# Airo Train - Amfleet I replacement Siemens Inter City Trainsets (ICT)



## Amtrak_Carolinian_2020

I recently came across this video on YouTube about the new Siemens trainsets which will replace the Genesis locomotives and Amfleet 1 cars. Most of the trains listed were daytime trains that only use the Amfleet 1 including the Northeast Regional, Carolinian, Vermonter, and so on. However, the Pennsylvanian and Palmetto, trains that use mostly the Amfleet 2, were grouped in with all of these trains as scheduled to receive these new trainsets. While the Pennsylvanian isn’t considered a “long distance train” like the Palmetto, will the Palmetto still be considered a “long distance train” and grouped in with the Silvers, or will it become its own separate train?


----------



## Amtrak_Carolinian_2020

Amtrak_Carolinian_2020 said:


> I recently came across this video on YouTube about the new Siemens trainsets which will replace the Genesis locomotives and Amfleet 1 cars. Most of the trains listed were daytime trains that only use the Amfleet 1 including the Northeast Regional, Carolinian, Vermonter, and so on. However, the Pennsylvanian and Palmetto, trains that use mostly the Amfleet 2, were grouped in with all of these trains as scheduled to receive these new trainsets. While the Pennsylvanian isn’t considered a “long distance train” like the Palmetto, will the Palmetto still be considered a “long distance train” and grouped in with the Silvers, or will it become its own separate train?


----------



## PerRock

While there is some element of truth to what is being said there. I wouldn't read too much into it; at the moment that information is coming from one youtuber who is referencing unnamed people at Siemens & Amtrak. Without knowing what the people he talked to actually said, or an official press release I would take what it being said with a grain of salt.


----------



## Tlcooper93

PerRock said:


> While there is some element of truth to what is being said there. I wouldn't read too much into it; at the moment that information is coming from one youtuber who is referencing unnamed people at Siemens & Amtrak. Without knowing what the people he talked to actually said, or an official press release I would take what it being said with a grain of salt.



From what I understand, this information is actually pretty accurate, and should not be regarded as just a youtuber's musings/predictions.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

One thing that puzzles me is the use of dual modes for the Northeast Regionals. I can see it for those few trains that continue South of Washington but for the majority of runs that just go from Washington to Boston it seems a waste to carry around an unused Diesel engine. It also adds a lot of complexity which adds extra maintenance and more likely breakdowns.


----------



## NES28

The flip side is that these trains could keep moving when there is no power. Not only would this protect against power/wire failure but it could simplify planned maintenance.


----------



## jis

NES28 said:


> The flip side is that these trains could keep moving when there is no power. Not only would this protect against power/wire failure but it could simplify planned maintenance.


The other operational advantage is that it is much easier to optimally allocate from a single large pool than from two smaller pools while keeping track of which pool can be used where etc. and pretty much eliminates the equivalent of things like "priority inversion" and such that people who have worked on thread scheduling algorithms are quite familiar with.


----------



## daybeers

Amtrak doesn't need standardized power for all of the single-level trains. I'm sorry but there is no justifying the dual-mode trainsets for most of the NEC runs while paying an exorbitant cost for them, way above what the other Siemens trainsets have gone for. It's a bad decision. Could've spent some of it on replacing the LD fleet that needed to be replaced years ago, not starting in 2025.


----------



## jis

daybeers said:


> Amtrak doesn't need standardized power for all of the single-level trains. I'm sorry but there is no justifying the dual-mode trainsets for most of the NEC runs while paying an exorbitant cost for them, way above what the other Siemens trainsets have gone for. It's a bad decision. Could've spent some of it on replacing the LD fleet that needed to be replaced years ago, not starting in 2025.


Suffice it to note that until the actual order is placed we really have no idea what is actually going to be ordered in what numbers. 

But one thing that is not going to happen is replacement for bilevel LD trains being handled before 2025. Amfleet IIs may be handled as an add-on to the Amfleet I replacement, but not Superliner replacements AFAICT.

It occurs to me that since the power head is not articulated with the rest of the train and actually hooks on with standard tightlock coupler, Amtrak actually does not have to commit to exactly which type of powerhead will be used until very late in the game. They have made noises about dual mode for all but until we see a real order come out, we cannot fully go on what is said in a single YouTube video IMHO.


----------



## Cal

What’s the reason for the Surfline and Capitol Corridor not ordering them?


----------



## John Santos

NES28 said:


> The flip side is that these trains could keep moving when there is no power. Not only would this protect against power/wire failure but it could simplify planned maintenance.


I think the most common reason for power failure is the line being physically down due to ice, a falling tree or a vehicle hitting one of the catenary towers and knocking it over. In any case, with a possibly live, high-voltage wire and maybe a tree, tower or the remains of a truck on the tracks, it probably wouldn't be safe to proceed until the damage is safely cleared, which would give plenty of time to dispatch a diesel while the train was waiting. So I don't think a dual-mode on an entirely electrified route would be all that useful.
On the other hand, for any NEC routes that continue into Virginia or points south, or for the Vermonter, they would save an engine change in Washington and New Haven, though electrifying those routes would IMO be better. In addition, other routes could be considered, such as extending the Adirondack or Ethan Allan or some of the Empire routes south past NY to Washington or beyond. On yet another hand, extending routes as opposed to adding more connecting trains causes delays to cascade. On about the fourth or fifth hand, shorter connecting routes makes trips longer and puts the onus of connecting onto the passengers instead of on Amtrak, even if Amtrak guarantees connections. It all makes me glad I'm not an Amtrak route designer. Even with unlimited funds, I would definitely make some people unhappy!


----------



## John Santos

jis said:


> Suffice it to note that until the actual order is placed we really have no idea what is actually going to be ordered in what numbers.
> 
> But one thing that is not going to happen is replacement for bilevel LD trains being handled before 2025. Amfleet IIs may be handled as an add-on to the Amfleet I replacement, but not Superliner replacements AFAICT.
> 
> It occurs to me that since the power head is not articulated with the rest of the train and actually hooks on with standard tightlock coupler, Amtrak actually does not have to commit to exactly which type of powerhead will be used until very late in the game. They have made noises about dual mode for all but until we see a real order come out, we cannot fully go on what is said in a single YouTube video IMHO.


Wouldn't the oft-mentioned replacement of the Superliners with single-level equipment alter this argument?


----------



## jis

I am not arguing really. I am just pointing out what is written in Amtrak's fleet replacement plan and the clear timeline there. Of course that could change, but until then....


----------



## Tlcooper93

I’d be curious to see the costs of electrifying


John Santos said:


> I think the most common reason for power failure is the line being physically down due to ice, a falling tree or a vehicle hitting one of the catenary towers and knocking it over. In any case, with a possibly live, high-voltage wire and maybe a tree, tower or the remains of a truck on the tracks, it probably wouldn't be safe to proceed until the damage is safely cleared, which would give plenty of time to dispatch a diesel while the train was waiting. So I don't think a dual-mode on an entirely electrified route would be all that useful.
> On the other hand, for any NEC routes that continue into Virginia or points south, or for the Vermonter, they would save an engine change in Washington and New Haven, though electrifying those routes would IMO be better. In addition, other routes could be considered, such as extending the Adirondack or Ethan Allan or some of the Empire routes south past NY to Washington or beyond. On yet another hand, extending routes as opposed to adding more connecting trains causes delays to cascade. On about the fourth or fifth hand, shorter connecting routes makes trips longer and puts the onus of connecting onto the passengers instead of on Amtrak, even if Amtrak guarantees connections. It all makes me glad I'm not an Amtrak route designer. Even with unlimited funds, I would definitely make some people unhappy!



I’d be curious to see the costs of electrifying the routes you mentioned vs. the cost of the dual mode train sets (~7.2 billion). Could we still get train sets but not new locos and have something sort of similar to rail jet in Austria?

I personally think it was unnecessary for them to ditch the ACS64’s so early. Most of them are not even a decade old. Could that money be spent electrifying say, New Haven to Springfield, thus eliminating engine change at NHV? I don’t know much about the line, so I could totally be wrong.


----------



## Ryan

Tlcooper93 said:


> I personally think it was unnecessary for them to ditch the ACS64’s so early.


With equipment deliveries slated for 2024-2030 (and nothing is ever on time), they'll have plenty of age on them before they're replaced.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Ryan said:


> With equipment deliveries slated for 2024-2030 (and nothing is ever on time), they'll have plenty of age on them before they're replaced.


In my opinion, plenty of age means 20-25 years, not 10-15.


----------



## MARC Rider

Ryan said:


> With equipment deliveries slated for 2024-2030 (and nothing is ever on time), they'll have plenty of age on them before they're replaced.


Given that our experience with electric locomotives is mostly the GG-1 and the AEM-7, both of which lasted for 30-50 years, I don't think that many of us realize that perhaps stuff should be replaced every 10 - 20 years for optimum performance. The ACS-64s will probably be seeing at least 15 years of service with Amtrak.


----------



## Ryan

Absolutely. Also keep in mind that "replaced" means "used for LD trains on the corridor", "kept around as protect power", and "sold to commuter agencies", so it's not like they're getting thrown away with their residual value wasted.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Ryan said:


> Absolutely. Also keep in mind that "replaced" means "used for LD trains on the corridor", "kept around as protect power", and "sold to commuter agencies", so it's not like they're getting thrown away with their residual value wasted.


I considered this rather obvious.
There is more than one commuter railroad that may want ACS 64s. SEPTA already operates 15 or so, and the MBTA desperately needs them.

that said, MARC Rider makes a good point. We (myself) would love to get used to a shorter lifespans being acceptable.


----------



## jis

Only two trains run through NHV to SPG. The rest of the NYP - SPG service involve a change of trains at SPG. Electrifying that route will have very minimal impact on the need for dual modes.

The big use of dual modes will be in service extending from the NEC spine in the south/west of New York and on the Empire service.

It would be more worthwhile discussing the feasibility and cost of electrifying upto RVR, though that will still leave a bulk of the south of DC service requiring either an engine change or dual mode. RVR is unlikely to be a good place for swapping engines without very significant amount of change in track layout and more clear separation of the CSX through freight tracks from the passenger station tracks.

One thing good about the ACS64s unlike the GG-1s is that they can easily be sold in the world market since they are a world standard locomotive in the guts and not terribly married to the US in any serious way.

Incidentally, I did find the insistence for powering everything with dual mode a bit doctrinaire rather than guided by real needs. But I explained earlier how one could see all dual modes being justified using the single equipment pool argument.


----------



## Mailliw

Even if downed power lines prevent a train from moving forward dual-mode engines mean passengers won't be trapped without power and push-pull trainsets could simply back up to the closest station if needed.


----------



## Palmland

While I'm sure we won't know until the order is placed, I am curious as to the types of Venture cars. Will there still be business class, cafe cars, split cafe/coach or cafe/business? Regardless, they have to be an improvement over Amfleet I cars if only for the larger windows.

It is concerning that Amtrak is not discussing long term plans for Superliner replacements.


----------



## 87YJ

I think in the long run Superliners are a gone. Just going to wear them out.


----------



## MARC Rider

Palmland said:


> While I'm sure we won't know until the order is placed, I am curious as to the types of Venture cars. Will there still be business class, cafe cars, split cafe/coach or cafe/business? Regardless, they have to be an improvement over Amfleet I cars if only for the larger windows.
> 
> It is concerning that Amtrak is not discussing long term plans for Superliner replacements.


Take a look at the "Amtrak-Equipment-Asset-Line-Plan-FY20-24" 
Amtrak Equipment Asset Line Plan FY20-24 

On page 32, in the discussion about replacement of the Superliners and bi-level California Cars:



> Amtrak is interested in starting a discussion with its California state partners—Caltrans and the Joint Powers Authorities responsible for managing and funding the Pacific Surfliner, Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins—about a coordinated fleet modernization plan for Superliner and other multilevel routes.
> 
> . . .
> 
> The ideal timing to begin the procurement process will be the early 2020s after the Amfleet, trainset and diesel fleets are replaced. Deliveries should be planned from the late 2020s with options into the early 2030s, replacing current fleets based on condition, age and upcoming overhaul needs and providing capacity for California’s state corridor expansion.



Note that this plan was published before the Covid pandemic, so the timing is probably going to slip right from the start. It seems that the plan is not to start the procurement process until after the Amfleet replacements arrive. This will also need to be coordinated with California (at least according to this plan.) In any event, there are still a few years left in "the early 2020s," so it's too early to start being all worked up about this. And just because you're not hearing anything about planning for the Superliner replacements doesn't mean that there aren't busy little Amtrak cubicle elves starting to work on it. I would expect seeing actual deliveries of the new cars sometime around 2030, give or take a couple of years.


----------



## John Santos

Mailliw said:


> Even if downed power lines prevent a train from moving forward dual-mode engines mean passengers won't be trapped without power and push-pull trainsets could simply back up to the closest station if needed.


That is true. One more in the plus column for dual-modes. The outage could easily be miles ahead or behind the train, so it could move away (either forward or back as appropriate) until it reached a station or a section where the power was still on.

Would the money be better spent on protecting the electrical system, though? For example on ROW maintenance to cut back trees that might fall on the tracks in a hurricane or ice storm? Or protecting the towers that hold up the wires from adjacent roads by installing jersey barriers or concrete bolsters on the road side of them?


----------



## Ryan

John Santos said:


> Would the money be better spent on protecting the electrical system, though? For example on ROW maintenance to cut back trees that might fall on the tracks in a hurricane or ice storm? Or protecting the towers that hold up the wires from adjacent roads by installing jersey barriers or concrete bolsters on the road side of them?


Not really.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

John Santos said:


> Would the money be better spent on protecting the electrical system, though? For example on ROW maintenance to cut back trees that might fall on the tracks in a hurricane or ice storm? Or protecting the towers that hold up the wires from adjacent roads by installing jersey barriers or concrete bolsters on the road side of them?



Last time Metra Electric had damage to the catenary it was caused by a derailing freight train (during a polar vortex when service had been temporarily discontinued due to the wires were too brittle for service luckily). So add moving freight faaar away.


----------



## jis

Experience in Russia, China and Northern and Alpine Europe suggests that the concerns about damage to catenary by snow and ice is vastly over-rated. There are many other things that in reality cause service disruptions before catenary failure comes into play. A catenary system properly designed for the environment that it operates in can be remarkably resilient to weather related failures.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

jis said:


> Experience in Russia, China and Northern and Alpine Europe suggests that the concerns about damage to catenary by snow and ice is vastly over-rated. There are many other things that in reality cause service disruptions before catenary failure comes into play. A catenary system properly designed for the environment that it operates in can be remarkably resilient to weather related failures.


Agreed - having lived in artic/sub-arctic areas with electric trains (and electric everything else except cars and a few older oil heating systems) it was a total non-issue. 

Why it's an issue with Metra (other than money and aging infrastructure) I don't know - one would have thought that the system was engineered for our climate, which is sub-tropical in summer and can be sub-arctic in winter. In this case it was the masts being knocked down (I think just one, but the wire came down and tangled) by the derailment. I give Metra kudos for getting it back up quickly in brutal conditions.


