, whatever they're actually called (and I read the press release again, it just says they're "similar" to the Viewliners). But those old heritage cars had real personality, which is one thing Amtrak has purposefully stripped out of all of their newer cars.


One of the cornerstones of quality operation is reduction in variation or deviation from standard, whatever is set as such. This inevitably leads to reduction of individual personality of any given piece of equipment. I don;t think that is going to change anytime soon unless someone can find gobs of money to maintain said personalities.



> By the way, other countries do try to preserve modes of travel that they have led in. Look at England and the QE2, which is what, 50 years old now and still sailing? And they just recently produced the QM2, which is another true ocean liner (as opposed to a cruise ship, meaning it is designed for actual transport). This is also an outmoded form of travel, but they refuse to let it go, and they've proven that these ships can still be profitable regardless of how "obsolete" traveling by boat is seen by the rest of the world.


That ships like QM2 are profitable as basic transport is highly questionable. At best they are curiosities and give bragging rights. Some like to spend money on such things. On the other hand the Cruise business is quite profitable, but that is not basic transportation. Ships are profitable as basic transport in areas where they make sense like the coastal steamer service in Norway. but no one in their right mind tries to use the likes of QM2 for that.

Oh well, and meanwhile our friends across the Pacific are on track to introduce HSR from Beijing to Urumqui over 2100 miles distance to be scheduled start to stop for 12 hours running time!


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 30, 2010)

Dutchrailnut said:


> The QE2 was retired over two years ago and has been rotting away in Dubai.
> 
> There is a new Queen Elisabeth II but its only 2 years old, built in Italy


Woops, well I could have made basically the same point just referencing the QM2, which is an attempt to provide passengers with the same level of service that they've always been used to in ocean liners. If we were still building new train cars that were *just like* the old Budd- or Pullman-built cars, but more modern and with extra conveniences, then I think you wouldn't see people complaining about retiring the heritage equipment. But what Amtrak is doing instead is building new cars designed to be completely utilitarian. Which is understandable - they're a government agency - but this is why some of us are trying to preserve what's otherwise been lost.


----------



## MrFSS (Jul 30, 2010)

jis said:


> Oh well, and meanwhile our friends across the Pacific are on track to introduce HSR from Beijing to Urumqui over 2100 miles distance to be scheduled start to stop for 12 hours running time!


Jis - do you have any idea what type amenities that train set will have? Sleepers (if they ran an overnight trip) - full meal service, etc.


----------



## jis (Jul 30, 2010)

MrFSS said:


> Jis - do you have any idea what type amenities that train set will have? Sleepers (if they ran an overnight trip) - full meal service, etc.


Haven't heard anything specific. All that I have heard is that they will be Siemens Valero knockoffs manufactured in China under license, with max speed of 350kph (217mph).

But just imagine..... New York to Chicago in 5 hours. A stopping train might take 6.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Jul 30, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.
> 
> I realize it's far too early to answer this, I'm just wondering out loud.


The effective way to make everyone happy would be to have four roomettes with toilets and eight without (or maybe 6 and 6) in every single level sleeping car, and give people who are booking a sleeping car compartment three types of compartments to choose from instead of just two.

(And unless they figure out how to put a 6' 6" long berth in the bedrooms, not everyone who wants a private toilet can comfortably upgrade to a bedroom.)

Also, I've gotten wondering how wide a coach seat in a Viewliner Coach would be compared to a coach seat in an Amfleet. How wide is the interior of a Viewliner vs an Amfleet, and how wide is the aisle in an Amfleet vs in Acela Business Class?


----------



## spacecadet (Jul 30, 2010)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Also, I've gotten wondering how wide a coach seat in a Viewliner Coach would be compared to a coach seat in an Amfleet. How wide is the interior of a Viewliner vs an Amfleet, and how wide is the aisle in an Amfleet vs in Acela Business Class?


From what I've found, the Viewliners and Amfleet cars are both 10 1/2 feet wide, and both have a bulge at the side (the purpose of which seems to be to make it feel like there's more room). The Viewliners are taller, though. You could put the luggage rack - or airliner-style overhead bins - higher up in a Viewliner, and it'd feel like there was more room than in an Amfleet car.

I don't know anything about aisle width...


----------



## gaspeamtrak (Jul 30, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Donctor said:
> 
> 
> > battalion51 said:
> ...



