# Superliner trains in Penn Station



## TheEmpireBuilder (Nov 14, 2015)

I know that superliner trains have low doors, but penn station and trains around there (NEC) mainly use high platforms, therefore, mainly Amfleet/Viewliner cars are there. It's too bad that Superliner service can't make its way to the NEC/East Coast. If Amtrak finds a way to make this possible, that would open a whole new window of possibilities! (Double decker coach, sleeper)


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 14, 2015)

I was recently on a bi-level train on NJ Transit into New York's Penn Station.


----------



## TheEmpireBuilder (Nov 14, 2015)

Yeah, those are cool. But, those bi-levels support high platforms; they board on one level then they split into a lower and upper level. On the Superliner, you board on the lower level, which has an entrance which is very close to the tracks. (Low platform.) Then it has stairs leading to a second floor. It would be awesome if they had bi-levels on the Amtrak, like the NJ Transit, so they could have high platform support. Unfortunately, I don't think this is likely at all.


----------



## amtkstn (Nov 14, 2015)

NJ Transit and other double deck cars of other rail system have a curved notch on each end for the car to clear. Amtrak Superliners do not have this feature.


----------



## A Voice (Nov 14, 2015)

It's not just a high platform issue. Superliner cars are_ taller_ than the _diameter_ of the Hudson River Tunnels (nor will they fit the B & P tunnel in Baltimore) and there are a few other clearance issues along the Northeast Corridor. The NJT bi-levels are shorter to meet clearance restrictions and would not really be suitable for Amtrak intercity use.

Someday, when there are new tunnels in New York and Maryland and stations (and not just Penn and D.C.) are expanded and upgraded, then maybe the remaining issues such as lack of low platforms and catenary and bridge clearance can be addressed and you might see a practical bi-level car design for the Northeast. But they won't be Superliners; They'll be _well_ past retirement age before all that happens.


----------



## dlagrua (Nov 15, 2015)

Just for info the NJT bi-level trains were designed for the maximum train height of the NEC.. They are considerably lower in height than a Superliner and I believe that they also sit lower to the rails. You can see this in a side to side picture. Double decker trains have been going into Penn Station for years. The LI RR first ran them years ago when the interiors were designed with duplex (High and low) seating accessed from the same aisle. If I am not mistaken the old Amtrak (PRR) duplex slumber coach sleepers may have also gone into Penn Station. These were bi-level cars also accessed from the same aisle. It is possible to build a bi-level sleeper but not in the Superliner arrangement.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Nov 16, 2015)

Honestly I think when they build Gateway they should build it for a higher clearance but chances are they wouldn't as it isn't likely to have Superliners. The other Bilevels are a cross between the PRR Keystone train which ran super close to the rail and a conventional single level car. But it's still taller then a single level car slightly. Really they aren't Bilevels but tri levels. The way they are built by technicality is tri level


----------



## west point (Nov 16, 2015)

There are some first plans / steps already being done.

1. The Gateway bores are being planned with superliner clearance in mind but not plate "H" freight clearance.

2. Penn South is also being planned with those clearances ans well as the east river bores 5 & 6. .

3. Newark Penn , 30th st,, Wilmington, Baltimore Penn, and rest of WASH will need modifications.

4. In real terms look for 40 years for the bigger equipment on the NEC. Not in my lifetime.i


----------



## jis (Nov 16, 2015)

The real issue is that there is very little to be gained by spending the enormous amount of money needed to get Superliners into Penn Station. These cars are already less stable than the single level cars with a tendency to topple over. The effect is even more pronounced when operating above 125mph. So they are really not suitable for HSR operations. Consequently, I would not expect to see any money spent specifically tog et them into Penn Station while many other more dire needs remain unfunded. Don;t expect them into Penn Station anytime before the middle of the century, if ever.

I asked about this at one of the RCLC meetings and was told that the tunnels are bigger diameter mainly to provide better clearance for centenaries, and not specifically for bringing in Superliners. Indeed the catenaries won't be high enough to allow safe operation of Superliners.


----------



## A Voice (Nov 16, 2015)

jis said:


> These cars are already less stable than the single level cars with a tendency to topple over.


I thought Superliners had a lower center-of-gravity than most single level cars (Amfleet, etc.)? Isn't the maximum design speed just 100 mph anyway?


----------



## jis (Nov 16, 2015)

They will be good to 125 also. Things start getting more interesting beyond that. Since the intention on the corridor is to run high speed service using high platforms, the Superliners will continue to be patently unsuitable. There are other multi-level designs that exist which operate successfully upto 200mph that fit on within the NEC loading gauge. So there really no need to bring Superliner sized cars into the mix - except for vanity perhaps.


----------



## neroden (Nov 18, 2015)

jis said:


> \Indeed the catenaries won't be high enough to allow safe operation of Superliners.


Well, in the 50-year timeframe, they can always replace the catenary with solid overhead contact bar. But they're permanently locked into high platforms, so there's no point.

Some bilevel with high-platform boarding might be used, but probably not. The internal stairs in an NJT-style multilevel eat space, and make them worse for wheelchair access. For a commuter rail operation with very tight seat spacing and/or 3-2 or 3-3 seating, they can get more seats in that way. But for an intercity operation with 2-2 seating and wide seat pitch... both vestibules have to be at the "single-level" level, several wheelchair spots and seats have to be at that level, and then you lose several feet of car length to the internal staircases. You lose so much to the internal stairs that you may actually have the same amount of seating as a standard single-level coach has. No advantage. Think of the way dome cars don't actually have more seats than standard coaches..


----------



## frequentflyer (Nov 28, 2015)

A Voice said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > These cars are already less stable than the single level cars with a tendency to topple over.
> ...


You are correct, their attach point to the boogie is at the wheel center.


----------