----------



## MisterUptempo

Now that the presentations for last week's NGEC Annual Meetings are available (h/t to jrud and jis for finding them), I wanted to post a couple of images from this presentation, which discusses Amtrak fleet acquisitions.

On page 8, the new Amtrak trainsets are mentioned, along with a photo that _might _be a preview of new livery, which shows deep blue shells, with two-tone grey below the belt line, separated with a yellow racing stripe, yellow doors, and grey roofs.

Whether this is the livery Amtrak has decided upon or whether it's just some concept Siemens threw together, who knows? But it's out there for everyone to see. So, let the critiques begin!






On that same page, there is this illustration which shows how the 6 and 8 car sets will be assembled, as well as the location of wheelchair lifts and ADA seating locations. The livery concept in the photo above is carried over into the trainset illustration-


----------



## Mailliw

The food service cars should be in the _middle_ of the trainsets. If Amtrak doesn't want BC passengers to have to walk much then they should just have the attendants provide at seat service.


----------



## Tlcooper93

MisterUptempo said:


> Now that the presentations for last week's NGEC Annual Meetings are available (h/t to jrud and jis for finding them), I wanted to post a couple of images from this presentation, which discusses Amtrak fleet acquisitions.
> 
> On page 8, the new Amtrak trainsets are mentioned, along with a photo that _might _be a preview of new livery, which shows deep blue with two-tone grey below the belt line, separated with a yellow racing stripe and yellow doors.
> 
> Whether this is the livery Amtrak has decided upon or whether it's just some concept Siemens threw together, who knows? But it's out there for everyone to see. So, let the critiques begin!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On that same page, there is this illustration which shows how the 6 and 8 car sets will be assembled, as well as the location of wheelchair lifts and ADA seating locations. The livery concept in the photo above is carried over into the trainset illustration-


Boy, Siemens will need a whole other plant just fulfill all these North American orders in a timely manner.

Honestly, I think these look great.
I would love to be travelling on one of these along the NEC is 5-10 years (probably more like 10 if we're being honest with ourselves). Indeed, these cant come soon enough.

I'm sure many a problem will have to be ironed out as these move through the various phases of design and implementation. They will certainly supplement the new Acelas nicely though.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Those steps look exposed to the weather and not very well protected. Ok for Southern California, not good for Chicago.

Are they using a heating system to keep the snow and ice from jamming the system?


----------



## MisterUptempo

Tlcooper93 said:


> Boy, Siemens will need a whole other plant just fulfill all these North American orders in a timely manner.
> 
> Honestly, I think these look great.
> I would love to be travelling on one of these along the NEC is 5-10 years (probably more like 10 if we're being honest with ourselves). Indeed, these cant come soon enough.
> 
> I'm sure many a problem will have to be ironed out as these move through the various phases of design and implementation. They will certainly supplement the new Acelas nicely though.


As far as timelines are concerned, in the same presentation, it indicates that bi-weekly preliminary and intermediate design reviews commenced in late August, 2021. Preliminary reviews will continue through early May, 2022, intermediate reviews through mid-March, 2023. Final design reviews started mid-October, 2021 and will continue through mid-October, 2023.

Soft mockups scheduled for late Spring, 2022; hard mockups in Summer.


----------



## Tlcooper93

MisterUptempo said:


> As far as timelines are concerned, in the same presentation, it indicates that bi-weekly preliminary and intermediate design reviews commenced in late August, 2021. Preliminary reviews will continue through early May, 2022, intermediate reviews through mid-March, 2023. Final design reviews started mid-October, 2021 and will continue through mid-October, 2023.
> 
> Soft mockups scheduled for late Spring, 2022; hard mockups in Summer.



Yes, that’s what it says doesn't it. 

I remember when new Acelas were staged for 2020


----------



## west point

A certain airline once used blue interiors. Later found that the color not the best. Warm colors have a better passenger outlook.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Not sure how I am going to like grey with yellow doors.
Sounds a bit like the MBTA's "grey ghost" scheme of the late 1960's which was unpopular.


----------



## Tlcooper93

A technical question that I’m sure some of the more knowledgeable people might be able to answer.

Why not make NE regionals run faster? Is 125 a significant milestone? Why not make new train sets capable of faster speeds like 135? Would this significantly upset the balance of frequencies on the NEC? Maybe it stops to frequently to make higher speeds worth it.

I’m sure there’s a good reason.


----------



## jis

125mph is a significant milestone in FRA regulations. Equipment that is allowed to run faster tends to be significantly more expensive for meeting FRA structural requirements.


----------



## jis

The following slideset has been posted on the Siemens Locomotives thread. It is also relevant to this thread since it also talks about train sets.

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/9.b. NGEC Annual Mtg 02252022 Ruppert.pdf


----------



## NES28

It's very interesting that it appears that the way that the trainsets are being made "dual mode" is to put the "elictric stuff" (AC transformer, pantograph, and other switchgear) in the end of the business class car next to the diesel which, thus, could be a pretty plain vanilla Charger. Presumably, the battery version for the Empire Corridor might need to have a whole dedicated car so batteries could be included. Apparently, Siemens didn't want to deal with third rail pickup.


----------



## jis

NES28 said:


> Apparently, Siemens didn't want to deal with third rail pickup.


For Amtrak maybe not. But for MNRR they have third rail pickup equipped dual modes on order already.Apparently LIRR will also get a bunch of them via a separate order.


----------



## west point

I always thought that the effort to make a loco tri mode was not going to happen because of the high weight of the 25/60 hZ transformer needed for overhead CAT. The idea of a business class power car seems to take care of a lot of those problems.

1, The isolation of an ALC to be the basic loco that can operate anywhere other than in tunnels, NYP, or other stations either with or without a power car has much merit. I can imagine enough battery power to transit cascade tunnel. That begs the question, are the 300 series ALCs already wired for this type of operation or has provision that they can be modified easily? Plus, failure of the CAT power will allow loco to use diesel and battery to continue to at least the next station or farther.
2. The power cars weight and balance can be easily balanced with transformer(s), & rectifiers at one end and batteries at other end opposite side.
3. Power cars might have third rail pickups either installed or quickly placed. I can see if power cars have the pick-ups then NYP trains from north can easily detour to Grand Central Terminal. That is because the Amtrak units will weight the same as the MNRR locos operating on the weight limits of the Park Avenue bridge spans.. That is if the Amtrak locos have the plow cutout to clear MNRR 3rd rails. EDIT Forgot Amtrak locos on the NYP- Albany must have the cutouts. Need to check the front of the 300s.
4. Plus, the power car with CAT can be very handy for layovers and covered stations if clearances are high enough for CAT. If a 25 kV Cat is installed at those locations then the ALC(s) can be shut down reducing emissions and now saving fuel and DEF. Provisions are needed to keep locos warm in very cold weather with those very ventilated ALCs.
5. Future times CAT could be installed for leaving and slowing for faster departures and slowing just at stations. Regeneration then comes into play. That really depends on what the HP ratings of the traction motors are. The ALCs might have same traction motors and gearing as the ACS sprinters. The extra power from using CAT power to leave stations will be needed as the ALC geared max speed is 125 the same as sprinters. That compares to P-42s max speed of 110.


----------



## NES28

I had forgotten that MN and LIRR had ordered Chargers adapted for third rail. I wonder why Amtrak didn't order some more of those for Empire Service. Maybe they and/or Siemens were looking for an excuse to test battery power. I haven't seen a rendering of a Siemens battery car yet.


----------



## neroden

That yellow on the doors and the stripe looks like a hi-viz thing to me. Might stay.


----------



## rickycourtney

More details in this new report: https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/...g/Amtrak-Service-Asset-Line-Plans-FY22-27.pdf

Here's the breakdown:
There will be 26 six-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets that will include an Auxiliary Power Vehicle (APV). The APV will be the trailer car closest to the locomotive and will include a pantograph, transformers and a powered truck. In electrified territory, the APV will draw power from overhead lines, which will be fed to the powered truck and the traction motors in the locomotive. These trainsets will be used on the _Carolinian_, _Downeaster_, _Keystone Service_, _Palmetto_, _Pennsylvanian_ and _Vermonter_.

There will also be 24 eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets, similarly configured, for use on _Northeast Regional_ trains including through trains to Virginia and Springfield, Massachusetts. Amtrak has options to purchase up to eight additional eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets.

Amtrak will also purchase 15 six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets, where the trailer car closest to the locomotive will supply electricity to traction motors in the locomotive when operating around New York Penn Station, eliminating the need for third rail propulsion on the _Adirondack_, _Empire Service_, _Ethan Allen Express_ and _Maple Leaf_. Amtrak has options to purchase up to two additional six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets.


----------



## jiml

So no third-rail units. Interesting!


----------



## PaTrainFan

rickycourtney said:


> More details in this new report: https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/...g/Amtrak-Service-Asset-Line-Plans-FY22-27.pdf
> 
> Here's the breakdown:
> There will be 26 six-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets that will include an Auxiliary Power Vehicle (APV). The APV will be the trailer car closest to the locomotive and will include a pantograph, transformers and a powered truck. In electrified territory, the APV will draw power from overhead lines, which will be fed to the powered truck and the traction motors in the locomotive. These trainsets will be used on the _Carolinian_, _Downeaster_, _Keystone Service_, _Palmetto_, _Pennsylvanian_ and _Vermonter_.
> 
> There will also be 24 eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets, similarly configured, for use on _Northeast Regional_ trains including through trains to Virginia and Springfield, Massachusetts. Amtrak has options to purchase up to eight additional eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets.
> 
> Amtrak will also purchase 15 six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets, where the trailer car closest to the locomotive will supply electricity to traction motors in the locomotive when operating around New York Penn Station, eliminating the need for third rail propulsion on the _Adirondack_, _Empire Service_, _Ethan Allen Express_ and _Maple Leaf_. Amtrak has options to purchase up to two additional six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets.



Is this proven technology? Is it used overseas anywhere? This sounds like too many opportunities for problems in the development of something that hasn't been used before. Even technology adapted from Europe such as the Avelia Liberty trainsets and the Siemens Venture coaches have seemingly had nothing but issues.

Is this new technology


----------



## rickycourtney

PaTrainFan said:


> Is this proven technology? Is it used overseas anywhere? This sounds like too many opportunities for problems in the development of something that hasn't been used before. Even technology adapted from Europe such as the Avelia Liberty trainsets and the Siemens Venture coaches have seemingly had nothing but issues.
> 
> Is this new technology


I mean, dual-mode equipment is very common. Siemens makes a lot of them for the global market.
The only sorta "new" things here are...
Placing the equipment in another car. (But there are lots of multiple units trainset that do something similar.)
Relying on battery packs. (There are several types of trains and trams with this technology.)


----------



## frequentflyer

PaTrainFan said:


> Is this proven technology? Is it used overseas anywhere? This sounds like too many opportunities for problems in the development of something that hasn't been used before. Even technology adapted from Europe such as the Avelia Liberty trainsets and the Siemens Venture coaches have seemingly had nothing but issues.
> 
> Is this new technology


From Amtrak's Five year plan-

*Significant reliability improvements are anticipated. The TSSSA will impose stiff penalties on Siemens if the frequency of “bad order” events exceeds specified thresholds.* The dual-power and hybrid characteristics of most trainsets create backup propulsion possibilities should catenary or other power problems develop enroute. Finally, many trains which currently only have an engineer’s cab at one end of the consist will gain a second cab on the opposite end; if a fault is discovered in one locomotive cab prior to departure (such as with cab signals or PTC equipment), the train can be turned rather than being taken out of service


----------



## west point

frequentflyer said:


> Finally, many trains which currently only have an engineer’s cab at one end of the consist will gain a second cab on the opposite end; if a fault is discovered in one locomotive cab prior to departure (such as with cab signals or PTC equipment), the train can be turned rather than being taken out of service



Yes for the NEC. However, Albany, Springfield, PHL, will take a long trip to wye the train set. And Richmond??? Newport News, & Norfolk? Leave other regions to others.


----------



## Cal

west point said:


> However, Albany, Springfield, PHL, will take a long trip to wye the train set. And Richmond??? Newport News, & Norfolk?


If one of the cabs aren't functional then it would be the same as if one of the current cab cars isn't functional.


----------



## Mailliw

rickycourtney said:


> More details in this new report: https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/...g/Amtrak-Service-Asset-Line-Plans-FY22-27.pdf
> 
> Here's the breakdown:
> There will be 26 six-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets that will include an Auxiliary Power Vehicle (APV). The APV will be the trailer car closest to the locomotive and will include a pantograph, transformers and a powered truck. In electrified territory, the APV will draw power from overhead lines, which will be fed to the powered truck and the traction motors in the locomotive. These trainsets will be used on the _Carolinian_, _Downeaster_, _Keystone Service_, _Palmetto_, _Pennsylvanian_ and _Vermonter_.
> 
> There will also be 24 eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets, similarly configured, for use on _Northeast Regional_ trains including through trains to Virginia and Springfield, Massachusetts. Amtrak has options to purchase up to eight additional eight-car catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets.
> 
> Amtrak will also purchase 15 six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets, where the trailer car closest to the locomotive will supply electricity to traction motors in the locomotive when operating around New York Penn Station, eliminating the need for third rail propulsion on the _Adirondack_, _Empire Service_, _Ethan Allen Express_ and _Maple Leaf_. Amtrak has options to purchase up to two additional six-car battery-diesel hybrid trainsets.


Why do the Downeaster and Keystone Service need dual power trainsets? The former doesn't run in electric territory and the latter always does.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Mailliw said:


> Why do the Downeaster and Keystone Service need dual power trainsets? The former doesn't run in electric territory and the latter always does.


Agree. The only situation where the Downeaster would need dual power is if the north south link was built and these units would be at the end of their useful life by the time that happened (if it ever happens)

Unless they wanted commonality with the NEC fleet to make it easier to swap out equipment then I suppose that makes sense


----------



## Trogdor

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> Unless they wanted commonality with the NEC fleet to make it easier to swap out equipment then I suppose that makes sense



I think this is the idea. Presumably the ability to rotate equipment across different routes with minimal additional effort is worth it. Otherwise, they'd have a set of equipment basically isolated on the Downeaster, for example. This makes it a lot more costly when doing maintenance, because you either need an extra set or two of spare equipment just for that route, or you need to deadhead equipment from wherever anyway, and then send it back. By making them all dual-powered, you get the interchangeability which allows for a common set of spares shared by multiple routes in the same general region.


----------



## jis

People into operations logistics tend to try to minimize fleet fragmentation so as to give maximum deployment flexibility. Unless there is an extremely pressing service reason fleets should not be fragmented. OTOH armchair planners often avoid the whole fleet management issue and want to have as fragmented a fleet as possible with specialized cars galore and special liveries galore. The tension between the two shall forever remain 

The decision to have a limited number (three) of fleets for the Regionals in the entire Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Region, except the Empire Service, is clearly driven by fleet efficiency managers.


----------



## Mailliw

So does this mean Keystone Service is getting Business Class and food service too or will those cars just be closed off?


----------



## PVD

Mailliw said:


> So does this mean Keystone Service is getting Business Class and food service too or will those cars just be closed off?


