Acela II RFP information announcement

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
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.
Thirdrail7 said:
Acela150 said:
Well if Alstom gets it the Acela II's will be just another POS. I hope to the good lord himself that this is some BS. Siemens seems to have delivered well so far with the ACS units.
Click to expand...
Don't get ahead of yourself!! :p ;)
Click to expand...
Hence the "so far". :) Although from what it sounds like it seems like the issues that come up are either a quick fix or something that could be an issue that would require some attention in the form of being "shopped" for a day or two, or more. Did I see that 650 is in service?
 
Nothing wrong with Alstom.

It used to be that you could order from Alstom, Siemens, or Bombardier (or its numerous predecessors, AdTranz etc. were all good) and count on getting decent stuff. Then CAF, Talgo, and Kawasaki also became reliable bidders. Recently, Bombardier management lost its mind completely and stopped being reliable at all.

The only rules of thumb for ordering passenger railroad cars over the last few decades have been:

(1) never order from a company with no experience in railcars (like Boeing)

(2) never, ever order from Breda
 
Andrew said:
jimhudson said:
Andrew said:
So then I wonder why Kawasaki or Siemens did not get the Acela Contract? http://www.mytwintiers.com/news/local-news/alstom-and-amtrak-contract-brings-jobs-to-southern-tier

If the contract does end up getting signed later today (Tuesday), then I also wonder when the first train set will get delivered and be put into revenue service.
Click to expand...
Keep two things in mind Andrew:

1) Money

2) Politics
Click to expand...

Politics?
Click to expand...
Is that serious? You're questioning why politics plays a game in an Amtrak order?????
 
If the tilt mechanism and ride quality are as smooth as the Virgin Pendolinos I rode aboard over in England, they should be a nice improvement over the existing Acelas!
 
I agree VT! I love those Virgin Pendolinos. Something like that but built to US Amtrak 14'6" loading gauge should be quite wonderful!

I suspect they might need to work a little harder to bring the NEC trackage upto standard for high speed operation though. It is much better than in the '80s and '90s but still needs a bit of work.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andrew said:
jimhudson said:
Andrew said:
So then I wonder why Kawasaki or Siemens did not get the Acela Contract? http://www.mytwintiers.com/news/local-news/alstom-and-amtrak-contract-brings-jobs-to-southern-tier

...
Click to expand...
Keep two things in mind Andrew:

1) Money

2) Politics
Click to expand...
Politics?
Click to expand...
For those who are just tuning in ...

Sen Schumer is a very powerful member of the U.S. Senate, currently the third ranked Democrat. He is expected to become the Democratic Leader after Harry Reid leaves in January 2017. (Reid is not running for re-election in 2016). It's always desirable for a bidder for any government contract to have a powerful supporter in Congress. (See any American war equipment maker, er, defense contractor, for examples of this factor.) And Sen Schumer is obviously pleased to be able to point to jobs he helped to bring to NY State.

From Amtrak's point of view, it's also politically beneficial to have its suppliers spread around the country. With Siemens already doing assembly of the electric locomotives in Sacramento, California, and Nippon Sharyo to build the bi-level cars in Rochelle, Illinois, now Alstom will provide a third leg with its assembly plant near Steuben, New York. It even helps the look of things that this plant is located in a swing district currently represented in the U.S. House by a Republican.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Another potential political aspect is perhaps beyond my grade level: General Electric has been involved in acquiring the electric generating equipment and electric grid equipment manufacturing businesses of Alstom. (Chiefly having an eye on the potential business to come from possible future replacements for many of the world's nuclear plants soon to be reaching their age of retirement, iirc.) The French government had numerous concerns about this takeover. One issue was whether the remaining transportation business of a much smaller Alstom would be viable. So maybe, perhaps, it could happen, that this contact somehow helps GE go forward with its much desired major acquisition.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The article has links to articles that say there were options for trainsets operating up to 300, 320 and 350 kph in different areas. I think CAHSR was the 320 kph. It looks like Amtrak is looking at possible upgrades to 300 and 350 kph, and it also appears to be here on the east coast. 300 kph is around 187 mph which is a nice bump up from 160 mph for the main order. Are there any stretches of any length where Amtrak could get the Acela II's up to 187 mph? Or is this for years down the road when the existing NEC corridor may be straightened up a bit? 350 kph is what, 209 mph? That may not be huge in China or Europe, but that would be pretty darned fast here in the States if they could hit that speed for more than a few minutes at a time.