I hate to say it but I have to agree with the Lion!!!


----------



## gaspeamtrak (Jul 30, 2010)

spacecadet said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > But I have not generally come across railfans in other countries who keep insisting that 50 year old stuff be fixed and put back to general use. Indeed many vocally criticize their railways when they try to do anything remotely like that.
> ...


Sorry the QE2 has been retired for a year or two... But a new QE3 which is coming out in October! 

Check out Cunards website! www.cunard.com


----------



## gaspeamtrak (Jul 30, 2010)

Dutchrailnut said:


> spacecadet said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, other countries do try to preserve modes of travel that they have led in. Look at England and the QE2, which is what, 50 years old now and still sailing? And they just recently produced the QM2, which is another true ocean liner (as opposed to a cruise ship, meaning it is designed for actual transport). This is also an outmoded form of travel, but they refuse to let it go, and they've proven that these ships can still be profitable regardless of how "obsolete" traveling by boat is seen by the rest of the world.
> ...



I think you mean the Queen Victoria!!


----------



## AlanB (Jul 31, 2010)

daveyb99 said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > Rumor has it that the design is very similar to the current Viewliners but the sinks and toilets have been removed from the roomettes.
> ...


Unless the plans have been changed recently, it's not a rumor.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 31, 2010)

PetalumaLoco said:


> spacecadet said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if there's going to be any way to differentiate these when booking a train, if the new ones don't have toilets in-room. I imagine some people don't like the toilets but others do, and if there's one car of each type on a train, I just wonder if you'll be able to book a room with a toilet or without.
> ...


I'm not sure that Amtrak will do this, but they may well confine the new cars to certain trains, that way you'd know by booking say the LSL, that you'd be getting a car without the toilet in the roomette.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 31, 2010)

battalion51 said:


> The only true non-revenue things in a consist are a locomotive (obviously a necessity), baggage car, and dorm car. The Diners typically do not make much money since their primary customer is sleeping car passengers who have their meals included. There is a small amount of revenue produced by sales of alcohol and sales to coach passengers. Overall I would argue that the lounge produces more revenue and lower direct expenses since it only takes one man to work it, more hours available to make sales, and everyone has to pay regardless of class of service. Granted the lounges are probably losing money overall, but its a necessity to remain competitive in the marketplace.


As noted by another, the baggage cars do produce revenue both from those who bring more bags than they can bring for free and from Express Shipping.

Regarding the dining cars, Amtrak allocates revenue from the sleepers to the dining car making it a much bigger source of revenue than you give it credit for. In fact, back when Congress forced Amtrak to cut food service losses, I saw a few stories that suggested that the biggest loosers for Amtrak were the cafe cars. Although it seemed to be that it was the short haul cafe cars that lost the most money. But it certainly wasn't the dining cars that were losing the most money.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Jul 31, 2010)

gaspeamtrak said:


> I think you mean the Queen Victoria!!




Your right Cunard(Carnaval)currently have Queen Victoria, Queen Mary and Queen Elisabeth is under construction in Marghera Italy at Financieri.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jul 31, 2010)

The Queen Mary 2 was one of several shots fired from the phalli of several major cruise operators in a pissing contest to see how grand a ship they could build. The Queen Mary 2, by my estimation, wins the contest hands down. Why? It is engineered to be an ocean liner. It is built like an ocean liner, a real ship. Not a modular floating hotel that really has a very limited ability to deal with rough seas.

Do not get caught on a modern cruise ship on the open sea in a big storm. Veteran sea dogs are known to get very bad cases of _mal de mare_. Actually, they don't sail on "repositioning cruises" if there is particularly bad weather forecast. Their ability to stay afloat in heavy north Atlantic weather is questionable, to say the least. They are top heavy, built for providing luxury cruising on the very calm Caribbean, Pacific, and Alaskan waters. Most certainly not on hell's own fury riding the Labrador.

The Queen Mary 2 is not a cruise ship. It is an ocean liner, built for braving heavy sea. While Cunard would most likely cancel a trans-atlantic cruise going into particularly bad weather, the QM2 could probably survive a class 4 hurricane. (Not that the passengers would enjoy it much.) I once believed that the QE2 would always be the last of the breed. But it is not so. The last of the breed, most definitely, is the Queen Mary 2. The likes of it will not pass this way again. Like New York Penn Station, or Grand Central Terminal, or Frank R. Lautenberg Secaucus Junction, it is a monument to the egos of the people who commissioned their building.