One would surmise that will be a decision by the PA state folks as to what they are willing to pay for. In NY on Empire Service, we have BC, but unless the train goes past Albany, the Cafe is unstaffed.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> One would surmise that will be a decision by the PA state folks as to what they are willing to pay for. In NY on Empire Service, we have BC, but unless the train goes past Albany, the Cafe is unstaffed.


If Amtrak is going to charge for an ICT set with a BC car in it I would find it hard to see PA saying yeah but we will not use it.

Currently they save a bit of money by not having a BC car and Amtrak probably does not have enough BC cars to give to them anyway. With fixed consist that will go away. Originally the Keystone sets were supposed to be 4 car + cab car with no BC and food service car, but apparently that is gone in the latest on consist configuration of the ICTs.


----------



## daybeers

jis said:


> If Amtrak is going to charge for an ICT set with a BC car in it I would find it hard to see PA saying yeah but we will not use it.


I wouldn't put it past them judging by the ridiculous fares they charge for the Keystone and Pennsylvanian and the fact that they're excluded from every sale.


----------



## jis

daybeers said:


> I wouldn't put it past them judging by the ridiculous fares they charge for the Keystone and Pennsylvanian and the fact that they're excluded from every sale.


Hey, VIA used to sell the BC space in the Maple Leaf in Canada for a $1 premium over Coach, or some such.


----------



## Mailliw

jis said:


> If Amtrak is going to charge for an ICT set with a BC car in it I would find it hard to see PA saying yeah but we will not use it.
> 
> Currently they save a bit of money by not having a BC car and Amtrak probably does not have enough BC cars to give to them anyway. With fixed consist that will go away. Originally the Keystone sets were supposed to be 4 car + cab car with no BC and food service car, but apparently that is gone in the latest on consist configuration of the ICTs.


Yeah, I guess PennDOT can still sell BC seats for a higher fare even without an attendant or free soft drinks. I just assumed they use similar configurations as the Piedmont or San Joaquins, but with electric locomotives. Another issue is that the Adirondack, Carolinian, etc; they run once daily and get turned at their termini. They also occasionally pull private cars. Then there's the issue of fixed bidirectional seating on what are practically long distance trains.


----------



## rickycourtney

I would also guess that the battery-diesel dual-mode trainsets will be pricey. Otherwise, it would make sense to buy those trainsets for the Downeaster.

The way Amtrak describes these battery-diesel dual-mode trainsets, it sound like they are strictly going to be discharged during operations into Penn Station.

But, it sounds like they have the potential to operate like a hybrid vehicle, potentially offering fuel savings. If thats case, they could be a good choice for the Downeaster.


----------



## rickycourtney

Mailliw said:


> Yeah, I guess PennDOT can still sell BC seats for a higher fare even without an attendant or free soft drinks. I just assumed they use similar configurations as the Piedmont or San Joaquins, but with electric locomotives.


I would hope that this equipment ushers in a serious effort from Amtrak to offer a consistent "hard and soft" product when it comes to business class. It doesn't make sense to offer varying levels of extra seat width, extra legroom, free soft drinks, free alcohol, and/or free snacks.



Mailliw said:


> They also occasionally pull private cars.


Amtrak doesn't care. They will be happy to eliminate pulling private cars.



Mailliw said:


> Then there's the issue of fixed bidirectional seating on what are practically long distance trains.


Either 50% of passengers will ride backwards, and they'll get over it -- or Amtrak will install turning seats (which have existed for decades)


----------



## MARC Rider

Mailliw said:


> Yeah, I guess PennDOT can still sell BC seats for a higher fare even without an attendant or free soft drinks.


That sounds just about the situation on the Empire Service trains that run between New York and Albany.


----------



## daybeers

Mailliw said:


> They also occasionally pull private cars.


I hadn't thought that these new trainsets wouldn't allow that!


----------



## MARC Rider

daybeers said:


> I hadn't thought that these new trainsets wouldn't allow that!


All of the private cars I've seen on the NEC are usually being pulled by one of the long-distance trains (Silvers, Crescent, Cardinal). For one thing, I doubt that many (if any) of the private cars are certified to run at 125 mph, which is the top speed of the Northeast Regionals. The LD trains, on the other hand, have Viewliner 1 sleepers, which are limited to 110 mph, which I guess is what the private cars can handle, too.


----------



## jis

Mailliw said:


> Another issue is that the Adirondack, Carolinian, etc; they run once daily and get turned at their termini.


I don't think anyone will bemoan the fact that the trains don't need to be turned any more.


> They also occasionally pull private cars. Then there's the issue of fixed bidirectional seating on what are practically long distance trains.





daybeers said:


> I hadn't thought that these new trainsets wouldn't allow that!


Theoretically they could tack them on at the end of the train assuming that the cab car or the powerhead has H couplers on the outward facing end. But most likely they will not do that. Instead they will just figure out a way of letting the Crescent, the Silver Star and such to do the private car thing and allow drop off/pick up at places like Raleigh and Charlotte and Savannah. Going to Canada OTOH will be a challenge. Nothing different from the way things were in the Northwest with Talgos.


----------



## rickycourtney

jis said:


> assuming that the cab car or the powerhead has H couplers on the outward facing end.


That’s a safe assumption. I mean without the standard H couplers, how else will freight locomotives be able to bail out Amtrak’s “maintenance” department?

Kidding aside, the Caltrans Venture cab cars are going to have H couplers on the outward facing end, so it’s clearly a thing that’s been considered.


----------



## west point

There is another probable advantage for running these common sets on routes such as Downeaster & Keystone. Since we have not seen the operating manuals, this is speculation. Albany trains not in this post but some of the advantages can be apparent. 

1. First Operating the ITC with CAT PAN on the NEC. We do not know what HP the AC traction motors will be. I will assume that the motors will be same as the ACS-64s which will give 1600 HP each continuous and short time rating to ~2000+ HP. Now the ACS-64s have very good acceleration with up to 9 cars. Assuming the power car front truck has 2 powered axels that gives 9600 HP continuous and ~12,000 HP for acceleration. That will be better than the ACS-64s. With the many slower sections that acceleration will be well accepted. There may be some wheel slip but have never heard of any on the ACS-64s. HEP will not take any HP away?

I assume the HEP comes off the battery inverter. It can be charged enroute including regenerative braking.

2. Off the wires the trains will have the full HP of the ALCs as battery can power the HEP. Dividing up the ALC traction power on 6 axels allow full HP output at a slower speed vs. just 4 axels. It may even be that battery power can help with acceleration. With PTC programed as it does now slowing will probably be same as present trains.

3. At some locations a short section of slow speed trolly wire can be installed to power train on overnight trains. Loco would need auto start for cold nights in case trolly wire lost power. Locations where the wire could be easily installed will be storage tracks that are not on regular used freight tracks. Maine obviously one location. Richmond river road is another off main. Richmond Main only if the stub tracks are restored. CLT and Raleigh might be locations if NC DOT finally upgrades to this set up.

4. The power car is going to be for business class. My only concern is how the batteries, transformer(s), rectifiers, inverters, etc are going to placed in the car. If all in the front of car then possibly a 3 axel powered truck would be necessary. However seating should be as far as possible from the traction motors and electronics. Maybe batteries in rear of car for weight and balance?


----------



## jrud

west point said:


> There is another probable advantage for running these common sets on routes such as Downeaster & Keystone. Since we have not seen the operating manuals, this is speculation. Albany trains not in this post but some of the advantages can be apparent.
> 
> 1. First Operating the ITC with CAT PAN on the NEC. We do not know what HP the AC traction motors will be. I will assume that the motors will be same as the ACS-64s which will give 1600 HP each continuous and short time rating to ~2000+ HP. Now the ACS-64s have very good acceleration with up to 9 cars. Assuming the power car front truck has 2 powered axels that gives 9600 HP continuous and ~12,000 HP for acceleration. That will be better than the ACS-64s. With the many slower sections that acceleration will be well accepted. There may be some wheel slip but have never heard of any on the ACS-64s. HEP will not take any HP away?
> 
> I assume the HEP comes off the battery inverter. It can be charged enroute including regenerative braking.
> 
> 2. Off the wires the trains will have the full HP of the ALCs as battery can power the HEP. Dividing up the ALC traction power on 6 axels allow full HP output at a slower speed vs. just 4 axels. It may even be that battery power can help with acceleration. With PTC programed as it does now slowing will probably be same as present trains.
> 
> 3. At some locations a short section of slow speed trolly wire can be installed to power train on overnight trains. Loco would need auto start for cold nights in case trolly wire lost power. Locations where the wire could be easily installed will be storage tracks that are not on regular used freight tracks. Maine obviously one location. Richmond river road is another off main. Richmond Main only if the stub tracks are restored. CLT and Raleigh might be locations if NC DOT finally upgrades to this set up.
> 
> 4. The power car is going to be for business class. My only concern is how the batteries, transformer(s), rectifiers, inverters, etc are going to placed in the car. If all in the front of car then possibly a 3 axel powered truck would be necessary. However seating should be as far as possible from the traction motors and electronics. Maybe batteries in rear of car for weight and balance?


The following discussion is based on a few solid sources, but runs contrary to some widely reported concepts. If you read the NGEC 2022 Annual Meeting presentation on the trainsets, this appears to agree with what they are saying.

The APV/Bus. car is different than the battery car. The APV/Bus. car should have very few, if any, batteries. It has a pantograph to collect electricity from the catenary and send that power to the ALC-42E. The pantograph related machinery should not be large or heavy, leaving space for Business class passengers.

The battery car design is less well defined, but will probably be an entire car of batteries and related electrical equipment due to space and weight requirements. IOW, no passengers in a battery car. The battery cars will not appear for a while and they will be used to create a hybrid diesel-battery trainset with an ALC-42E for trains that do not run under catenary. No pantograph on the battery car.

I have not seen anything that implies a single trainset can have both an APV/Bus. car and a battery car.


----------



## jis

@jrud, Do you know if the APV will have the main HV transformer on/under it? Normally it resides underfloor, and that space in a diesel might be occupied by a fuel tank and such. That is why I was wondering. Although, depending on the size of the fuel tank there could still be enough space under the power head.


----------



## jrud

jis said:


> @jrud, Do you know if the APV will have the main HV transformer on/under it? Normally it resides underfloor, and that space in a diesel might be occupied by a fuel tank and such. That is why I was wondering. Although, depending on the size of the fuel tank there could still be enough space under the power head.


Sorry, but please clarify. The APV/Bus car sits right behind the locomotive (ALC-42E) and has a pantograph. There is no reason I can think of for the APV/Bus to have fuel 

Is there anything on page eight of this presentation that helps?



http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/Annual%20Meetings/2022/9.b.%20NGEC%20Annual%20Mtg%2002252022%20%20Ruppert.pdf


----------



## rickycourtney

jis said:


> @jrud, Do you know if the APV will have the main HV transformer on/under it? Normally it resides underfloor, and that space in a diesel might be occupied by a fuel tank and such. That is why I was wondering. Although, depending on the size of the fuel tank there could still be enough space under the power head.


From the fleet plan: "The passenger car closest to the locomotive will be an Auxiliary Power Vehicle (APV) containing a pantograph, transformer cabinet and supplemental powered truck for use in electrified territory; power drawn from the APV will also be fed to the traction motors in the locomotive to ensure sufficient acceleration when operating on the Northeast Corridor (NEC)."


jis said:


> assuming that the cab car or the powerhead has H couplers on the outward facing end.


Also on that note -- VIA just did a test related to that -- having a GO Transit locomotive tow one of their Venture/Charger trainsets. Pics in this article: https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/via-runs-test-train-of-new-siemens-equipment/


----------



## rickycourtney

west point said:


> 4. The power car is going to be for business class. My only concern is how the batteries, transformer(s), rectifiers, inverters, etc are going to placed in the car. If all in the front of car then possibly a 3 axel powered truck would be necessary. However seating should be as far as possible from the traction motors and electronics. Maybe batteries in rear of car for weight and balance?


In a little note on the fleet plan document Amtrak says "Order of cars in consist is TBD." So despite the earlier diagram, Amtrak could choose to move business class to a different car (cab car?).


----------



## west point

Thanks gentlemen. I had my suspicions that the Albany and beyond trains with batteries in the battery car were designs not finalized. If or not there is a powered truck on front truck will affect many operational possibilities as well. As you pointed out will there even be seats? The only item for sure seems to be no CAT PAN. However, there seems to be no reason that a CAT equipped train could not go to Albany as CAT is installed to the end of the west side access tunnel at NYP? But the Battery car trains do have the advantage of being able to go to NYG.


----------



## frequentflyer

So on a NYC-RIC train, will the diesel motor be turned on at NYC or at WAS when it leave the electrified area?


----------



## jis

frequentflyer said:


> So on a NYC-RIC train, will the diesel motor be turned on at NYC or at WAS when it leave the electrified area?


At WAS.


----------



## NES28

It would be really good to electrify the First Street tunnel, just south of Washington Union Station, to resolve the smoke problem.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

NES28 said:


> It would be really good to electrify the First Street tunnel, just south of Washington Union Station, to resolve the smoke problem.


How would that work with switching engines?


----------



## Ryan

The smoke problem?


----------



## west point

Once Amtrak completes the forced acquisition of WASH union station from the present leese then items can be done that the present leese will not cooperate. One item mentioned is Amtrak says immediate work on the 1st street tunnel is needed. That may include your electrification. Of course, only if Superliners will clear the CAT enough. Actually, using a conducting rail insulated against the celling is a real possibility. Done at many rail locations worldwide.

That might be workable depending how long a warmup is required for the diesel prime mover. It may be that the connection to the CAT at WASH will allow warmups if the diesel has some kind of heater(s) for the diesel coolant. 



NES28 said:


> It would be really good to electrify the First Street tunnel, just south of Washington Union Station, to resolve the smoke problem.


----------



## PVD

Not sure if a (high voltage) rail along the ceiling is allowed in the US There may be a minimum distance between the conductor and the building surface.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

NES28 said:


> It would be really good to electrify the First Street tunnel, just south of Washington Union Station, to resolve the smoke problem.


I imagine the switch to Tier 4 compliant prime movers would reduce the smoke problem significantly


----------



## jis

west point said:


> That might be workable depending how long a warmup is required for the diesel prime mover. It may be that the connection to the CAT at WASH will allow warmups if the diesel has some kind of heater(s) for the diesel coolant.


NJT has been transitioning from electric to diesel for years through many winters on their ALP45DPs. I do not recall them running the diesels for a very long time before transitioning. I would be surprised if the Siemens ones would be much different.


----------



## NES28

Does anyone know what the clearance is in the First Street tunnel?


----------



## jis

NES28 said:


> Does anyone know what the clearance is in the First Street tunnel?


My guess is it is at least 16'6" above rail since Superliners are known to operate through there without scraping the roof. So there is enough dynamic clearance for them. But that does not mean there is space for catenary necessarily.


----------



## keelhauled

jis said:


> NJT has been transitioning from electric to diesel for years through many winters on their ALP46DPs. I do not recall them running the diesels for a very long time before transitioning. I would be surprised if the Siemens ones would be much different.