The sad part though is that higher speeds would be of even more use in the western LD routes where they could actually spend 10 or 15 minutes at the higher speed without having to brake for curves or stops. But then again, I am not sure that BN or NS would want to have 30 or 45 mile long sections of their routes being fenced in to prevent trespassers from crossing the trackage. And building the passovers and underpasses would be way too expensive for Amtrak to pay for.

Sorry if this is pretty basic stuff.

_ Amtrak required a maximum speed of 257 km/h (160 mile/h) for use on existing NEC infrastructure, with options for 300 km/h or 350 km/h, while CHSRA was seeking 320 km/h trainsets for use on a new line. _

CHamilton said:
Amtrak selects Alstom for Northeast Corridor train contract
Click to expand...
 
I don't understand. Are the options kind of a long term warning of what Amtrak will be wanting a couple decades from now? Because if they are talking options for trainsets that are capable of 300-350 kph now, I would have thought the trainsets would be delivered within 5-10 years. Which would mean most of them would be retired by 2050.

(That number doesn't look like a year, it looks like a dinner reservation time...)

Anyway, I guess my point was that I was hoping that there would be 20-30 mile sections of NEC track that were capable of allowing 300 kph speeds sooner rather than later. 350 kph would be like getting biscuits with your beer, but on the east coast the short distances it would be possible probably wouldn't be worth the extra cost it would entail.

Again, I may be missing the obvious because I am not that familiar with what Amtrak is, or has been, planning.

jis said:
The 300-350 kph stuff on NEC may come to pass maybe in the 2050 timeframe.
Click to expand...
 
It will take 50 years to get sections at the 300 KPH speeds. At present its not worth the effort to get small sections that fast. Instead take the money and get 160 MPH track NYP - WASH. That would reduce travel time including 4 stops to under 2 hours. Much more bang for the buck. As well there are many passengers who do not travel that complete distance so just clean up the slow orders. Just imagine the time savings NYP - PHL if PHL north station to Frankford junction and Brunswick - Newark Penn were all 160 MPH
 
Ziv said:
I don't understand. Are the options kind of a long term warning of what Amtrak will be wanting a couple decades from now? Because if they are talking options for trainsets that are capable of 300-350 kph now, I would have thought the trainsets would be delivered within 5-10 years. Which would mean most of them would be retired by 2050.

(That number doesn't look like a year, it looks like a dinner reservation time...)

Anyway, I guess my point was that I was hoping that there would be 20-30 mile sections of NEC track that were capable of allowing 300 kph speeds sooner rather than later. 350 kph would be like getting biscuits with your beer, but on the east coast the short distances it would be possible probably wouldn't be worth the extra cost it would entail.

Again, I may be missing the obvious because I am not that familiar with what Amtrak is, or has been, planning.
Click to expand...
The 300 to 350 kph speeds for the NEC came out of Amtrak's Next Gen NEC Vision plan from 2012 which envisioned new tracks for 220 mph operation between WAS and NYP by 2030. If Amtrak is buying new HSR trainsets that would be delivered in circa 2020 with a 20-25 year operating lifespan, then it follows to at least be open in the RFP for bidders to submit HSR trainsets that could operate at speeds above 160 mph for the 2030 time frame. But the reality is that there are major funding hurdles to modernize the existing NEC, expand its capacity, get the NEC to a state of good repair, and the really big ticket Gateway project.
IMO, getting multiple segments up to 160 mph speeds, getting Gateway built, replacing the RF&P tunnel and the movable bridges that are way past their replacement date, expanding to (mostly) four tracks on the WAS to WIL segment, and getting the NEC to somewhere in the ballpark of a state of good repair over the next 15-20 years would represent substantial progress and is more politically realistic. The long term planning for the NEC is now in the domain of the NEC Future EIS study and the NEC Commission, not so much up to Amtrak.
 