The other two long-surviving ocean liners, the SS United States, and the SS France, will never be recomissioned. Actually, the SS France was scrapped recently.


----------



## Rob_C (Aug 2, 2010)

All the liners of the "Queen" Line look to be ocean liners. Is the sea-worthiness not true of the new QE or the QV?

Getting back on topic...

I have a few design suggestions for Amtrak, in no particular order-

Design for the Viewliner Baggage Car:







Design for the much-needed Viewliner Sightseer Lounge!:






Hey we can dream, right? 

Rob


----------



## PerRock (Aug 2, 2010)

I came up with a few designs myself as well. Click on the smaller pics for a large view!

Dome-Lounge:




















Dorm-Bag:









Bag:










peter


----------



## PerRock (Aug 2, 2010)

Continued:

And a few other Dome designs that I didn't really like the out come of:









peter


----------



## Rob_C (Aug 2, 2010)

I think the biggest problem I'm seeing with all the Sightseer Viewliner concepts including mine is just plain lack of space. Unless you take out the food service and put that in another car, it's just not gonna feel as roomy as the Superliner and accommodate as many people. And you can't relocate the food service of course. Cool concepts all around!

Rob


----------



## NE933 (Aug 2, 2010)

Nice ideas for the lounge! I'm thinking that the way-on-the-bottom windows would probably have to come off for safety (should it derail and roll over, ballast and debris would likely enter the car through them) and also because a window at floor level would not contribute as much to an open feel in the car as does the ceiling windows. Other than that it's a great design, along with the baggage and the dorms. I hope someone from Amtrak sees this and is inspired to throw in 25 of these into the next order.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Aug 2, 2010)

I will be the first to admit having a "bashful" kidney but I really enjoyed the toilets in the Viewliner rooms. I'm all for rolling out of bed, quietly and quickly using the toilet and climbing right back into bed and going back to sleep. Sometimes if I get up and walk down a train hallway to use the bathroom, by the time I'm done in the middle of the night, I'm fully awake and its harder to get back to sleep.


----------



## PerRock (Aug 2, 2010)

NE933 said:


> Nice ideas for the lounge! I'm thinking that the way-on-the-bottom windows would probably have to come off for safety (should it derail and roll over, ballast and debris would likely enter the car through them) and also because a window at floor level would not contribute as much to an open feel in the car as does the ceiling windows. Other than that it's a great design, along with the baggage and the dorms. I hope someone from Amtrak sees this and is inspired to throw in 25 of these into the next order.


Oh I should have mentioned; the "final" plan (the one with the 3d models) for the lounge I came up with would be a double decker. Although I admit I'm not an engineer or architect so I don't know it if would actually physically work. The upper level is all 'scenic' seating (like the sightseer); and the lower level contains the food-service section. If you look at the little floor plan I came up with the one side has the counter for ordering food as well as a stand-up eating area (like what is seen on a lot of European trains) the other side of the car would have your CCC half-dome tables, one could make the stand up area more like a bar similar to the Cascades cafe. And then the far end of the car (on the middle level) has your standard tables.

Again I'm no engineer of architect (just a graphic designer) so I really don't know if that would work. However If someone had technical drawings of a viewliner I'd love to look them over and compair them to the Budd vista-domes.

peter


----------



## NE933 (Aug 2, 2010)

PerRock said:


> Oh I should have mentioned; the "final" plan (the one with the 3d models) for the lounge I came up with would be a double decker. Although I admit I'm not an engineer or architect so I don't know it if would actually physically work. The upper level is all 'scenic' seating (like the sightseer); and the lower level contains the food-service section. If you look at the little floor plan I came up with the one side has the counter for ordering food as well as a stand-up eating area (like what is seen on a lot of European trains) the other side of the car would have your CCC half-dome tables, one could make the stand up area more like a bar similar to the Cascades cafe. And then the far end of the car (on the middle level) has your standard tables.
> 
> peter


Well, I'm thinking that the obvious big challenge with a double decker concept is, of course, the height restrictions of Penn Stations and tunnels to/fro, yet NJT has a design that conquered that. The reason why their design works is that the ends of the so-called 'multi-level' fleet have the corners "shaved" off, so that as part of the cars' overhang, they won't scrape or knock into anything. The double-decker part is concentrated in the center, which your design does, so that might be workable. And there's no reason why we can't have a snack food section. There's more room in your design to store supplies, i.e. an upstairs and downstairs. I would consider not putting in any restrooms because the this car design would preclude any room for sewage tanks and such. As for interiors perhaps three different seating arrangements: the standard booth on one end, a window facing thingy in the center sightseer part, and a sort of European-style round tabled cafe at the other end, to give that section a sort of club-by feel. It would not be like the failed Acela-bistro design. My only worry that might prove insurrmountable is that it may not be able to comply with ADA, because the only way anyone can move from one end of the car to the other would be stairs.