As long as there's electricity in the trainset, it should be trivial to have a coolant heater for the diesel.


----------



## jis

Slideset on Amtrak ICT Program from the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority:

Amtrak Intercity Trainset Program (PDF)


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Slideset on Amtrak ICT Program from the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority:
> 
> Amtrak Intercity Trainset Program (PDF)



I like the first slide, the best!


----------



## Mailliw

Not very informative, other than apparently the NERs are getting baggage cars if I read it right.


----------



## jis

Mailliw said:


> Not very informative, other than apparently the NERs are getting baggage cars if I read it right.


The impression I have is that the Cab Car will apparently have a Baggage compartment.


----------



## rickycourtney

Two interesting infographics making their rounds on social media today…


----------



## Tlcooper93

The downeaster is listed under the Hybrid model.
Is the Haverhill line getting electrified any time soon?


----------



## west point

It is puzzling that Amtrak will use battery pack train sets on the Empire corridor. A 1- or 2-mile extension of NYP CAT north of present end on the west side line would seem easily done unless the diesel engines have a long warm up time. One reason might be Amtrak does not want to worry if there is a CAT failure at NYP. Also, the battery pack trains could be used as a Hudson River rescue train instead of using the third rail equipment in those tunnels. The other item might be that battery pack trains could detour to GCT on very short notice. It is also a possible to use the battery pack trains for lay over in Albany. My take it would be better to string a short section of CAT to provide overnight current at Albany.


----------



## Mailliw

Overall I like what I see, but the food service cars should be placed in the _middle _of the trainset, not right after Business Class. On the NER Coach passengers could have to walk (or _ wheel_) through up to *six cars*!  Not good. If Amtrak is soo worried about BC passengers having to walk through a few cars just hire a BC attendant.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Tlcooper93 said:


> The downeaster is listed under the Hybrid model.
> Is the Haverhill line getting electrified any time soon?


Probably just for using common equipment with the NEC, rather than a one-off without the hybrid capability for just one route.


----------



## jrud

Is anyone else seeing information that the batteries will take up more of the car than the pantograph? I’ve seen an unofficial drawing with batteries taking the whole car. Plus speculation that batteries will require additional length.

I’ve also not seen anything indicating the battery car will have a driven truck like the pantograph car does. Has anyone else heard otherwise?

Finally, the 2022 NGEC presentation seems to indicate that only the pantograph car is called an APV and the battery car is just called a battery car. Is there any other “official” information on the naming?


----------



## jis

The NGEC presentation is probably more trustworthy than these graphics, which apparently did not originate either from NGEC or Amtrak as far as I can tell.


----------



## joelkfla

jrud said:


> Is anyone else seeing information that the batteries will take up more of the car than the pantograph? I’ve seen an unofficial drawing with batteries taking the whole car. Plus speculation that batteries will require additional length.
> 
> I’ve also not seen anything indicating the battery car will have a driven truck like the pantograph car does. Has anyone else heard otherwise?
> 
> Finally, the 2022 NGEC presentation seems to indicate that only the pantograph car is called an APV and the battery car is just called a battery car. Is there any other “official” information on the naming?


The infographic above calls both Auxilliary Power Vehicles, shows both including BC seating, and says the pantograph APV has a powered truck but says the battery APV sends power to the locomotive with no mention of a powered truck.

ETA: But I just saw @jis's reply saying he doesn't think it's official.


----------



## joelkfla

Found this on pp. 125-126 of Amtrak's FY 2022-2027 Five Year Plans:

*Twenty-six (26) catenary-diesel dual-power trainsets*,​consisting of an ALC-42E locomotive and six passenger​cars, for use on the Downeaster, Vermonter, Pennsylvanian,​Palmetto, Carolinian and Keystone Service. The passenger car​closest to the locomotive will be an Auxiliary Power Vehicle​(APV) containing a pantograph, transformer cabinet and​supplemental powered truck for use in electrified territory;​power drawn from the APV will also be fed to the traction​motors in the locomotive to ensure sufficient acceleration​when operating on the Northeast Corridor (NEC).​​*Fifteen (15) battery-diesel hybrid trainsets* with a short​term option to acquire two more), consisting of an ALC-42E​locomotive and six passenger cars, for use on the Empire Service,​Ethan Allen Express, Adirondack, and Maple Leaf. The passenger​car closest to the locomotive will contain a battery which will​supply electricity to the locomotive for power when operating​around New York Penn Station, eliminating the need for third rail​propulsion.​
"The passenger car closest to the locomotive will contain a battery" seems to imply that the battery will be in a car that also carries passengers. And there is no mention of a "supplemental powered truck" in the battery-diesel description. Seems to me that acceleration just pulling into and out of NYP would not be of enough concern to justify the cost of the additional powered truck.


----------



## jis

joelkfla said:


> "The passenger car closest to the locomotive will contain a battery" seems to imply that the battery will be in a car that also carries passengers. And there is no mention of a "supplemental powered truck" in the battery-diesel description. Seems to me that acceleration just pulling into and out of NYP would not be of enough concern to justify the cost of the additional powered truck.


What proportion of the car will be occupied by batteries is also a piece of detail that possibly does not belong in such a high level description, and hence is not mentioned.


----------



## rickycourtney

My curiosity is if these batteries will simply be used to push/pull the trainset into NYP, or if they will enable a “hybrid” operation (think like a Prius) and also improve fuel economy.


----------



## jis

rickycourtney said:


> My curiosity is if these batteries will simply be used to push/pull the trainset into NYP, or if they will enable a “hybrid” operation (think like a Prius) and also improve fuel economy.


The Prius Prime plugin (I own one) notionally uses two separate batteries, one for the hybrid operation and the other for the plugin operation. This is to make sure that hybrid operation does not drain the traction battery. Afterall you would not want to discover that you had no charge left when you needed it in the tunnel because hybrid operation drained everything. I wonder if that complexity is part of the battery-diesel plan.


----------



## Mailliw

It occurs to me that assuming Amtrak goes with fixed bidirectional seating as expected, but doesn't expand seat selection to Economy then Business Class could suddenly become alot more popular on the NER. Given that 2:1 BC cars will have a lower passenger capacity maybe it would behoove Amtrak to have a 2nd BC car in NER consists? Or just designate one economy coaches as "Premium Economy" with seat selection?


----------



## NES28

I really hope that Amtrak moves toward universal advanced seat selection on reserved trains, as is pretty much consistently true on European trains. The business of making passengers at originating stations stand in line for extended periods to protect their chance of getting a decent seat, reminds of travel in third world countries or the old system on Southwest Airlines.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

NES28 said:


> I really hope that Amtrak moves toward universal advanced seat selection on reserved trains, as is pretty much consistently true on European trains. The business of making passengers at originating stations stand in line for extended periods to protect their chance of getting a decent seat, reminds of travel in third world countries or the old system on Southwest Airlines.


I second this. I recently reserved a trip on Irish Rail and seat selection online is just like on an airline with a pictorial diagram of the seats available.
In the US the hard part would be actually enforcing it given that we have had open seating for so long. On IE they have actual displays at the seat showing that it is reserved. I guess it is probably too late to add something like this to the Siemens coaches.


----------



## NES28

This is true in Germany. Perhaps other countries, as well. Press releases have said that the design of the 83 Siemens trains is set to be done in 2023.


----------



## Willbridge

NES28 said:


> This is true in Germany. Perhaps other countries, as well. Press releases have said that the design of the 83 Siemens trains is set to be done in 2023.


There still are a few problems. A German lady was sitting in the seat that showed as mine (unless she was also going to obscure Augustfehn). When she realized that I was an Auslander she hunkered down. I just waited for the conductor and he moved her to the car she belonged in. Right seat number -- wrong car number.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTES: A large number of posts regarding introduction of Venture Cars in the Midwest have been moved to a p[re-existing thread on that subject. Please post Midwest Venture related posts to the following thread:






Midwest Venture introduction


In his latest video which covered a pre-covid trip on the MO River Runner, French Youtuber "Simply Railway" says the latest rumor is that the midwest Velaro cars could go into service by this August. That's about a month away. I find this at least a little hard to believe, but I want to. Does...




www.amtraktrains.com





And leave this thread for discussing NEC ICTs.

AND BTW, while we are at it, let us also be done with seat reservations and get back to discussing equipment.

Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------



## JWM

Seats on reserved trains should be assigned in both classes. It is not rocket science, but little things such as this seem to send Amtrak into tizzy fits.


----------



## Mailliw

Are the ICT revenue cars going to be 2 doors or 4 doors? If they'll be 2 doors could a 2nd, non-accessible, toilet be placed at the door less end?


----------



## jis

Mailliw said:


> Are the ICT revenue cars going to be 2 doors or 4 doors? If they'll be 2 doors could a 2nd, non-accessible, toilet be placed at the door less end?


This has been discussed before. The vestibule area is outside the protective cage area (required to meet the Tier III structural requirements) irrespective of whether there is a door or not. So they will probably not place anything there that could require a passenger to spend somewhat extended time there.

I would be very surprised too if the ICT cars are two door ones. I suspect they will be like the Brightline cars, except with traps.


----------



## Mailliw

OK, for some reason I thought the vestibule area was in the protective cage area, hence no revenue seating.


----------



## frequentflyer

This is post from TrainOrders by poster Milpost20. Info comes from RailColorNews. A Euro railfan and rail news site.



Details on Amtrak's New Siemens Trainsets











[US] Amtrak Intercity Trainsets: Exact numbers and configurations


advertisement Amtrak has released specific numbers about its hybrid Intercity Trainsets (ICT), conventional trains for the NEC, and state corridors (2021). They will come in 2025-2030, in fou…




railcolornews.com






Siemens and Amtrak have released further details on the order for new trainsets.
The order is confirmed as being for 83 trains. The following is from the
European based site RailColorNews(a pay site) that closely covers developements
with the big European train manufacturers:

Amtrak has released specific numbers about its hybrid InterCity Trainsets (ICT),
conventional trains for the NEC, and state corridors. They will come in 2025-2030,
in four versions:

• 26 sets Type B-1: diesel locomotive + 6 passenger coaches including one driving
trailer; the coach closest to the locomotive will feature a transformer+pantograph
(Auxiliary Power Vehicle/Battery Car) so the train can also run in electric mode.

• 32 sets Type B-2: diesel locomotive + 8 passenger coaches including one driving 
trailer; the coach closest to the locomotive will feature a transformer+pantograph
so the train can also run in electric mode.

• 17 sets Type C: diesel locomotive + 6 passenger coaches including one driving trailer;
the coach closest to the locomotive will feature a battery pack so the train will 
be able to reach Penn Station in New York without using the third rail(Empire Service).

• 8 sets Type D: diesel locomotive + 6 passenger coaches, including one driving trailer.

The diesel locomotives used for these trains are Siemens Charger locomotives of a new sub-type
called ALP-42E. The trains will be maintained at "trainset level", meaning trains will not be
taken apart for repair/service/overhaul. Each type includes a food service coach and a business
class coach. For the type D trains also, WSDOT Chargers (SC-44) will be used.

Type B-1: Downeaster, Vermonter, Pennsylvanian, Palmetto, Carolinian, Keystone Service;
Type B-2: Northeast Regional including Virginia, Springfield Line through service;
Type C: Empire Service, Adirondack, Maple Leaf, Ethan Allen Express;
Type D: Amtrak Cascades in Washington and Oregon.

Amtrak states that their project team is working with Siemens on the final design elements, 
livery, and interior furnishings for the new trainsets. Additional trainset renderings, 
branding, and other public announcements for these trainsets will be released as this work
is complete and the project transitions to construction.

By the end of 2025, around 75 class P40DC/P42DC locomotives will be retired, and the whole 
class will be replaced within the next decade. The same goes for the P32ACDM dual-mode units.
Between 2027 and 2030 all Amfleet I and ex-Metroliner coaches will be withdrawn and replaced
by the ICTs.

Amtrak will have a surplus of the Siemens ACS-64 electric locomotives once the new fleet is
in service. Therefore, Amtrak will have these locomotives available for resale or lease to
commuter operators or the secondary market in the late 2020s.


----------



## GDRRiley

Cal said:


> What’s the reason for the Surfline and Capitol Corridor not ordering them?


They are still working with amtrak to see if the 2 can work together and share an order for bi levels. California is committed to low floor at this point


Ryan said:


> With equipment deliveries slated for 2024-2030 (and nothing is ever on time), they'll have plenty of age on them before they're replaced.


electric locos are good for 35-40 years


MARC Rider said:


> Given that our experience with electric locomotives is mostly the GG-1 and the AEM-7, both of which lasted for 30-50 years, I don't think that many of us realize that perhaps stuff should be replaced every 10 - 20 years for optimum performance. The ACS-64s will probably be seeing at least 15 years of service with Amtrak.


the eurosprinter into vectron platform is 25 years old now and they still sell new ones with the old ones still in service.
if we were talking diesel yes, 10-15 years they need major rebuild


----------



## GDRRiley

I still hope that within the next few years states will commit to putting wires on lines they own so amtrak can ditch dual modes. While these shouldn't have the same reliability issues other ones have the performance will still be hampered by dragging around a prime mover

Does the FRA publish a list of what class a family of equipment is?


----------



## 33Nicolas

Tlcooper93 said:


> I’d be curious to see the costs of electrifying
> 
> 
> I’d be curious to see the costs of electrifying the routes you mentioned vs. the cost of the dual mode train sets (~7.2 billion). Could we still get train sets but not new locos and have something sort of similar to rail jet in Austria?
> 
> I personally think it was unnecessary for them to ditch the ACS64’s so early. Most of them are not even a decade old. Could that money be spent electrifying say, New Haven to Springfield, thus eliminating engine change at NHV? I don’t know much about the line, so I could totally be wrong.


Ditto, I'd love to see or get my hands on the cost to dig in poles and lay catenaries versus buying a complex system of diesel/electric locos with powered cars behind.



MARC Rider said:


> Given that our experience with electric locomotives is mostly the GG-1 and the AEM-7, both of which lasted for 30-50 years, I don't think that many of us realize that perhaps stuff should be replaced every 10 - 20 years for optimum performance. The ACS-64s will probably be seeing at least 15 years of service with Amtrak.


An acquaintance of mine bought a few AEM-7. His comnpany is on the west coast. He's been working on electrifying shunters and to offer electricity for the local fleet there. I'm intrigued to know what he's doo with these AEM-7s.



Mailliw said:


> The food service cars should be in the _middle_ of the trainsets. If Amtrak doesn't want BC passengers to have to walk much then they should just have the attendants provide at seat service.


I think they don't want coach folks to walk through business cars.