afigg said:
Ziv said:
I don't understand. Are the options kind of a long term warning of what Amtrak will be wanting a couple decades from now? Because if they are talking options for trainsets that are capable of 300-350 kph now, I would have thought the trainsets would be delivered within 5-10 years. Which would mean most of them would be retired by 2050.

(That number doesn't look like a year, it looks like a dinner reservation time...)

Anyway, I guess my point was that I was hoping that there would be 20-30 mile sections of NEC track that were capable of allowing 300 kph speeds sooner rather than later. 350 kph would be like getting biscuits with your beer, but on the east coast the short distances it would be possible probably wouldn't be worth the extra cost it would entail.

Again, I may be missing the obvious because I am not that familiar with what Amtrak is, or has been, planning.
Click to expand...
The 300 to 350 kph speeds for the NEC came out of Amtrak's Next Gen NEC Vision plan from 2012 which envisioned new tracks for 220 mph operation between WAS and NYP by 2030. If Amtrak is buying new HSR trainsets that would be delivered in circa 2020 with a 20-25 year operating lifespan, then it follows to at least be open in the RFP for bidders to submit HSR trainsets that could operate at speeds above 160 mph for the 2030 time frame. But the reality is that there are major funding hurdles to modernize the existing NEC, expand its capacity, get the NEC to a state of good repair, and the really big ticket Gateway project.
IMO, getting multiple segments up to 160 mph speeds, getting Gateway built, replacing the RF&P tunnel and the movable bridges that are way past their replacement date, expanding to (mostly) four tracks on the WAS to WIL segment, and getting the NEC to somewhere in the ballpark of a state of good repair over the next 15-20 years would represent substantial progress and is more politically realistic. The long term planning for the NEC is now in the domain of the NEC Future EIS study and the NEC Commission, not so much up to Amtrak.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that Amtrak was originally going to take out a $2.7 Billion RRIF Loan for the new train sets, but the news says the cost is now $2.5 billion. Does anyone know why this is the case?

I believe that Amtrak wants to operate the new train sets beginning in approximately four years or so--until at least 2045!

If Amtrak is able to borrow for new train sets, then why can't Amtrak also borrow to help pay the Fed's half for Gateway if they are likely to plug future NEC Profits back into the NEC?
 
Andrew said:
afigg said:
Ziv said:
I don't understand. Are the options kind of a long term warning of what Amtrak will be wanting a couple decades from now? Because if they are talking options for trainsets that are capable of 300-350 kph now, I would have thought the trainsets would be delivered within 5-10 years. Which would mean most of them would be retired by 2050.

(That number doesn't look like a year, it looks like a dinner reservation time...)

Anyway, I guess my point was that I was hoping that there would be 20-30 mile sections of NEC track that were capable of allowing 300 kph speeds sooner rather than later. 350 kph would be like getting biscuits with your beer, but on the east coast the short distances it would be possible probably wouldn't be worth the extra cost it would entail.

