Amtrak Cascades 2017 upgrades

[CSXfoamer1997]

Why will the trains be running at 79 rather than 110 to 125?

 

[CCC1007]

Why will the trains be running at 79 rather than 110 to 125?

The track isn't certified for faster, that's why.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Why will the trains be running at 79 rather than 110 to 125?

The official from the Washington DOT said the route has "hundreds of curves."

 

[fairviewroad]

Oregon is likely to be in a financial crisis within the next several years and we will be lucky to keep the existing service.

Not to get into a debate on Oregon politics, but I think it's a bit of an overstatement to say that "Oregon is likely to be in a financial crisis" in the next few years. That's not to say the trains won't be on the proverbial chopping block: They're an easy target since they cost $$$ and serve relatively few people.

The official from the Washington DOT said the route has "hundreds of curves."

That is more or less correct. The key to improving the Cascades is not to spend zillions to get the track up to 110 mph, but to spend considerably less in order to improve reliability. That's the aim of many of the projects described in the OP.

 

[neroden]

Several things to consider. The new Talgos are not well liked by crews that I have talked to, whether real issues or just being different I don't know. The Talgos are expensive to maintain compared to conventional equipment, and do not have the flexibility for adding capacity for peak periods.

Doesn't matter. Crews always complain about new cars. It isn't going to cause Washington to buy different brand new expensive cars when there are matching cars available at a huge discount... when they want another set, they'll get the orphan set because it'll be cheap. When they want a *ninth* set, that's when they'll consider getting new bilevels.

I feel at some point of success, especially if there is a one seat train Eugene to Vancouver BC and return, that capacity will be an issue and the economics of bi-level equipment will be such that investment will go that way.

Possibly, but only if they don't slow the route down. Talgos tilt. You'd need tilting bilevels, or you'd need to improve the track speed for non-tilting trains.

 

[CSXfoamer1997]

Why will the trains be running at 79 rather than 110 to 125?

The official from the Washington DOT said the route has "hundreds of curves."

Ahhah. So THAT's why they're certified for 79.

 

[jis]

No. The 79mph limit is primarily because its signaling system is not capable of handling higher speeds. There are several short segments where higher speed is possible if the infrastructure is suitably upgraded, but it may be debatable whether that would be a cost effective investment.

 

[west point]

The signal system is still being upgraded to PTC. Now whether that includes any higher speed capability than 79 would only be speculation. Then the track structure where possible needs upgrading as well. Reliable on time service is more important. If Oregon could upgrade the tracks across the Columbia and into Portland station the time saved would be much less expensive than upgrading to 90+ MPH in Wash. The only way would be a federal grant since there is very little benefit to Washington or Oregon.

When the 187 miles is reduced by the Pt Defiance bypass the scheduled 3:50 enroute time is anticipated to be 3:40 and also due to curve elimination. If average speed including stops could increase to 60 MPH then a 3:00 PDX < > SEA time would compare to Amtrak's NEC WASH < > NYP timing. Then Washington DOT could get funds to eliminate one slow section at a time when funds are acquired.

 

[Northwest Railfan]

I believe they would like to originally, but at this point it is probably a good thing that they have not. When they first started running, the doors on the trash receptacles would fly open every time the train went around a curve and the crew would shut them as they walked up and down the train. Last time I rode in May, one set didn't have working monitors or destination signs.

Both sets also appeared to have been damaged as one had a shattered window and the other had a deep baseball sized dent in the side of the bistro car. As to using the Wisconsin sets to upgrade the older sets, I don't believe that the cars would be compatible together.

 

[seat38a]

Several things to consider. The new Talgos are not well liked by crews that I have talked to, whether real issues or just being different I don't know. The Talgos are expensive to maintain compared to conventional equipment, and do not have the flexibility for adding capacity for peak periods.

Doesn't matter. Crews always complain about new cars. It isn't going to cause Washington to buy different brand new expensive cars when there are matching cars available at a huge discount... when they want another set, they'll get the orphan set because it'll be cheap. When they want a *ninth* set, that's when they'll consider getting new bilevels.

I feel at some point of success, especially if there is a one seat train Eugene to Vancouver BC and return, that capacity will be an issue and the economics of bi-level equipment will be such that investment will go that way.

Possibly, but only if they don't slow the route down. Talgos tilt. You'd need tilting bilevels, or you'd need to improve the track speed for non-tilting trains.

The Talgos tilt but the engine does not. Does the train still go through the curves at the higher speed?

 

[CCC1007]

I believe they would like to originally, but at this point it is probably a good thing that they have not. When they first started running, the doors on the trash receptacles would fly open every time the train went around a curve and the crew would shut them as they walked up and down the train. Last time I rode in May, one set didn't have working monitors or destination signs.

Both sets also appeared to have been damaged as one had a shattered window and the other had a deep baseball sized dent in the side of the bistro car. As to using the Wisconsin sets to upgrade the older sets, I don't believe that the cars would be compatible together.

I was trying to say the extra capacity would allow the older sets to be pulled from service long enough that the update can be done like it should be. It could even be a temporary lease of the sets.

 

[railiner]

Several things to consider. The new Talgos are not well liked by crews that I have talked to, whether real issues or just being different I don't know. The Talgos are expensive to maintain compared to conventional equipment, and do not have the flexibility for adding capacity for peak periods.