----------



## PerRock (Aug 2, 2010)

NE933 said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> > Oh I should have mentioned; the "final" plan (the one with the 3d models) for the lounge I came up with would be a double decker. Although I admit I'm not an engineer or architect so I don't know it if would actually physically work. The upper level is all 'scenic' seating (like the sightseer); and the lower level contains the food-service section. If you look at the little floor plan I came up with the one side has the counter for ordering food as well as a stand-up eating area (like what is seen on a lot of European trains) the other side of the car would have your CCC half-dome tables, one could make the stand up area more like a bar similar to the Cascades cafe. And then the far end of the car (on the middle level) has your standard tables.
> ...


Actually the height would be the same as a regular viewliner. The added height comes by dropping the floor in the middle instead of raising the roof. as for ADA compliant I was thinking one would be able to have ramps instead of stairs; one might be able to fit an elevator in there as will (ooh could be the 1st train car with a wheelchair elevator)

peter


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 2, 2010)

The Queens Victoria and Elizabeth [3] are not ocean liners, they are, structurally and basic design, Carnival Vista-class cruisers. The Vista-Class is a class of large ocean liners about 950 feet long. There are several varients on the design, but they are all basically the same design. The fleet includes:

Holland America Line: MS Zuiderdam, MS Oosterdam, MS Westerdam, MS Noordam, MS Eurodam, MS Nieuw Amsterdam*

P&O Cruises: MS Arcadia

Costa Cruises: Costa Luminosa, Costa Deliziosa

Cunard: Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth.

*I have this feeling HAL has run out of cities to name its ships after, but people who sail HAL do seem to think of them as "the dam ships." Silliness for perpetuation of a pun.

They are modularly built, and are intended to be cruise ships. While, like any large ship, they can cross the ocean, it is not their intended purpose, and they are not good at it.

Anyway, the Viewliner designs submitted are interesting, but unrealistic. Peter, take a shot at designing one on the basis that the basic car shell must remain the same.


----------



## NE933 (Aug 2, 2010)

But his designs do that already, using the present shell, that is. Only difference is the upper windows can be identical to the Superliner sightseer lounge, and the lower floor will displace some holding tanks. I'm thinking Amtrak can come up with an unprecedented and wild advertising campaign for all it's long distance trains using this Viewliner design, or something close to it. Where else can one boogie to some dance music, smooch under the moon and stars, or just relax with your arms stretched over your head while flying on the ground to New Orleans or Florida or Chicago? Getting creative with low cost LED lighting and interior design can produce a 'killer' lounge car that will have passengers getting on just for the trip.


----------



## MattW (Aug 2, 2010)

Except it's not. Because of the sunken floor, you have to majorly modify the shell and possibly the frame. This creates a unique car even if it is a "Viewliner" that has more differences to the other Viewliners. For a lounge, one with just windows overhead makes more sense because it does modify the shell, but the overall shape doesn't change that much. However, it still modifies the structural soundness of the car so if we do see VII Lounges, they probably won't have overhead or wrap-around windows.


----------



## spacecadet (Aug 2, 2010)

PerRock said:


> Actually the height would be the same as a regular viewliner. The added height comes by dropping the floor in the middle instead of raising the roof.


That won't work. I'm not sure of the exact heights but both the LIRR's C3's and NJT's bi-level cars are noticeably taller than the Viewliners, and you're still in bump-your-head territory even with a sunken floor. Trying to do that with the height of a Viewliner would probably leave you with about 4 feet of standing space on each level, once you take into account the actual structure required and the clearance required above the track.