MisterUptempo said:


> Now that the presentations for last week's NGEC Annual Meetings are available (h/t to jrud and jis for finding them), I wanted to post a couple of images from this presentation, which discusses Amtrak fleet acquisitions.
> 
> On page 8, the new Amtrak trainsets are mentioned, along with a photo that _might _be a preview of new livery, which shows deep blue shells, with two-tone grey below the belt line, separated with a yellow racing stripe, yellow doors, and grey roofs.
> 
> Whether this is the livery Amtrak has decided upon or whether it's just some concept Siemens threw together, who knows? But it's out there for everyone to see. So, let the critiques begin!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On that same page, there is this illustration which shows how the 6 and 8 car sets will be assembled, as well as the location of wheelchair lifts and ADA seating locations. The livery concept in the photo above is carried over into the trainset illustration-


Something France had to do in the 80s was to lift up platforms for easier access to cars. It's pretty interesting to see we have to climb with our suitcases to access a car. I understand the exorbitant amount of money it would take to do that and that AMTRAK likes to only have a few access in the train letting people stand in line. But, higher platforms would help a lot.



Tlcooper93 said:


> A technical question that I’m sure some of the more knowledgeable people might be able to answer.
> 
> Why not make NE regionals run faster? Is 125 a significant milestone? Why not make new train sets capable of faster speeds like 135? Would this significantly upset the balance of frequencies on the NEC? Maybe it stops to frequently to make higher speeds worth it.
> 
> I’m sure there’s a good reason.


If I recall well, when the French SNCF went from 160 kph to 200 kph, they ran into delayed reactions and longer braking lengths. They automated some signaling but felt that anything over 200 kph/ 125 mph needed a complete overhaul of signaling in cab and on the tracks. In other words, lights were not deemed safe enough to give the information needed for a train conductor to react in time, hence the digitalization around the TGV and other high-speed train systems.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

curretly 125 is max for convention style trains as per FRA rules , special High Speed trainsets can go higher . but can not have for example low level boarding due to breaks in side sills . and can not have occupied (other than crew) lead vehicle .


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> curretly 125 is max for convention style trains as per FRA rules , special High Speed trainsets can go higher . but can not have for example low level boarding due to breaks in side sills . and can not have occupied (other than crew) lead vehicle .


You are talkingTier II standards. Tier III allows break in side sill as long as it is not in the safety cage. Read the new rules. Nobody will ever build another Tier II compliant equipment since it really does not allow much CEM.


----------



## GDRRiley

33Nicolas said:


> Ditto, I'd love to see or get my hands on the cost to dig in poles and lay catenaries versus buying a complex system of diesel/electric locos with powered cars behind.


the cost per track mile on an expensive project in the US is about 5m a mile, the UK gets that down under 2m a mile and mainland europe gets that even lower


33Nicolas said:


> Something France had to do in the 80s was to lift up platforms for easier access to cars. It's pretty interesting to see we have to climb with our suitcases to access a car. I understand the exorbitant amount of money it would take to do that and that AMTRAK likes to only have a few access in the train letting people stand in line. But, higher platforms would help a lot.


putting platfroms at the correct height on the east coast just needs to happen, I know stracnet doesn't like them without a bypass but thats easy enough to accommodate 


jis said:


> You are talkingTier II standards. Tier III allows break in side sill as long as it is not in the safety cage. Read the new rules. Nobody will ever build another Tier II compliant equipment since it really does not allow much CEM.


yep T2 is dead, is it wavers that allow the new Acela to do 160mph even though its T3?

really the whole NER+ Acela fleet should have been Pendinlinos with better acceleration had FRA let euro stock and more of the line was under wires.


----------



## jis

Acela Is are T2. There was no T3 when those were built. Experience with them finally convinced FRA of the error of their ways leading to the T3 spec.

Acela 21s are T3 and in some sense any operation above 125 mph is by special specific dispensation irrespective of whether it is 150 or 160.


----------



## GDRRiley

I was asking about wavers because normally T3 can only break 125mph on track only shared with other T3 equipment.


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> I was asking about wavers because normally T3 can only break 125mph on track only shared with other T3 equipment.


I am almost certain that they will allow mixing with ACSES active either as waiver or change of regulation.


----------



## 33Nicolas

rickycourtney said:


> I mean, dual-mode equipment is very common. Siemens makes a lot of them for the global market.
> The only sorta "new" things here are...
> Placing the equipment in another car. (But there are lots of multiple units trainset that do something similar.)
> Relying on battery packs. (There are several types of trains and trams with this technology.)


I've been talking to Rail Propulsion Systems for a few years. The answer to your question is kinda, maybe, depending on how much testing and real-life use this system has seen.






Rail Propulsion Systems – Practical Rail Modernization







www.railpropulsion.com





RPS has been working on electrifying diesel locomotives and also slapping on EV spent batteries on a car behind. It works well for shunters and they are testing it for commuter trains and next longer distances.


----------



## cocojacoby

Why would the Downeaster be B1? It doesn't run under wire anywhere on its route and wouldn't need pantagraphs even if the MBTA eventually electrifies its trackage.


----------



## GDRRiley

cocojacoby said:


> Why would the Downeaster be B1? It doesn't run under wire anywhere on its route and wouldn't need pantagraphs even if the MBTA eventually electrifies its trackage.


because amtrak isn't getting any sets for the NEC that don't have the option to run under wires


----------



## cocojacoby

So assign it a Type D. It doesn't actually run on the NEC.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

Does this order increase the capacity for either number of trains or the number of seats compared to the Sprinter Amfleet I or Genesis p42 Amfleet I rollingstock currently in service? Was just curious to know if this order gives us more or less in terms of the actual rollingstock--would be nice to always have a few extra trainsets or traincars available in the event of sellouts or busy weekends. Amtrak would certainly benefit from the additional revenue. Seems inexcusable that Amtrak would ever be capacity constrained esp on the NEC and beyond


----------



## GDRRiley

cocojacoby said:


> So assign it a Type D. It doesn't actually run on the NEC.


The only type D planned on being ordered are for Cascade.


Touchdowntom9 said:


> Does this order increase the capacity for either number of trains or the number of seats compared to the Sprinter Amfleet I or Genesis p42 Amfleet I rollingstock currently in service? Was just curious to know if this order gives us more or less in terms of the actual rollingstock--would be nice to always have a few extra trainsets or traincars available in the event of sellouts or busy weekends. Amtrak would certainly benefit from the additional revenue. Seems inexcusable that Amtrak would ever be capacity constrained esp on the NEC and beyond


No the fleet is about the same size at this time 492 amfleet I built, 435 in service. 

438 venture cars order at this time there is options to double if not triple the order


----------



## west point

GDRRiley said:


> 438 venture cars order at this time there is options to double if not triple the order


Just another option as the V-2s were???


----------



## GDRRiley

west point said:


> Just another option as the V-2s were???


They've got 140 more sets they could be any version of the ones listed above
but I don't see them changing the cars a lot unless they decide to go pure electric or lengthen sets.


----------



## MARC Rider

GDRRiley said:


> They've got 140 more sets they could be any version of the ones listed above
> but I don't see them changing the cars a lot unless they decide to go pure electric or lengthen sets.


..or if they want to add more service. The New York - Scranton line is now in the pipeline, they're seriously talking about New York - Allentown and Philadelphia - Reading. How about more frequencies on the Empire Corridor? Or more service to Vermont? And more frequencies between Washington and Richmond and other Virginia points. All of these will require more equipment, no?


----------



## John Webb

I am a bit wary of what I saw in the video and the attendant discussion. No mention of what plans are, if any, for new food service cars and in the case of the Night Owl (listed as one of the trains receiving the new equipment) sleeping cars. Anyone know anything about this? Or are we facing a future of vending machines and coach only seating?


----------



## jis

John Webb said:


> I am a bit wary of what I saw in the video and the attendant discussion. No mention of what plans are, if any, for new food service cars and in the case of the Night Owl (listed as one of the trains receiving the new equipment) sleeping cars. Anyone know anything about this? Or are we facing a future of vending machines and coach only seating?


There is plenty of material available on the food service (Cafe) car, though they may not be readily available on this site. RPA representatives have been present at the soft setup reviews and reported back on it at RPA. Actually the Cafe cars look pretty good.

There are no plans for Sleeping Cars in the ICTs. The configuration of ICTs are available in quite some detail. If there is an overnight train with Sleeper that set will have to come out of the LD pool, that much is pretty clear.


----------



## rickycourtney

cocojacoby said:


> So assign it a Type D. It doesn't actually run on the NEC.


That would require maintaining another subset of equipment in the NEC pool. I'm sure Amtrak did a cost/benefit analysis and determined the extra cost of buying the electric equipment for all cars was less than the costs of keeping a subset of equipment for the Downeaster.
Furthermore, in the 20-40 year lifespan of these trainsets, the proposed North–South Rail Link may be built, connecting Boston North and South station. In that case, it would be necessary to have equipment that can run under wire.


----------



## jis

rickycourtney said:


> That would require maintaining another subset of equipment in the NEC pool. I'm sure Amtrak did a cost/benefit analysis and determined the extra cost of buying the electric equipment for all cars was less than the costs of keeping a subset of equipment for the Downeaster.
> Furthermore, in the 20-40 year lifespan of these trainsets, the proposed North–South Rail Link may be built, connecting Boston North and South station. In that case, it would be necessary to have equipment that can run under wire.


Indeed, transformers and rectifiers require surprisingly little maintenance. No moving parts at all.


----------



## GDRRiley

MARC Rider said:


> ..or if they want to add more service. The New York - Scranton line is now in the pipeline, they're seriously talking about New York - Allentown and Philadelphia - Reading. How about more frequencies on the Empire Corridor? Or more service to Vermont? And more frequencies between Washington and Richmond and other Virginia points. All of these will require more equipment, no?


They can order more sure
I'm just saying I don't expect if and when they do for the cars to be different other than some minor changes


----------



## Willbridge

jis said:


> ...
> There are no plans for Sleeping Cars in the ICTs. The configuration of ICTs are available in quite some detail. If there is an overnight train with Sleeper that set will have to come out of the LD pool, that much is pretty clear.


It might better be described as a LD puddle rather than pool.


----------



## cocojacoby

rickycourtney said:


> That would require maintaining another subset of equipment in the NEC pool. I'm sure Amtrak did a cost/benefit analysis and determined the extra cost of buying the electric equipment for all cars was less than the costs of keeping a subset of equipment for the Downeaster.
> Furthermore, in the 20-40 year lifespan of these trainsets, the proposed North–South Rail Link may be built, connecting Boston North and South station. In that case, it would be necessary to have equipment that can run under wire.


Seems like it's a simple matter of switching out one car, the one with the unnecessary electrical equipment. That equipment will be riding around unused for years. Converting a D1 to a B1 would be an easy job I would think. You know after 20 years of nonuse that electrical equipment will be obsolete and useless.


----------



## rickycourtney

cocojacoby said:


> Seems like it's a simple matter of switching out one car, the one with the unnecessary electrical equipment. That equipment will be riding around unused for years. Converting a D1 to a B1 would be an easy job I would think. You know after 20 years of nonuse that electrical equipment will be obsolete and useless.


You’re assuming that this equipment will be completely captive to the Downeaster. It likely won’t be. Just like today, there will be occasional times where equipment will need heavy maintenance that can’t be performed in Maine. If all the trainsets are identical it’s an easy swap.


----------



## jis

cocojacoby said:


> Seems like it's a simple matter of switching out one car, the one with the unnecessary electrical equipment. That equipment will be riding around unused for years. Converting a D1 to a B1 would be an easy job I would think. You know after 20 years of nonuse that electrical equipment will be obsolete and useless.


Whatever makes you think that the same consist will remain captive to the Downeaster for 20 years?


----------



## TransitTyrant

John Webb said:


> I am a bit wary of what I saw in the video and the attendant discussion. No mention of what plans are, if any, for new food service cars and in the case of the Night Owl (listed as one of the trains receiving the new equipment) sleeping cars. Anyone know anything about this? Or are we facing a future of vending machines and coach only seating?


1.) There is a cafe car, the Midwest trains will have a cafe, the ICTs will have a similar one.
2.) Probably shouldn’t worry too much about the Night Owl, it’s one train.


----------



## GDRRiley

John Webb said:


> I am a bit wary of what I saw in the video and the attendant discussion. No mention of what plans are, if any, for new food service cars and in the case of the Night Owl (listed as one of the trains receiving the new equipment) sleeping cars. Anyone know anything about this? Or are we facing a future of vending machines and coach only seating?


I'd expect the owl will keep viewliner cars mixed with venture cars. Unless they order venture car sleepers for the east coast


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> I'd expect the owl will keep viewliner cars mixed with venture cars. Unless they order venture car sleepers for the east coast


The overnight train will be an ICT from what I gather. So it is unlikely that there will be a Viewliner anything in its consist. In the last 20 years it has had a Sleeper only during short intervals here and there.


----------



## GDRRiley

jis said:


> The overnight train will be an ICT from what I gather. So it is unlikely that there will be a Viewliner anything in its consist. In the last 20 years it has had a Sleeper only during short intervals here and there.


you could mix a viewliner car in but where would be the challenge. They could also just use whatever LD coaches amtrak gets or if amtrak orders singles/pairs of coaches to be mixed in


----------



## Tlcooper93

jis said:


> The overnight train will be an ICT from what I gather. So it is unlikely that there will be a Viewliner anything in its consist. In the last 20 years it has had a Sleeper only during short intervals here and there.


Are there no plans to restore the sleeper service they brought back in 2021? I’ve heard chatter here and there but nothing concrete beyond a general desire to bring it back.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Indeed, transformers and rectifiers require surprisingly little maintenance. No moving parts at all.


but especially transformers represent a lot of dead weight.


----------



## jis

cirdan said:


> but especially transformers represent a lot of dead weight.


So does an idle prime mover. That is the price one pays for using dual mode. But general operating experience with currently operating dual mode EDMUs and locomotives suggests that the weight cost is not intolerable and is manageable as long as things are distributed around to keep axle loads from becoming excessive.


----------



## Steve4031

The sleepers removed from the Night Owl could be put to better use on a single-level Capital Limited or adding capacity to the Cardinal.


----------



## TransitTyrant

Official rendering of the new ICTs, now known as the Amtrak Airo.


----------



## GDRRiley

They look quite nice, shame none will be pulled by a repainted ACS-64.


----------



## Tlcooper93

These do indeed look amazing. Definitely reminiscent of Railjets.
I do hope those seats are more comfortable than they look.


----------



## Ryan

Look, armrests!!!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Ryan said:


> Look, armrests!!!


And space between the two seats! So now people are complaining they're too narrow. You can't have both space/arm rests, which many have wished for, and roomy seats in a limited width car.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

GDRRiley said:


> They look quite nice, shame none will be pulled by a repainted ACS-64.


Out of curiosity why the affinity for the ASC 64


----------



## GDRRiley

Touchdowntom9 said:


> Out of curiosity why the affinity for the ASC 64


because it means some would be all electric instead of being the current dual modes. which I'd prefer we string up wires on a few state own lined than get dual modes


----------



## John Bredin

I googled "Airo" by itself to see more pics, figuring Airo is a unique-enough (if slightly illiterate-looking) spelling. It turns out Airo is a brand of cannabis smoking products (vape pens, cartridges, etc.).  To be fair, it's also an HVAC company, a drone & aerospace company, and a brand of CT scanner. Nowhere on the first page of google searches was Amtrak's Airo.

I wasn't loving the name when I first saw it, I'm liking it even less now. Acela's unique, Airo ain't.


