VIA Rail Long Distance (LD) and Inter-Regional fleet replacement

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
They can always piggyback on Amtrak's single level order or even better Amtrak could piggyback on VIA's single level order for the necessary single level LD equipment. ;) VIA has in past already rejected bi-levels once for various reasons. They did try out Superliners for a short period and jointly operated the Superliner Chicago - Toronto service for a little while too.
I've often heard that VIA rejected bilevels in the past (in the 80s they considered piggybacking on the Superliners II order), but what exactly were those various reasons? Accessibility wasn't that big an is in the 1980s.
 
I've often heard that VIA rejected bilevels in the past (in the 80s they considered piggybacking on the Superliners II order), but what exactly were those various reasons? Accessibility wasn't that big an is in the 1980s.
I understand part of it was simply cost. I have heard they decided it would be cheaper to refurbish and HEP the Budd fleet. I do not think Superliners being bilevels had anything to do with it.

Also, by the time it would be time to pull the trigger, the 1990 cutbacks were already on the board and their fleet needs were being drastically reduced. They decided they could retire the ex-CN "Blue Fleet" of non-stainless cars entirely and retain only the stainless Budd cars of CP's big Canadian order. Had the system not been drastically reduced they would have had to retain the Blue Fleet, which were getting problematic with corrosion issues, or replace it. By 1990 they could get along without either the Blue Fleet or new cars. Unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
When are bids due to VIA for their LD Fleet replacement? Will they require them to be built in North America?
I believe separate Request For Proposals for both locomotives and rolling stock have been issued. Speculation among interested parties is all over the place, with the suggestions that cars will continue to be single-level and Siemens is not the likely front-runner for locomotives, with a proven variant of a freight locomotive preferred. I would expect a domestic production requirement.
 
Last edited:
A single-level design? Well, I suppose that rules out any talk of coordination with Amtrak's new order.
 
A single-level design? Well, I suppose that rules out any talk of coordination with Amtrak's new order.
The fleet has to be compatible with the 48 inch platform height Montréal’s found at Gare Centrale and at least parts of the consist have to be accessible and allow the circulation of passengers in wheelchairs, which is a combination which all but rules out any bi- or multi-level designs…
 
Last edited:
The fleet has to be compatible with the 48 inch platform height Montréal’s found at Gare Centrale and at least parts of the consist have to be accessible and allow the circulation of passengers in wheelchairs, which is a combination which all but rules out any bi- or multi-level designs…
Now, if they would just return the "Canadian" to its original route and give it priority over freight trains to reduce the travel time. Same thing with the "Ocean". If the prototypes are adopted, I predict they will be sell outs.
 
A single-level design? Well, I suppose that rules out any talk of coordination with Amtrak's new order.
Amtrak has some concepts that are really moving in a bad direction. For example, no lounge or viewing space for coach passengers. Basically, the lounge and dining space is assigned to the sleeping car passengers only. Coach passengers have three or four tables in a small cafe. It’s pretty bad. It’s a concept now, but I see no signs that concept is changing based on the Venture cafes. Coach travel will be nearly unbearable for long distances, with passengers confined to their seats. Apparently, nobody has considered how agitated people become when stuck in a chair for two days. The land cruisers will probably love it, but those of us who believe the long distance train needs to be a link between underserved rural communities and urban centers, and the tremendous economic and social benefit trains bring to communities, recognize it as a fatal defect in planning.
 
The fleet has to be compatible with the 48 inch platform height Montréal’s found at Gare Centrale and at least parts of the consist have to be accessible and allow the circulation of passengers in wheelchairs, which is a combination which all but rules out any bi- or multi-level designs…
Amtrak is planning elevators which resolves the ADA issue.
 
Amtrak is planning elevators which resolves the ADA issue.
First of all, VIA Rail is not bound by the Americans with Disabilities Act, but by similar (Canadian) legislation, which (unlike the ADA) doesn’t seem to require that the entire train is accessible across and in between cars.

Anyways, in the case of a bilevel design like the Superliner, lifts are only required to reach the lower level of a specific car and passengers in wheelchair can be re-accommodated to (or board/detrain through) a different car if a lift is broken (and they will invariably break and remain out-of-service until the next visit at a maintenance center). A multi-level design like the Skyline and Park cars is a fundamentally different beast, as there is no redundancy and every broken lift will divide the train into two train parts between which passengers in wheelchairs can no longer move unless they retrain one part at a station and entrain the other part.

This means that only a bilevel design would be acceptable to VIA and this is incompatible with a platform height of 48 inches, as the lower level is much lower and the higher level much higher than the platform.

Therefore, I strongly doubt that it would be feasible to design a train which is reliably and mostly accessible and can be used at a high-level platform like at Montreal’s Gare Centrale, without designing it as mostly single level…
 
Here's hoping VIA's core concepts can prove out a better Viewliner replacement, so Amtrak can buy east coast LD equipment off the shelf. Even if it's just coaches and sleepers, not full consists, having a hot production line or even just a current design could be critical.

Everyone seems to want some combination of NEC night trains, expanded cross-border service, more capacity on single level routes, and more frequencies. Heck, if the Superliner replacement program really goes sour, there's precedent for "just buy that single level off the shelf model instead".
 
Apparently, nobody has considered how agitated people become when stuck in a chair for two days.
They are including a premium coach car which appears aimed at longer haul coach passengers. If they provide an enhanced experience in the "premium coach" car itself it could somewhat mitigate the absence of a lounge at least for some. As much as I love the Sightseers they don't really do you any good if you can't get a spot in there. I am sure the thinking is "why not just make it so people don't need a lounge and instead make the coaches better." I can see the thought behind the idea - will it work? Don't know. I guess we'll find out.

As far as cafe seating on shorter distance trains I know on the Airo sets they are somewhat mitigating this by having table seating interspersed throughout the coaches for groups. The vast majority of people purchasing items in the cafe car return to their seats and at least from my observation the Cafe tables on the Regionals tend to get hogged by groups wanting to sit together (and crew of course.) On busy trips the cafe tables on the Regionals often end up as overflow seating.

Here's hoping VIA's core concepts can prove out a better Viewliner replacement, so Amtrak can buy east coast LD equipment off the shelf. Even if it's just coaches and sleepers, not full consists, having a hot production line or even just a current design could be critical.

Everyone seems to want some combination of NEC night trains, expanded cross-border service, more capacity on single level routes, and more frequencies. Heck, if the Superliner replacement program really goes sour, there's precedent for "just buy that single level off the shelf model instead".
VIA's concepts would probably not be DIRECTLY interchangeable with Amtrak but they might be a path for a single level order. Dome cars likely wouldn't fly with ADA though.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like there is one thing that will be similar to Amtrak’s approach. They are going with an accessible “core” semi permanently connected trainset where non accessible cars would be tacked on the ends of.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like there is one thing that will be similar to Amtrak’s approach. They are going with an accessible “core” semi permanently connected trainset where non accessible cars would be tacked on the ends of.
Can someone please explain why it is necessary to semi-permanently connect cars that have an extra wide vestibule? Why isn't it possible to have a regular coupler with a wide vestibule?
 
Is VIA planning on ordering enough cars to increase frequency on any routes (like bumping the Ocean back to 6×week)?
I‘m not sure, but considering that VIA only seems to have ever owned 110 HEP or Renaissance Sleeper Cars (40 Manor + 29 Chateau + 14 Park + 27 Renaissance), 313 cars sounds suspiciously like an expansion compared to the legacy non-Corridor fleet…
 
Back
Top