Again, I may be missing the obvious because I am not that familiar with what Amtrak is, or has been, planning.
Click to expand...
The 300 to 350 kph speeds for the NEC came out of Amtrak's Next Gen NEC Vision plan from 2012 which envisioned new tracks for 220 mph operation between WAS and NYP by 2030. If Amtrak is buying new HSR trainsets that would be delivered in circa 2020 with a 20-25 year operating lifespan, then it follows to at least be open in the RFP for bidders to submit HSR trainsets that could operate at speeds above 160 mph for the 2030 time frame. But the reality is that there are major funding hurdles to modernize the existing NEC, expand its capacity, get the NEC to a state of good repair, and the really big ticket Gateway project.
IMO, getting multiple segments up to 160 mph speeds, getting Gateway built, replacing the RF&P tunnel and the movable bridges that are way past their replacement date, expanding to (mostly) four tracks on the WAS to WIL segment, and getting the NEC to somewhere in the ballpark of a state of good repair over the next 15-20 years would represent substantial progress and is more politically realistic. The long term planning for the NEC is now in the domain of the NEC Future EIS study and the NEC Commission, not so much up to Amtrak.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that Amtrak was originally going to take out a $2.7 Billion RRIF Loan for the new train sets, but the news says the cost is now $2.5 billion. Does anyone know why this is the case?

I believe that Amtrak wants to operate the new train sets beginning in approximately four years or so--until at least 2045!

If Amtrak is able to borrow for new train sets, then why can't Amtrak also borrow to help pay the Fed's half for Gateway if they are likely to plug future NEC Profits back into the NEC?
Click to expand...
The debt burden on a loan for a significant portion of the Gateway project would be crushing, to say the least. Even the $2.5 to $2.7 billion suggested for Acela replacements is rather substantial and will consume a large chunk of Amtrak's budget for decades, even allowing for (presumed) higher revenues for expanded and improved service. Really, these trainsets should be paid for through federal appropriations - and if we wait for that, the existing Acela equipment will be older than the current Heritage diners by the time it happens!

Indeed, if the trains are to be available in the 4-5 year timeframe, it appears Amtrak intends to retire the original Acela cars & locomotives as soon as the leases expire (or even earlier, perhaps). We know Acela is expensive to operate; Will the new sets have substantially lower maintenance and operating costs? Had the Acela design not been such a lemon from the beginning, we wouldn't be seeing complete replacement at less than 20 years of service.
 
Andrew said:
I was under the impression that Amtrak was originally going to take out a $2.7 Billion RRIF Loan for the new train sets, but the news says the cost is now $2.5 billion. Does anyone know why this is the case?

I believe that Amtrak wants to operate the new train sets beginning in approximately four years or so--until at least 2045!

If Amtrak is able to borrow for new train sets, then why can't Amtrak also borrow to help pay the Fed's half for Gateway if they are likely to plug future NEC Profits back into the NEC?
Click to expand...
Andrew, can we please keep this on-topic? Posts about the HSR trainsets or NEC track improvement plans that affect what Amtrak might be ordering are on-topic. How the NEC Gateway project might get paid for is off-topic and should be kept to the Gateway threads.
At this point, there is a lot we do not know about the contract, the proposed delivery schedule, or what type of trainsets Alstom is offering. It appears that we will have to wait for more information.
 
A Voice said:
Indeed, if the trains are to be available in the 4-5 year timeframe, it appears Amtrak intends to retire the original Acela cars & locomotives as soon as the leases expire (or even earlier, perhaps). We know Acela is expensive to operate; Will the new sets have substantially lower maintenance and operating costs? Had the Acela design not been such a lemon from the beginning, we wouldn't be seeing complete replacement at less than 20 years of service.
Click to expand...
A major factor pushing Amtrak to replace the Acelas at 20 years is the limited 303 seat capacity and the 20 trainsets. The Acelas were brought with too few coach cars. The plan to buy 40 additional coach cars of a unique design to expand the Acela trainsets was determined to be uneconomic and problematic with the rest of the Acela rolling stock well through its operating lifespan. Amtrak is leaving a LOT of revenue on the table because of the limited seat capacity and only 20 trainsets. 28 new trainsets with circa 425 seats will double the Acela class seat capacity on the NEC.
So, get new trainsets and return the Acelas to the lease holder when the leases expires. The Acelas are not lemons in that they have been financially successful and have expanded Amtrak's profile as a travel option along the cities of the Northeast corridor.
 