----------



## Septa9739

Overall, I say so far so good. The only hesitation I have is the seats. It doesn’t seem wise to shrink the coach seat that much, unless it’s an ADA mandate. Even though these are going to be “short” haul equipment, some of the state supported services, and for that matter, the NEC, that these will serve carry many passengers for many hours at a time, and the Amfleet seats, width aside, also look far more comfortable for that kind of duration.


----------



## jis

I wonder why Amtrak Media pulled the article with the photos that they had briefly posted on their site. Perhaps there is some sort of an announcement shindig coming up and someone jumped the gun? Or maybe one of the other users of the Airo moniker sent a cease and desist letter? I am sure we will hear more about it soon. I remember something like this happening with the first moniker "American Flyer" they came up with for what eventually came out as Acela.


----------



## ascii42

jis said:


> I wonder why Amtrak Media pulled the article with the photos that they had briefly posted on their site. Perhaps there is some sort of an announcement shindig coming up and someone jumped the gun? Or maybe one of the other users of the Airo moniker sent a cease and desist letter? I am sure we will hear more about it soon. I remember something like this happening with the first moniker "American Flyer" they came up with for what eventually came out as Acela.


Amtrak tweeted this yesterday.



So yeah looks like the announcement is supposed to be today and some mistake led to the page going live yesterday.


----------



## jis

John Bredin said:


> I googled "Airo" by itself to see more pics, figuring Airo is a unique-enough (if slightly illiterate-looking) spelling. It turns out Airo is a brand of cannabis smoking products (vape pens, cartridges, etc.).  To be fair, it's also an HVAC company, a drone & aerospace company, and a brand of CT scanner. Nowhere on the first page of google searches was Amtrak's Airo.
> 
> I wasn't loving the name when I first saw it, I'm liking it even less now. Acela's unique, Airo ain't.


Why the reference to "Air" a mode that Amtrak is supposedly competing with? Maybe "Railo"  Nah!

I can see people saying I will be Airoing on the Airo as they pull out their vape pen, Oh wait, they are not allowed to do that!  Ooops!


----------



## John Bredin

jis said:


> Why the reference to "Air" a mode that Amtrak is supposedly competing with? Maybe "Railo"  Nah!


I actually like the real English word Arrow for a train. It's got railroad history and modern usage (Italy's Frecciarossa, Frecciabianca, and Frecciargento trains, or Red, White, and Silver Arrows). There's no need to resort to funky trademarkable spelling when there's not going to be another U.S. rail operator co-opting the name for their trains.


----------



## John Bredin

John Bredin said:


> I actually like the real English word Arrow for a train. It's got railroad history and modern usage (Italy's Frecciarossa, Frecciabianca, and Frecciargento trains, or Red, White, and Silver Arrows). There's no need to resort to funky trademarkable spelling when there's not going to be another U.S. rail operator co-opting the name for their trains.


Would you believe I found out I was wrong only minutes after my posting?  Metrolink is running a service with new DMUs and calling it the Arrow. So another U.S. rail operator is using the word Arrow.


----------



## jis

John Bredin said:


> I actually like the real English word Arrow for a train. It's got railroad history and modern usage (Italy's Frecciarossa, Frecciabianca, and Frecciargento trains, or Red, White, and Silver Arrows). There's no need to resort to funky trademarkable spelling when there's not going to be another U.S. rail operator co-opting the name for their trains.


There was also the famous London - Paris Boat Train Golden Arrow/Fleche d'Or which ran upto as late as 1972


----------



## frequentflyer

jis said:


> Why the reference to "Air" a mode that Amtrak is supposedly competing with? Maybe "Railo"  Nah!
> 
> I can see people saying I will be Airoing on the Airo as they pull out their vape pen, Oh wait, they are not allowed to do that!  Ooops!


Ironic, Amfleet was designed to mimic an aircraft cabin and its replacement is called "Airo".


----------



## PerRock

The new "Amtrak Airo" trainsets:


















Source:


----------



## frequentflyer

Just as the first gen Acela equipment changed the NEC perception and market share for good, this new equipment may do the same.


----------



## jamess

No recline again?


----------



## jis

Most surprisingly, AU got a preview of this in a post upthread yesterday!


PerRock said:


> The new "Amtrak Airo" trainsets:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source:


----------



## Mailliw

I wish Amtrak would put mockups on public display at DC Union Station and Penn Station.


----------



## lordsigma

New Amtrak Cascades trains in 2026 Cascades version.


----------



## TransitTyrant

Seems like from the renderings that the Midwest Ventures are the plainest and have the worst seats out of the bunch.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

lordsigma said:


> New Amtrak Cascades trains in 2026 Cascades version.


You beat me to it.


----------



## Mailliw

lordsigma said:


> New Amtrak Cascades trains in 2026 Cascades version.


I like the cafe car. Will they have seating?


----------



## joelkfla

lordsigma said:


> New Amtrak Cascades trains in 2026 Cascades version.


Looks like there'll be a human manning the cafe, but will there be tables?


----------



## rickycourtney

Septa9739 said:


> Overall, I say so far so good. The only hesitation I have is the seats. It doesn’t seem wise to shrink the coach seat that much, unless it’s an ADA mandate. Even though these are going to be “short” haul equipment, some of the state supported services, and for that matter, the NEC, that these will serve carry many passengers for many hours at a time, and the Amfleet seats, width aside, also look far more comfortable for that kind of duration.


I think it is an ADA mandate. The aisle is now wide enough for a wheelchair rider to pass through cars. That's a good thing.

Seen from a global perspective: new seats look appropiate for short haul equipment. We've just been spoiled by the long-haul seats that Amtrak uses on the Amfleet.


----------



## TheMalahat

John Bredin said:


> Nowhere on the first page of google searches was Amtrak's Airo.
> 
> I wasn't loving the name when I first saw it, I'm liking it even less now. Acela's unique, Airo ain't.



I mean in fairness you Googled Amtrak brand that hadn't even been announced officially at the time you posted. A bit of a self fulfilling prophecy there. 

In any event, I think the name is catchy, and I think the comparison to Acela is erred. Airo is a type of equipment, not the name of the train service. Acela is kind-of both. Airo = Superliner. I also think the brand juxtaposition isn't problematic, I don't think any of our friends will be left wondering if we were talking about our recent Amtrak experience, or a vape.


----------



## jis

TheMalahat said:


> I mean in fairness you Googled Amtrak brand that hadn't even been announced officially at the time you posted. A bit of a self fulfilling prophecy there.
> 
> In any event, I think the name is catchy, and I think the comparison to Acela is erred. Airo is a type of equipment, not the name of the train service. Acela is kind-of both. Airo = Superliner. I also think the brand juxtaposition isn't problematic, I don't think any of our friends will be left wondering if we were talking about our recent Amtrak experience, or a vape.


Airo is actually the entire trainset, not just the car, as far as I can tell So Aero = Railjet.


----------



## TheMalahat

jis said:


> Airo is actually the entire trainset, not just the car, as far as I can tell So Aero = Railjet.



Fair enough. But my point stands, it's not gonna be an advertisement for "ride the Airo", it'll be ride the (insert train name or corridor here), maybe with a note it's on their Swaggy new Airo equipment.


----------



## Free Jaffa

Well it seems the Airo-set rolling stock is the reason We cant keep our ACS’s.
It stinks we can’t have nice things.
I hope CT, Pennsylvania or Virginia step up.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Amtrak uploaded this on Youtube. Guess its official.


----------



## jiml

They hired the naming consultants that turned Marriott into Bonvoy.


----------



## frequentflyer

GDRRiley said:


> They look quite nice, shame none will be pulled by a repainted ACS-64.


Why? Amtrak is trying to get away from tedious and time consuming engine swaps. The Sprinters will be resold to commuter lines along the NEC. Or maybe elsewhere in the world, its a better built Euro Sprinter /Vectron.



TransitTyrant said:


> Seems like from the renderings that the Midwest Ventures are the plainest and have the worst seats out of the bunch.


If I am the midwest states I am thinking why do our sets (well not really till the cab and cafe cars are delivered) look so blah.

The Midwest cars remind me of American Eagle airline's former livery.


----------



## PVD

Perhaps Amtrak just made better decisions on what the interiors should be. They didn't pick the seats or make the final choice on livery for the state owned fleet.


----------



## MisterUptempo

PVD said:


> Perhaps Amtrak just made better decisions on what the interiors should be. They didn't pick the seats or make the final choice on livery for the state owned fleet.


I'd also be curious what an Airo coach or BC car costs as opposed to the Midwest versions. The Midwest/Caltrans only had so much cash to work with. It could be that Caltrans/IDOT just weren't very good at design or perhaps they did the best with what they had available.

I also noticed that the slick renderings neglected to show us the power end of the trainsets. Still hammering that out, maybe?


----------



## PVD

MisterUptempo said:


> I'd also be curious what an Airo coach or BC car costs as opposed to the Midwest versions. The Midwest/Caltrans only had so much cash to work with. It could be that Caltrans/IDOT just weren't very good at design or perhaps they did the best with what they had available.
> 
> I also noticed that the slick renderings neglected to show us the power end of the trainsets. Still hammering that out, maybe?


There was also a time pressure involving the Federal funding for the Midwest purchase, and they were in a bad place with the Nippon Sharyu "default"


----------



## jis

Amtrak unveils new train cars with plenty for customers to love - The Points Guy


new cars and improvements on Amtrak




thepointsguy.com


----------



## Cal

They look really good, here's some notes:
-The aisle in the standard economy section looks much more narrow than the ones in the midwest Venture cars
-They seem to be going with a slightly different layout than the midwest cars
-The finishing touches like the wall texture and seat design are nice, I think it's atmosphere is better and less bland than the midwest cars
-No real difference between standard and business class seats except the 2-1 layout. Missed opportunity in my opinion
-Seat assignment system is installed
-Love the cafe design
-Not really loving the cascade's livery, I think the current one is much better
-The blue livery is cool, not the most innovative but solid 

I'm really glad that Amtrak did not go with the same design as the midwest (are there any pictures of the business class or cafe car layout of those?). The midwest coach cars are definitely inferior to these. However, that will probably nix the possibility of uniform business across the network. Also, the California ventures livery definitely looks lame in comparison.


----------



## jis

The official Amtrak Media page is back...









Introducing Our New Trains: Amtrak Airo | Amtrak


Amtrak is partnering with Siemens to enhance the travel experience by introducing new trainsets with a focus on comfort, efficiency and sustainability.




www.amtrak.com


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> Amtrak unveils new train cars with plenty for customers to love - The Points Guy
> 
> 
> new cars and improvements on Amtrak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thepointsguy.com


Here's a quote from the article:



> One new detail especially worth highlighting: Panoramic windows allow passengers to "enjoy some of the most beautiful scenery in the country," explained Harris.



Oh yeah, some really great scenery, like the passage through West Baltimore, North Philadelphia, the notorious curve at Frankford Junction. Not to mention some really great views of the backside of the Bronx between the Hell Gate Bridge and New Rochelle.


----------



## jis

MARC Rider said:


> Here's a quote from the article:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, some really great scenery, like the passage through West Baltimore, North Philadelphia, the notorious curve at Frankford Junction. Not to mention some really great views of the backside of the Bronx between the Hell Gate Bridge and New Rochelle.


I was thinking more of the view from the Hell Gate Bridge and Susquehanna Bridge, and along the New England Shore, and along the Hudson and such. I guess different people focus on different things


----------



## joelkfla

MARC Rider said:


> Here's a quote from the article:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, some really great scenery, like the passage through West Baltimore, North Philadelphia, the notorious curve at Frankford Junction. Not to mention some really great views of the backside of the Bronx between the Hell Gate Bridge and New Rochelle.


The Manhattan skyline from Hell Gate, the Hudson River, and the Connecticut coast.


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> I was thinking more of the view from the Hell Gate Bridge and Susquehanna Bridge, and along the New England Shore, and along the Hudson and such. I guess different people focus on different things


Don't forget the SEPTA car barn at Elmwood Ave and Island Ave. in SW Philadelphia before you get to 30th St. There's usually some of the PCC cars parked there in addition to the typical Kawasaki cars that SEPTA uses.

There's also a great view of the Philadelphia skyline as you cross the Schuylkill River at Girard Av.


----------



## Asher

Nice look, no complaints here


----------



## railiner

Cal said:


> They look really good, here's some notes:
> -The aisle in the standard economy section looks much more narrow than the ones in the midwest Venture cars
> -They seem to be going with a slightly different layout than the midwest cars
> -The finishing touches like the wall texture and seat design are nice, I think it's atmosphere is better and less bland than the midwest cars
> -No real difference between standard and business class seats except the 2-1 layout. Missed opportunity in my opinion
> -Seat assignment system is installed
> -Love the cafe design
> -Not really loving the cascade's livery, I think the current one is much better
> -The blue livery is cool, not the most innovative but solid
> 
> I'm really glad that Amtrak did not go with the same design as the midwest (are there any pictures of the business class or cafe car layout of those?). The midwest coach cars are definitely inferior to these. However, that will probably nix the possibility of uniform business across the network. Also, the California ventures livery definitely looks lame in comparison.


Call me old-fashioned (I am!), but I prefer the look of classic Budd corrugated and fluted stainless steel, with art deco style black lettering, as in the original CZ, over any of these new liveries…


----------



## Exvalley

Cal said:


> -Seat assignment system is installed



Do you mean like on the British railroads where there is an LED indicator to tell you if a seat is available?


----------



## jis

Exvalley said:


> Do you mean like on the British railroads where there is an LED indicator to tell you if a seat is available?


Acelas also came equipped with those but it has been seldom used, if ever. They could not even get assigned seat reservation working until very recently. There was pushback from executives, passengers, train crew and possibly even the IT department. Is it going to be different this time around? We'll see......


----------



## rickycourtney

Cal said:


> -No real difference between standard and business class seats except the 2-1 layout. Missed opportunity in my opinion


The armrests are wider providing more space between passengers. It's hard to tell, but the seats may be wider with a longer pitch too. But yes, not a huge difference.

Here's a wild thought -- maybe Amtrak can improve the soft BC product to improve the value proposition. Do like the Pacific Surliner and offer a snack box and a free alcoholic beverage.


----------



## Exvalley

jis said:


> Acelas also came equipped with those but it has been seldom used, if ever. They could not even get assigned seat reservation working until very recently. There was pushback from executives, passengers, train crew and possibly even the IT department. Is it going to be different this time around? We'll see......



But does the Airo come equipped with this technology? I might have missed it, but I do not see any indicators in the photos.


----------



## jis

Exvalley said:


> But does the Airo come equipped with this technology? I might have missed it, but I do not see any indicators in the photos.


Those photos may be artists renditions rather than actual photos of the interior. I have heard from Jim Matthews who has seen various mockups that there are electronic indicators.

Just for reference Brightline Coach seats are 19" wide , Business are 21", and seat pitch is 39". Of course Amtrak could have selected some other mix. I don't know. I will ask around and see if someone who has seen the mockups and given feedback know.