I think Amtrak could incorporate elements from both the Viewliner and the LIRR/NJT cars into a new east coast dome car. But it wouldn't be strictly a Viewliner, it would be a real dome car, with a sunken section and a bubble on top (just a shorter bubble than earlier domes). Actually there *were* a few dome cars built that could fit within east coast clearances - not sure if there are any photos on the net but I have the "Domeliners" book and there are a couple in there. They look a little weird but they are definitely better than a standard lounge or even a standard Viewliner. So this is definitely possible. But you would need to make a taller car than a regular Viewliner and have it be two levels.

We're just dreaming now, though; I can't see Amtrak spending the money required for this.


----------



## Chris J. (Aug 2, 2010)

MattW said:


> Except it's not. Because of the sunken floor, you have to majorly modify the shell and possibly the frame. This creates a unique car even if it is a "Viewliner" that has more differences to the other Viewliners. For a lounge, one with just windows overhead makes more sense because it does modify the shell, but the overall shape doesn't change that much. However, it still modifies the structural soundness of the car so if we do see VII Lounges, they probably won't have overhead or wrap-around windows.


Does it modify the structure more than a Superliner Lounge does compared to a Superliner sleeper/diner/coach? I know they're not modular like the Viewliners but I'd expect the all the Superliners to have the same basic structure.

Won't they'll need different body configurations for the sleeper, diner, baggage and bag/dorm cars anyway? It's not like you can convert a baggage car to a diner; unless you want to eat in the dark!


----------



## Ryan (Aug 2, 2010)

Yes, all Superliners have the same basic structure.

Making a Viewliner into a dual level car would require a complete redesign and the result would end up looking nothing like a Viewliner.


----------



## Trogdor (Aug 2, 2010)

What you're proposing is really a lot like the old dome cars, which had a lowered floor for lower-level stuff, and an upper-level area for lounging/viewing. Amtrak's 10031 is a lot like this. It is also taller than a Viewliner, and can't operate to/from NYP for that reason.


----------



## Rob_C (Aug 2, 2010)

I dunno, I think my model is a pretty good compromise. It's single level, uses a viewliner body and would be structurally sound because the windows don't wrap around, but would give you a very airy and open feel from the inside. I just finished the other side, plenty of room for the food service and a reasonable amount left for just lounging.







If Amtrak does do lounges in the next order, they would most-probably do it on the cheap. That's why my money is on a simple reconfiguration like the above. 

Rob


----------



## NE933 (Aug 2, 2010)

Rob_C said:


> I dunno, I think my model is a pretty good compromise. It's single level, uses a viewliner body and would be structurally sound because the windows don't wrap around, but would give you a very airy and open feel from the inside.Rob


It's nice, but (and i hope you won't think i'm bashing your design or feel like i'm picking hairs} there are too many small, Amfleet I windows. In such a spacious area it would sort of look like many small holes. As i read the excellent engineering postings behind ours, i see why the dual level design would require a complete redesign, and the same goes for my idea of Superliner sightseer sized windows. Going purely by instinct and the way the angles look, there is a structural beam that runs in between the present Viewliners' top and bottom windows. A Superliner sized window looks great, but it would bisect the continuity of this horizontal beam and create an unacceptable compromise on the strength of the car should it roll over or hit something. So any window between the widest point in the mid section, and this beam, would have to fit in without breaking the line. Perhaps an Acela sized window can do it, as it's smaller than a Superliner sightseer yet bigger than Amfleet II sized bottom Viewliner windows. The next riddle stems from the upper Amfleet I sized windows and the roof of the car. If there is another horizontal beam in between the two, then the only thing that will work within present structure is another Amfleet II sized window.

Whatever perceptual benefit from putting Amfleet I windows on the roof i think wouldn't be worth it. I would try to see if engineering can do re-do, to move the possible roof beam, a few feet over to accomodate a 'wrap-style' window that is used in the roofs of the Superliner sightseers. In any event there is anecdotal stories that in the mid 80's, Amtrak had a "spectacular" design for a Viewliner lounge; i think it would be a good idea to get those blue prints out and dust them off to see what they came up with.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 3, 2010)

Chris J. said:


> Does it modify the structure more than a Superliner Lounge does compared to a Superliner sleeper/diner/coach? I know they're not modular like the Viewliners but I'd expect the all the Superliners to have the same basic structure.
> 
> Won't they'll need different body configurations for the sleeper, diner, baggage and bag/dorm cars anyway? It's not like you can convert a baggage car to a diner; unless you want to eat in the dark!