A Voice said:
We know Acela is expensive to operate; Will the new sets have substantially lower maintenance and operating costs?
Click to expand...
Depends on whether FRA allows the trains to be designed with "crash energy management" and "positive train control" instead of obsolete "buff strength", "corner posts", "collision posts", etc. The Acelas are full of parts which wear out too fast because the trains are too heavy.
 
afigg said:
A Voice said:
Indeed, if the trains are to be available in the 4-5 year timeframe, it appears Amtrak intends to retire the original Acela cars & locomotives as soon as the leases expire (or even earlier, perhaps). We know Acela is expensive to operate; Will the new sets have substantially lower maintenance and operating costs? Had the Acela design not been such a lemon from the beginning, we wouldn't be seeing complete replacement at less than 20 years of service.
Click to expand...
A major factor pushing Amtrak to replace the Acelas at 20 years is the limited 303 seat capacity and the 20 trainsets. The Acelas were brought with too few coach cars. The plan to buy 40 additional coach cars of a unique design to expand the Acela trainsets was determined to be uneconomic and problematic with the rest of the Acela rolling stock well through its operating lifespan. Amtrak is leaving a LOT of revenue on the table because of the limited seat capacity and only 20 trainsets. 28 new trainsets with circa 425 seats will double the Acela class seat capacity on the NEC.
So, get new trainsets and return the Acelas to the lease holder when the leases expires. The Acelas are not lemons in that they have been financially successful and have expanded Amtrak's profile as a travel option along the cities of the Northeast corridor.
Click to expand...
Amtrak's new Acela Train-sets are supposed to have a 40% increase in seating capacity (or possibly more)--and a 30 year lifespan--which means they could potentially be in revenue service until 2050!

I wonder why Amtrak did not look into a much longer train-set--perhaps 850 feet like a typical Long Island Rail Road Train. With more and more folks using Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor, perhaps this option should have been considered.

By Amtrak going into distributed power--instead of concentrated power--these new Acela train-sets will have 40% more seats in the same train length.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andrew said:
afigg said:
A Voice said:
Indeed, if the trains are to be available in the 4-5 year timeframe . . .
Click to expand...
A major factor pushing Amtrak to replace the Acelas at 20 years is the limited 303 seat capacity and the 20 trainsets. The Acelas were brought with too few coach cars. . . . Amtrak is leaving a LOT of revenue on the table because of the limited seat capacity and only 20 trainsets.

28 new trainsets with circa 425 seats will double the Acela class seat capacity on the NEC.

...
Click to expand...
Amtrak's new Acela Train-sets are supposed to have a 40% increase in seating capacity (or possibly more)--and a 30 year lifespan--which means they could potentially be in revenue service until 2050!

...

By Amtrak going into distributed power--instead of concentrated power--these new Acela train-sets will have 40% more seats in the same train length.
Click to expand...
Yes. You've got it! That's the whole point of this new equipment order.

However, saying something like,

"I wonder why Amtrak did not look into a much longer train-set--perhaps ... this option should have been considered,"

is NOT getting it. LOL. You can be sure that Amtrak considered it. Even if they didn't tell you and me.

As I'm sure you understand upon a moment's reflection, every Amtrak station is obsolete and overcrowded now, and things are getting worse. One of the problems, discussed on this blog from time to time, is that many of the platforms are too short to serve very long trains. Of course, both Penn Station and Union Station are at the small beginnings of massive rebuilds. But the platform issues won't be much better by 2020 or so when we hope to see Acela capacity double.

Now venturing beyond my comfort zone, I'll offer that perhaps the new Acela II trainsets using distributed power could be lengthened in the future, when or if abundant long platforms to serve them become available. But doubling capacity with equipment that is, we hope, newer, better, lighter, faster, cheaper to operate and to maintain, makes this such a very good deal that it's a very good deal within a 20-year time frame. So never mind sweating 2050 and any later years.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top