----------



## rickycourtney

jis said:


> Those photos may be artists renditions rather than actual photos of the interior. I have heard from Jim Matthews who has seen various mockups that there are electronic indicators.
> 
> Just for reference Brightline Coach seats are 19" wide , Business are 21", and seat pitch is 39". Of course Amtrak could have selected some other mix. I don;t know. I will ask around and see if someone who has seen the mockups and given feedback know.


And for futher reference -- on a typical 737 -- economy seats are 17" wide with 30-32" of pitch, while first class seats are 21" wide with 41" of pitch.

So in other words, if the seats are similar to Brightline, Business Class will be an equal experience to domestic first class, which is a pretty good comparison.


----------



## PerRock

jis said:


> Acelas also came equipped with those but it has been seldom used, if ever. They could not even get assigned seat reservation working until very recently. There was pushback from executives, passengers, train crew and possibly even the IT department. Is it going to be different this time around? We'll see......



Seeing as the Venture cars have overhead displays & Amtrak is pretty much already given up using them, I wouldn't hold out hope for the seat reservation indicators being used.

peter


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

That'll be like those indicators in fancy parking garages have with red or green lights above the spaces!


----------



## jis

I don't know if the Cascades version has been posted yet, so here it is:









New Amtrak Cascades trains in 2026


Eight new trainsets and two new locomotives manufactured by Siemens in California.




www.flickr.com










New passenger trains coming to the I-5 corridor | WSDOT


OLYMPIA – A new fleet of Northwest-themed Amtrak Cascades trains will transport passengers in style between Seattle, Vancouver, BC, Portland and other stations along the I-5 corridor when eight new trainsets and two new locomotives arrive in the Pacific Northwest in 2026.




wsdot.wa.gov







PerRock said:


> Seeing as the Venture cars have overhead displays & Amtrak is pretty much already given up using them, I wouldn't hold out hope for the seat reservation indicators being used.
> 
> peter


What Amtrak is doing in the Midwest bears little connection with what they currently do or will do on the NEC and vice versa. But of course one should always wait until the proverbial fat lady sings


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

It is puzzling as to why a concept - seat reservations - that has been around for decades and is universal on many airlines and many European railways is considered so controversial for Amtrak.


----------



## rs9

In regard to the appearance of the Airo seats versus the current Amfleet I seats, and the inevitable comments about comfort:

- I've been fortunate enough to ride the rails in other countries with modern train systems, namely RENFE in Spain and TGV in France. Modern passenger railroads don't use seats like the Amfleets; their seats are just like what Siemens is offering here.

This should come as no surprise - the US is such a minor player in terms of passenger rail travel. We aren't going to be setting the market.

- The coach seats I've experienced on RENFE and TGV were perfectly fine. Frankly they were so normal and unremarkable that I can't even recall much to try to describe them.

- I agree the new seats might get uncomfortable for the full WAS-BOS run on the NEC. But I'm sure I'm not alone in noting that the Amfleet seats became uncomfortable for folks like me after 2-3 hours of sitting. Modern recline functions, in which the seat base itself moves along with the seat back, are so much better ergonomically designed. I have a hard time finding a comfortable position in the Amfleet seats when I have any level of recline; I have to use something I brought with me for lumbar support.

- It will be interesting to see what Amtrak can source for long distance seats. Who else in the world runs coach long distance trains the length that Amtrak does?


----------



## Willbridge

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> It is puzzling as to why a concept - seat reservations - that has been around for decades and is universal on many airlines and many European railways is considered so controversial for Amtrak.


There are some pros and cons, which I've experienced. The biggest problem is that on trains or individual cars with a lot of turnover, passengers spot a couple of empty seats and so they move into them. Then the train stops in McCook in the middle of the night and two people board and find some body in their seats. Everyone in the vicinity is awakened while the crew straightens things out.

Of course, many of the difficulties in the past were a result of manual systems. I recall a triple-booked seat on the SP _Cascade, _which resulted in a screaming match. But the seat-switching behavior will not change with computers.


----------



## Steve4031

PerRock said:


> Seeing as the Venture cars have overhead displays & Amtrak is pretty much already given up using them, I wouldn't hold out hope for the seat reservation indicators being used.
> 
> peter


The overhead displays were in use on the river runner/Lincoln service train I rode in November.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTE: A number of posts on new Sleeper ideas have been moved out of this thread on Amfleet I replacement to a new thread on the subject in the Amtrak Futures forum:






New Sleeper ideas


Russia does, but I don't see Amtrak embracing platzcart. https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-railways-presents-new-sleeping-carriage-design/30434553.html




www.amtraktrains.com





Please post Sleeper related ideas in that thread and leave this thread focused on ICTs to replace Amfleet Is

Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------



## NES28

All seats being reserved, reinforced with real-time displays, should end the nonsense of trainloads of passengers standing in line for an hour before train time, like Southwest Airlines, before A, B, C boarding groups. This will be a huge improvement.


----------



## rs9

NES28 said:


> All seats being reserved, reinforced with real-time displays, should end the nonsense of trainloads of passengers standing in line for an hour before train time, like Southwest Airlines, before A, B, C boarding groups. This will be a huge improvement.


Slightly off topic, but this would make life loads better for solo coach travelers on long distance trains.


----------



## west point

Now we find that management has a royal screw up for the AIRO purchase that will delay delivery possibly 5- 1/2 months. As well maintenance facilities revisions for the equipment were not verified by each facility personnel Appears central design teams screwed up. Also there is no changes for Chicago maintenance which absolutely no sense.



https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-A-2023-005%20ICT.pdf


----------



## Septa9739

I didn’t realize that only $3.4 of the $7.3 billion were spent on train sets. That makes me want to question whether this is going to end up being any cheaper than buying conventional equipment. You could have in theory replaced everything for about that amount. Maybe they think the Horizons plus the Ventures will cover corridors out of Chicago. It also seems like Siemens should open another production line. They are already filled out to 2031. That would seem to make them unattractive for future orders from anyone.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Now we find that management has a royal screw up for the AIRO purchase that will delay delivery possibly 5- 1/2 months. As well maintenance facilities revisions for the equipment were not verified by each facility personnel Appears central design teams screwed up. Also there is no changes for Chicago maintenance which absolutely no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-A-2023-005%20ICT.pdf


Actually it makes perfect sense that there is no changes in Chicago. Why would Chicago need anything to handle Airos? The Airos are not going to run anywhere out of Chicago. They are a Northeast, Atlantic Coast and Cascades thing.


Septa9739 said:


> I didn’t realize that only $3.4 of the $7.3 billion were spent on train sets. That makes me want to question whether this is going to end up being any cheaper than buying conventional equipment. You could have in theory replaced everything for about that amount. Maybe they think the Horizons plus the Ventures will cover corridors out of Chicago. It also seems like Siemens should open another production line. They are already filled out to 2031. That would seem to make them unattractive for future orders from anyone.


Regional service out of Chicago uses State owned equipment going forward. Not Amtrak owned equipment. Airos in this order are Amtrak owned for use on routes where either Amtrak operates them or the States funding the routes lease equipment from Amtrak. Nothing in the Midwest Regional service fits that description going forward.


----------



## joelkfla

west point said:


> Now we find that management has a royal screw up for the AIRO purchase that will delay delivery possibly 5- 1/2 months. As well maintenance facilities revisions for the equipment were not verified by each facility personnel Appears central design teams screwed up. Also there is no changes for Chicago maintenance which absolutely no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-A-2023-005%20ICT.pdf


I wouldn't call this a royal screw-up; I would call it a management oversight. If a project of this size comes in 5½ months late, IMO that's pretty good these days.


----------



## west point

Isn't it possible that Airos will go to CHI on LSL and possible Capitol to free up Superliners ? By the way maybe Cardinal ?
BTW the 5-1/2 month delay is not the biggie. Even with that delay maintenance facilities may not be completely revised when Airo is in service. No reasn they would not be ready for original date of Airo deliverys.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Isn't it possible that Airos will go to CHI on LSL and possible Capitol to free up Superliners ? By the way maybe Cardinal ?
> BTW the 5-1/2 month delay is not the biggie. Even with that delay maintenance facilities may not be completely revised when Airo is in service. No reasn they would not be ready for original date of Airo deliverys.


No. They do not have any Sleepers or Diners, and they are articulated sets with accommodations suitable only for daytime Regional service. They will not be running on LSL, Capitol or Cardinal ever.

It is possible though quite unlikely that Amtrak will choose Airo-like articulated sets with Sleeping Cars for LD service, but really I do not see that will happen and in any case that is not part of the current Airo/ICT order that we are talking about here or in the IG report


----------



## rickycourtney

west point said:


> Now we find that management has a royal screw up for the AIRO purchase that will delay delivery possibly 5- 1/2 months. As well maintenance facilities revisions for the equipment were not verified by each facility personnel Appears central design teams screwed up. Also there is no changes for Chicago maintenance which absolutely no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-A-2023-005%20ICT.pdf


Not involving the food service teams in the design of the Cafe leading to a 5 1/2 month delay and a $42.5 million charge... that's typical Amtrak mismanagement.

But the fact that Amtrak has taken concrete steps to prevent future mistakes like that -- that's won the praise of the OIG -- is huge progress for Amtrak. 

While a $42.5 million mistake with a 5 1/2 month delay is not insignificant, calling it a "royal screw up" is a bit overstated in the context of a $7.3 billion/10-year project.


----------



## Mailliw

It does sound encouraging that they're planning on more food storage space.


----------



## zephyr17

Mailliw said:


> It does sound encouraging that they're planning on more food storage space.


Maybe they learned that stuff actually takes up space after they omitted linen closets on the Viewliner IIs.


----------



## RebelRider

zephyr17 said:


> Maybe they learned that stuff actually takes up space after they omitted linen closets on the Viewliner IIs.



Oh, no, closet is a Viewliner I term. We call them linen rooms on the Viewliner IIs.


----------



## RebelRider

Back on the Airo track, the lack of planning for food storage and seat configuration has me wondering just how far the procurement people think these trainsets will travel. Boston to Roanoke or Newport News is a long trip to be in a thinly padded, non-reclining seat. Those are 14 hour trips. If the extension to Christiansburg, VA happens, add another hour or more. 

Next question is how big are the retention tank and water supply? On busy days, trains originating in SPG or BOS heading to Virginia have retention tanks nearly full at WAS.

The inability to flex capacity by trainset is a huge oversight, too, running the same number of seats every day of the year, regardless of demand. (I guess this is good for charging high ticket prices?) Even the largest 8 car B-2 trainsets will have fewer seats than the 10 car Regional sets that run on peak days now. 

Somewhere I read Amtrak stating extra frequencies would be operate to capture peak demand. On-corridor, maybe. The host railroads will not entertain extra frequencies, never mind layover and turnaround facility constraints. Even if the host railroads did play ball, Amtrak will never staff the off-corridor crew bases to reliably operate extra frequencies a few times a year.

If a grade crossing accident or any other incident (tires, shopping carts, etc) disables something, the train is annulled as the bad ordered car can't be set out. 

I have lots of other mundane operational questions that I doubt the company will think about until it is too late. I don't mean to sound down about the new trains - I'm quite excited to have new equipment - but realistically they aren't going to arrive on schedule and lots of little details will be left hanging out there for crews to stumble over.


----------



## Septa9739

I’m with you. Maybe this is just ignorance on my part, but I don’t see the value of semipermanently connected sets. I don’t see how they’re supposed to improve shop ratios. What realistically is the difference between servicing 7 coaches or one seven coach set? Badlisted equipment can no longer just be set out. Will the Airo’s be strong enough to drag a dead set many miles to a shop, or will an engine have to be dispatched?

I really don’t like the inability to right size consists as needs arise. These things are going to be to be giants on the Keystone from the outset. In theory they should’ve be able to MU the way train sets do in Europe, but even still running two trains coupled will prove more expensive than one monster and decline margins. The steps toward break even (and effective service), I think, are 1) run the longest trains necessary that infrastructure will permit (diluting fixed costs of crew, stations, and power), 2) run more frequencies on routes that show promise (diluting fixed costs of maintenance and dispatch), 3) run new routes (diluting fixed costs of administration). Each tier dilutes the fixed costs of the tier above but not vice versa. Success at one tier implies attempt at the next. Fixed consists mess up tier 1 and we all know achievping tiers 2 and 3 are difficult.

I’m also not thrilled that apparently BILLIONS are going into shop retrofits, but maybe they were in poor condition anyway and this was a way to fund necessary rehabilitation. But, despite it all, I am glad that the Amfleets are being replaced and that we will have rolling stock for the decades to come.


----------



## NTL1991

I'm all for the added redundancy that a Diesel loco would provide to trains running under the wire here on the NEC. This time of year is especially bad when trees pull the wire down and your tin cans Amfleets are struggling to retain their heat. I remember #66 that was dead on the Hell Gate for 5+ hours with no overhead power in freezing temps. Lets say there's something fouling tracks ahead... At the very least you still have HVAC, lights, WiFi, working bathrooms while you wait for track. And if **** has really hit the fan ahead, you change ends and head back to the nearest station. I personally don't care how much dead weight the diesels are to tote around under wire, at least it's there when you need it. Redundancy is everything.

The Acela I's redundant power cars have proven to be a saving grace. I think passengers would be surprised to know how often that second power car prevents dead-in-the-water trains/train-to-train rescues. Not even knowing they've been running with a power car offline. And that's the point.

I also like the somewhat distributed-traction from the Charger and APV, which might possibly assist with seasonal wheelslip delays.

Also, it could cut down on terminal departure delays since looping the trainset can resolve ACSES failures fairly quickly. Another common occurrence on the Acelas.

Since the ordering of the new Viewliner II, I had been hopefully that Amtrak would expand checked-baggage service in the NEC, providing for checked baggage not only on 65/66/67, but also on LD connecting NERs such as 95, 171, 174, 178 for example. The company wants to improve entrain/detrain, onboard and in-station safety and reducing the amount of carry-on baggage would absolutely help that. So many passenger injuries happen when people are struggling with bags, steps, gaps, slick vestibules, escalators, etc. Providing realistic, convenient options for checked baggage (NOT check your bag the day before you travel...) would absolutely help that. It's clear that this will not be a reality with the new equipment, which is a shame.


----------



## rickycourtney

Let's just put some of this into perspective...

As to concerns about these being semi-permanently coupled trainsets...
The Cascades has been using (functionally) permanently coupled trainsets for over 20 years with very few issues you bring up and the operation is much the same. The cars are maintained under contract with Talgo as one unit. But the Talgo trainsets require the use of a crane and specialized equipment to remove a car from a trainset. Siemens says these cars will take a team of two people about 35 minutes to couple/uncouple. It's not something they'll want to do all the time, but eliminating a bad car or expanding a trainset for surge needs? No problem! In my experience, it's rare that Amtrak makes changes to their consist as is. But maybe over time, they'll discover that it just doesn't make sense to have six cars on Keystone Corridor trains; they can remove those cars and use them elsewhere. 

As to concerns about the length of time people will spend on these trains... 
The seats do recline, sort of. The seat bottoms slide forward, adjusting the angle of your seat and allowing you to recline at the expense of YOUR legroom, not the legroom of the person behind you. This has always seemed like a more fair system to me, and I say this as a 6'3" tall person with long legs. Also, I don't honestly expect that many people will be traveling the entire Boston to Virginia length of the corridor. For a 14-hour trip, if you're not a die-hard railfan, it makes more sense to just fly.