The Superliners were designed from day one to include wraparound windows in their roof. The Viewliners were not.

The Viewliners were designed under the ever pragmatic (although increasingly senile) W. Graham Claytor. They were designed to use as many standard Amfleet parts as possible to minimize parts costs- of course, when they were actually built a lot of that never carried over.

Structurally speaking, every single Amfleet I is the same. BC, cafe, coach, whatever. All the same. Same structure as the Metroliners, actually. Completely interchangeable. All cars of the Amfleet I fleet have cut outs in the structure for 18 windows. On the Cafe cars, 4 of them are covered over on the exterior shell. A few of them, you can actually see the cut outs.

Structurally speaking, the Bag-dorms, sleepers, as well as any lounges and coaches, would be the same for the Viewliner. They would just have different window cut outs. The Diner, I am not so sure. I don't know if it will have a vestibule.


----------



## dlagrua (Aug 4, 2010)

I just wonder how things will turn out with a completely new supplier of Viewliners. The contract awarded to CAF was $90 million less than the bid by Alstom. It is interesting to note that that both Alstom and CAF are French Companies that are located in Hormell NY and Elmira Heights NY. respectively.

There is a guy on the Railroad.net forum that works for CAF and has been posting good info. The plant in Elmira Hts is almost 500,000 sq ft so its big enough to do the job but the 2 mile rail siding that led to the plant was abandoned by Norfork Southern in late 2009. There is a main line on the other side of the street from the CAF plant but its on a sharp curve so to ship the new Viewliners will mean refurbishing the siding, trucking the rail cars out or dollying them across the street to the mainline.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> I just wonder how things will turn out with a completely new supplier of Viewliners. The contract awarded to CAF was $90 million less than the bid by Alstom. It is interesting to note that that both Alstom and CAF are French Companies that are located in Hormell NY and Elmira Heights NY. respectively.


CAF stands for Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles. It is not a French company. It is a Spanish company.

The Alstom factory is in Hornell NY. Hormel is a food company known for the soups that it produces.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 4, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Structurally speaking, the Bag-dorms, sleepers, as well as any lounges and coaches, would be the same for the Viewliner. They would just have different window cut outs. The Diner, I am not so sure. I don't know if it will have a vestibule.


Unless the plans are changed, the diners will not have end vestibules. The plans did include two access doors, one on either side just where the kitchen ends and the LSA has their workstation, to allow for emergency egress.


----------



## printman2000 (Aug 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Structurally speaking, the Bag-dorms, sleepers, as well as any lounges and coaches, would be the same for the Viewliner. They would just have different window cut outs. The Diner, I am not so sure. I don't know if it will have a vestibule.
> ...


And, I assume, for loading food and supplies.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 4, 2010)

printman2000 said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


Yup.


----------



## dlagrua (Aug 4, 2010)

jis said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > I just wonder how things will turn out with a completely new supplier of Viewliners. The contract awarded to CAF was $90 million less than the bid by Alstom. It is interesting to note that that both Alstom and CAF are French Companies that are located in Hormell NY and Elmira Heights NY. respectively.
> ...



I stand corrected on both counts. So from French Viewliners we will now have Spanish Viewliners. I wish that we still had Pullman and Budd American made passenger cars but we were quick to put those companies out of business. At least they are made here and will create some American jobs. I predict that as soon as the new Viewliners are put into service Amtrak ridership will increase more than at the current levels. Everyone should appreciate riding/sleeping in a fresh new smooth riding train- at long last!!!.


----------



## NE933 (Apr 23, 2013)

Is the buzz about 3 or 4 almost (open to interpretation) ready to go to Pueblo, Colorado testing center true?


----------



## Steve4031 (May 2, 2013)

When will we start to see some new diners and sleepers?


----------



## PRR 60 (May 2, 2013)

Steve4031 said:


> When will we start to see some new diners and sleepers?


As best I know, the first cars will be released for testing this summer. The first cars will enter revenue service sometime in 2014.


----------



## the_traveler (May 2, 2013)

I heard some cars may be in service by Thankgiving. But you know the Government, that could mean Thankgiving 2168!


----------



## zephyr17 (May 2, 2013)

the_traveler said:


> I heard some cars may be in service by Thankgiving. But you know the Government, that could mean Thankgiving 2168!


That's not too bad, Thanksgiving 2168 will still beat CA HSR ^_^


----------