Doesn't matter. Crews always complain about new cars. It isn't going to cause Washington to buy different brand new expensive cars when there are matching cars available at a huge discount... when they want another set, they'll get the orphan set because it'll be cheap. When they want a *ninth* set, that's when they'll consider getting new bilevels.

I feel at some point of success, especially if there is a one seat train Eugene to Vancouver BC and return, that capacity will be an issue and the economics of bi-level equipment will be such that investment will go that way.

Possibly, but only if they don't slow the route down. Talgos tilt. You'd need tilting bilevels, or you'd need to improve the track speed for non-tilting trains.

The Talgos tilt but the engine does not. Does the train still go through the curves at the higher speed?

The tilting is only beneficial for passenger comfort....it simulates banking or superelevation, so the centrifugal force on passengers feels more like gravity. Only true banking makes the train itself able to go around a curve faster....

Since the line is shared by slow moving freight trains, there is a practical limit on how much banking of the line can be done.

 

[jis]

But answering the core question, yes, Talgos are allowed faster speed through curves even though the engines don't tilt. As pointed out the tilt is more a passenger comfort thing and not a safety issue. Larger under balance is allowed for tilting trains even though the engineer gets to feel greater centrifugal force on curves than the passengers in the tilting carriages.

 

[Northwest Railfan]

I believe they would like to originally, but at this point it is probably a good thing that they have not. When they first started running, the doors on the trash receptacles would fly open every time the train went around a curve and the crew would shut them as they walked up and down the train. Last time I rode in May, one set didn't have working monitors or destination signs.

Both sets also appeared to have been damaged as one had a shattered window and the other had a deep baseball sized dent in the side of the bistro car. As to using the Wisconsin sets to upgrade the older sets, I don't believe that the cars would be compatible together.

I was trying to say the extra capacity would allow the older sets to be pulled from service long enough that the update can be done like it should be. It could even be a temporary lease of the sets.

When they purchased the original sets, they also purchased multiple extra cars. The coaches were added to a couple of sets and there are back up end cars, bistro cars, and lounge cars. I do not believe that the Talgo 8 cars could be used in the same train as the older Talgo cars.

 

[CCC1007]

I believe they would like to originally, but at this point it is probably a good thing that they have not. When they first started running, the doors on the trash receptacles would fly open every time the train went around a curve and the crew would shut them as they walked up and down the train. Last time I rode in May, one set didn't have working monitors or destination signs.

Both sets also appeared to have been damaged as one had a shattered window and the other had a deep baseball sized dent in the side of the bistro car. As to using the Wisconsin sets to upgrade the older sets, I don't believe that the cars would be compatible together.

I was trying to say the extra capacity would allow the older sets to be pulled from service long enough that the update can be done like it should be. It could even be a temporary lease of the sets.

When they purchased the original sets, they also purchased multiple extra cars. The coaches were added to a couple of sets and there are back up end cars, bistro cars, and lounge cars. I do not believe that the Talgo 8 cars could be used in the same train as the older Talgo cars.

I never said to add the new cars to the old trains, I keep trying to get the idea that the new sets would allow the older sets to be pulled from service one at a time for an update to their systems and interiors. Once a set is done, it would return to service and another set would be pulled for the same update. There would be no reason to merge the new and old sets AT ALL!

 

[WoodyinNYC]

The Coast Starlight is scheduled to depart Seattle at 9:35 a.m. to arrive Portland at 1:50 p.m.

Trip time 4 hrs 15 min.

An earlier Cascades departs 7:25 a.m. to arrive 11:25 a.m.

Trip time 3 hrs 40 min.

The next Cascades departs 11:15 a.m. to arrive 3:05 p.m.

Trip time 3 hrs 45 min.

So the Starlight is 30 min slower than the Cascades.

That's because the Talgos can tilt and go faster. That's their reason for being.

So why replace fast, tilting Talgos with bi-level cars from Nippon Sharyo that can't run as fast on this curvy track?

 

[afigg]

I was trying to say the extra capacity would allow the older sets to be pulled from service long enough that the update can be done like it should be. It could even be a temporary lease of the sets.

Oregon took delivery of two new Talgo trainsets, built during the same time as the two trainsets ordered for WI. My understanding is that those two new trainsets are underutilized and will continue to be until the 2 additional daily frequencies are added starting in late 2017. So the Cascades corridor has spare capacity at present to service the older sets if they wanted to.

 

[fairviewroad]

The Coast Starlight is scheduled to depart Seattle at 9:35 a.m. to arrive Portland at 1:50 p.m.

Trip time 4 hrs 15 min.

An earlier Cascades departs 7:25 a.m. to arrive 11:25 a.m.

Trip time 3 hrs 40 min.

The next Cascades departs 11:15 a.m. to arrive 3:05 p.m.

Trip time 3 hrs 45 min.

So the Starlight is 30 min slower than the Cascades.

That's because the Talgos can tilt and go faster. That's their reason for being.

I think that's a bit of an over-simplification, as LD trains generally seem to have more padding in their schedule than corridor trains. That said, the Cascades accomplish the faster trip despite making an additional station stop (Tukwila), so it's likely the equipment is at least partially responsible for the shorter run time.