As to concerns about checked baggage...
Those are fair points... but I just don't see Amtrak being all that interested in expanding checked baggage service. For better or worse, the airlines have made all of us used to NOT checking our luggage. It usually comes with added fees and increased chances of lost bags. Beyond that, eliminating (or not adding) checked baggage service means fewer baggage handlers are necessary. People are the most expensive part of any operation.


----------



## rickycourtney

Amtrak Cascades says their cafe cars will have table seating.


----------



## Septa9739

Thank you. Context helps. I was still thinking of the crane.


----------



## Stremba

Western Pa. to get new, upgraded Amtrak Airo trains


Amtrak is upgrading a select portion of its fleet and Western Pennsylvania passengers will benefit. The Pennsylvanian line — which runs from Pittsburgh to Harrisburg and connects to Philadelphia and New York — will be getting new Amtrak Airo trains. These new, modern trains are coming to 14...




triblive.com





I saw this on the local newspaper website and this was the first I heard of it. Anyone familiar with these new Airo trains? Eliminating the long layover for the engine change in Philly certainly will speed the Pennsylvanian trip a bit. (Apparently the new train will have the ability to run on both diesel and electric power)


----------



## rickycourtney

Stremba said:


> Western Pa. to get new, upgraded Amtrak Airo trains
> 
> 
> Amtrak is upgrading a select portion of its fleet and Western Pennsylvania passengers will benefit. The Pennsylvanian line — which runs from Pittsburgh to Harrisburg and connects to Philadelphia and New York — will be getting new Amtrak Airo trains. These new, modern trains are coming to 14...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> triblive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I saw this on the local newspaper website and this was the first I heard of it. Anyone familiar with these new Airo trains? Eliminating the long layover for the engine change in Philly certainly will speed the Pennsylvanian trip a bit. (Apparently the new train will have the ability to run on both diesel and electric power)


You’ve come to the right place. Scroll back for 10 pages of discussion about the Airo.

The trains will be dual powered, so yes, much shorter layovers will be possible in Philly, as will a switch to electric power in Harrisburg.


----------



## Mailliw

rickycourtney said:


> Amtrak Cascades says their cafe cars will have table seating.



Which is good news, but how much of that seating will actually be available to passengers? I think there should one small dedicated crew compartment; think Euro-style compartment seating.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

Mailliw said:


> Which is good news, but how much of that seating will actually be available to passengers? I think there should one small dedicated crew compartment; think Euro-style compartment seating.


As a matter of principle, crews should not be taking up locations that are for passenger use.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Actually Management might not like a crew to be in designated crew compartment, and get complaints of crew not being found or crew sleeping. 
either way the crew is a neccesity , their work space a neccesity in whatever form , the public will complain .


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> Actually Management might not like a crew to be in designated crew compartment, and get complaints of crew not being found or crew sleeping.
> either way the crew is a neccesity , their work space a neccesity in whatever form , the public will complain .


I still think it would be appropriate to have designated crew space, which could very well be one table in the Lounge/Cafe. The current problem is that in a half Cafe almost all the tables are occupied by crew with one individual occupying an entire table and scowling and growling at any passenger (customers who they ostensibly are supposed to be serving) that dares to try to find a sitting place in the Cafe to eat. That is what should not be acceptable, and is generally not accepted anywhere other than at Amtrak, as routine crew behavior.


----------



## IndyLions

There is actually a "conductor's office" in some Cafe cars - a small enclosed space with a desk. Usually that's where they throw their junk - so it doesn't clutter up the half dozen booths they need to do their job...

Once I saw a conductor actually sitting in one and I immediately thought...Hmmm...he must be new...


----------



## Mailliw

Dutchrailnut said:


> Actually Management might not like a crew to be in designated crew compartment, and get complaints of crew not being found or crew sleeping.
> either way the crew is a neccesity , their work space a neccesity in whatever form , the public will complain .


I don't see this as any different than crew compartments on airliners. Only 1 or 2 crewmembers should actually be on break at anytime, the rest would still be easily found. I'd imagine having the crew take their breaks in a passenger area creates more of an impression of "laziness" than a crew compartment would.


----------



## Simsuper80

Will amtrak be getting rid of the talgo 8 sets that they are currently using?


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

Simsuper80 said:


> Will amtrak be getting rid of the talgo 8 sets that they are currently using?


Yes


----------



## zephyr17

Simsuper80 said:


> Will amtrak be getting rid of the talgo 8 sets that they are currently using?


Well, it's really not up to Amtrak, it is up to ODOT which owns the two sets (I think one is still out of service), and WashDOT, which jointly funds the service generally with ODOT and so is on the hook for part of the maintenance costs.

WashDOT, in particular, is concerned about economics of scale and no longer having maintenance one-offs different from the general Amtrak fleet. They also are pretty determined to cease doing business with Talgo, there was a major falling out over Talgo's required maintenance contracts. Pissing off their lead customer in the North American market was not a smart move for Talgo, and they are now shut out of North America for the foreseeable future.

While I don't know for sure, WashDOT announcements of the new fleet made no mention of the Talgos at all. And WashDOT, at least, would almost certainly like be done with Talgo. WashDOT is the senior partner and largest funder of the service.

Long way of getting to the same conclusion, but I don't see a future for the Talgo VIIIs once the all the "Airos" WashDOT/ODOT are buying are delivered.


----------



## jis

On the argument about using locomotive hauled trains vs. articulated distributed power sets, an interesting data point has shown up over the last few weeks in India that I thought might be worth sharing. There is a route of length of 565km (351 miles) which has a loco hauled day train which is scheduled for 8.5 hours. It has numerous speed restrictions for various reason interspersed among sections of 80mph. On the same route recently a second train with similar stops, but operated using an articulated distributed power set (Vande Bharat Express) was added with initial schedule of 7.5 hours, allegedly to be updated to 7 hours after it is ascertained that the schedule can be reliably maintained. In its first week of operation it routinely ran 20 mins ahead of schedule, so it looks like that the schedule will be tightened to 7 hours.

What this suggests is that in situations where the route profile requires numerous slowdown and speedups articulated distributed power sets gives one a very significant scheduling boost of between 1 and 1.5 hours per 300 miles. This sort of a thing projected onto a 2000 mile corridor would suggest cutting schedule time by between 3 and 5 hours by just changing equipment. That translates to a 13-15 hour New York - Chicago schedule without doing any track work, provided of course dispatching can be managed better. Also since it is not an electrified route, the gains will probably be somewhat less spectacular.

As for Amtrak, it has so far steadfastly refused to consider distributed power. However the Airos, even though they are not fully distributed power, the ones with catenary APV have 2 or 4 more powered axles than pure loco hauled push-pull set, which should help performance, how much is yet to be seen. The question is will Amtrak actually take advantage of it or will it hold the schedules down for the sake of product differentiation between Regionals and Acelas?


----------



## bonzoesc

jis said:


> On the argument about using locomotive hauled trains vs. articulated distributed power sets, an interesting data point has shown up over the last few weeks in India that I thought might be worth sharing. […]


Yeah, "multiple units" (abbreviated DMU for diesel multiple unit and EMU for electric multiple unit) have better performance because of physics, where the amount of force you can exert between wheel and rail is based on mass, but are harder operationally because you have the complexity of having that extra traction power distributed around the train.


----------



## Tlcooper93

bonzoesc said:


> Yeah, "multiple units" (abbreviated DMU for diesel multiple unit and EMU for electric multiple unit) have better performance because of physics, where the amount of force you can exert between wheel and rail is based on mass, but are harder operationally because you have the complexity of having that extra traction power distributed around the train.


I'm not sure this is enough of an issue for there to be any argument against widespread adoption of the tech. EMU use is ubiquitous, and the US should absolutely utilize them (at the least, DMUs would be highly advised in many instances, especially in the Northeast).

That said, these 'american railjets' really are a significant upgrade, and will be a much more enjoyable experience, except for maybe those seats.


----------



## jis

I just thought that there is something to be said for the possibility of being able to tighten schedules by an hour to hour and a half between New York and Richmond without spending many tens of Billions on track upgrade, by just making better selection of rolling stock when you are replacing them anyway. But what would I know? These things just work outside the US as we have been told multiple times.


----------



## Trogdor

bonzoesc said:


> Yeah, "multiple units" (abbreviated DMU for diesel multiple unit and EMU for electric multiple unit) have better performance because of physics, where the amount of force you can exert between wheel and rail is based on mass, but are harder operationally because you have the complexity of having that extra traction power distributed around the train.





Tlcooper93 said:


> I'm not sure this is enough of an issue for there to be any argument against widespread adoption of the tech. EMU use is widespread, and the US should absolutely utilize them (at the least, DMUs would be highly advised in many instances, especially in the Northeast).
> 
> That said, these 'american railjets' really are a significant upgrade, and will be a much more enjoyable experience, except for maybe those seats.



My understanding is the main argument against MUs vs. loco & trailers has been that MUs must all be maintained according to locomotive standards, vs. trailers which have less stringent inspection routines. I'm not an expert on maintenance and inspection requirements, but my vague recollection is that locomotives must undergo some sort of inspection every two days, plus additional inspections at various intervals. If that is the case, then the maintenance costs become considerably higher for MU sets vs. loco-hauled trainsets.

That this is not an issue elsewhere suggests that the regulations governing MU sets are probably not as draconian in other parts of the world as they are in the US. This wouldn't be anything new, however, as the US has this habit of regulating good ideas into oblivion while less effective things continue unabated.


----------



## jis

bonzoesc said:


> Yeah, "multiple units" (abbreviated DMU for diesel multiple unit and EMU for electric multiple unit) have better performance because of physics, where the amount of force you can exert between wheel and rail is based on mass, but are harder operationally because you have the complexity of having that extra traction power distributed around the train.


This train I mentioned is not a multiple unit anything. It is a single unit articulate distributed power 16 car trainset. What is important is many powered axles distributed around the train.


----------



## bonzoesc

jis said:


> This train I mentioned is not a multiple unit anything. It is a single unit articulate distributed power 16 car trainset. What is important is many powered axles distributed around the train.


The Vande Bharat Express is an electric multiple unit train. The "multiple unit" part doesn't necessarily mean that the wagons are easy to split up or run separately.


----------



## west point

So, for any route the more slow sections & distances below max speed then the more likely that distributed traction would be desired, How much time would be saved for each slow section can be calculated probably in just seconds dependingon how slow and how far slow. The NEC from north of Frankford to North PHL probably is the best known on the NEC with max speeds as low as 60? MPH. But what the best time savings per passenger seconds might be the best metric? Also regional 125 and 160 AX-2 speeds have to be considered. 

So Amtrak needs to start acquiring what real eastate it needs and soon as some is acquired then elimiate those slow areas . Then take the lowest cost per passenger section and eliminate all slow speeds..

As manay slow sections that are at present on th NEC then distributed traction seems prudent. But by time AX-3s are ordered maybe only power cars wiill be needed? 

Of course end of life structures have to be priority. So, Conn river bridge, new hudson tunnel bores, north and south Portal bridges, B&P tunnel, Susquehanna bridge replacements will all save a few minutesdo


----------



## jis

bonzoesc said:


> The Vande Bharat Express is an electric multiple unit train. The "multiple unit" part doesn't necessarily mean that the wagons are easy to split up or run separately.


That would indeed be consistent with FRA's definition as far as inspection requirements go, though of course the rules that apply to them are not FRA's. Even though consisting of multiple powered units the train can be inspected as a single unit with a single inspection report rather than each individual powered car requiring a separate report. Thanks for clarifying. 

This is true of EMUs in the USA even if a particular train consists of multiple separable units. As long as they remain together they can be treated as a single unit for the purposes of inspection reporting.


Trogdor said:


> My understanding is the main argument against MUs vs. loco & trailers has been that MUs must all be maintained according to locomotive standards, vs. trailers which have less stringent inspection routines. I'm not an expert on maintenance and inspection requirements, but my vague recollection is that locomotives must undergo some sort of inspection every two days, plus additional inspections at various intervals. If that is the case, then the maintenance costs become considerably higher for MU sets vs. loco-hauled trainsets.


Incidentally, in the US power units that have microprocessor based monitoring and event recording and alarm facilities do not need to be inspected every 92 days anymore. They require inspection every 184 days, thus removing one of the major impediments to using MUs.


----------



## GDRRiley

frequentflyer said:


> Why? Amtrak is trying to get away from tedious and time consuming engine swaps. The Sprinters will be resold to commuter lines along the NEC. Or maybe elsewhere in the world, its a better built Euro Sprinter /Vectron.


Because I'd prefer them to put more lines under wire and have a split fleet. Yes there are routes were bi modes will work well but others where if the state DOT would stop being clowns they could easily run the whole thing under wire.


----------



## TransitTyrant

GDRRiley said:


> Because I'd prefer them to put more lines under wire and have a split fleet. Yes there are routes were bi modes will work well but others where if the state DOT would stop being clowns they could easily run the whole thing under wire.


Good luck, we can barely get these state DOTs to support the trains they currently fund, let alone running more.  Why has it taken WisDOT and IDOT to run a measly 3 more Hiawatha’s? Amtrak can’t force them to electrify.


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> Because I'd prefer them to put more lines under wire and have a split fleet. Yes there are routes were bi modes will work well but others where if the state DOT would stop being clowns they could easily run the whole thing under wire.


The fly in the ointment of that logic are many:

(1) Most State DOTs are not going to stop being clowns just because we think they should.

(2) Additionally the host railroads also have to stop being opposed to electrification of their tracks, unless paid a King's ransom. A large proportion of the proposed new service is slated to operate on host railroad owned trackage, specially as it applies to extension from the NEC spine.

(3) Cost of electrification in this country, which is literally out of this world, has to somehow be brought down to address the argument used by the purveyors of (1) and to some extent (2)

Noticeably Amtrak has little control over any of those factors all by itself. Ergo the quickest way in which Amtrak can improve the customer experience is by going for dual modes. This is not the first time this has happened. UK facing mostly problem (3) has followed the dual mode route, and good thing they did too since it made it possible to introduce uniform MU based service much faster than if they had to wait for completion of electrification all across Great Western territory. In the US NJTransit has followed the same course. 

So while ideally I'd like to see quicker and further spread of electrification, realistically in the context of service extensions from the NEC spine IMHO it is better to go with dual mode for the time being.


----------



## John Bredin

TransitTyrant said:


> Good luck, we can barely get these state DOTs to support the trains they currently fund, let alone running more. [Snip.] Amtrak can’t force them to electrify.


Generally true, especially the can't force electrification part.


> Why has it taken WisDOT and IDOT to run a measly 3 more Hiawatha’s?


NIMBYs, mostly in the area from Glenview to Lake Forest, who claim they're not against improved Amtrak service but the additional freight trains that lengthened sidings would allow.  Just this once, it ain't Wisconsin's fault.  In fact, WisDOT has said they'll do their share of the track improvements to get additional Hiawathas running.


----------

