Equipment order expected in January

[VT Hokie]

I was hoping that "dramatic and bold" meant 1000 new Super Steel Turboliners!

 

[jis]

I was hoping that "dramatic and bold" meant 1000 new Super Steel Turboliners!

:lol:

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

I am still wondering though how anyone is going to actually pay for all this since Congress does not appear to be in a hurry to appropriate any funds for anything. They have been diligently reducing the capital component of the FY10 budget the last time I looked. Has that changed? Are they perhaps talking of using bonding authority of some sort to raise the money? Or perhaps getting some private partnership going with the notion of rail equipment owning and leasing companies, like in the UK being considered?

I am just curious because the money story does not seem to add up yet.

 

[frequentflyer]

I was hoping that "dramatic and bold" meant 1000 new Super Steel Turboliners!

:lol:

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

I am still wondering though how anyone is going to actually pay for all this since Congress does not appear to be in a hurry to appropriate any funds for anything. They have been diligently reducing the capital component of the FY10 budget the last time I looked. Has that changed? Are they perhaps talking of using bonding authority of some sort to raise the money? Or perhaps getting some private partnership going with the notion of rail equipment owning and leasing companies, like in the UK being considered?

I am just curious because the money story does not seem to add up yet.

They could take money from the stimulus plan since an order of this magnitude would keep and create more jobs in the US.

In other news, so these will be Superliner look a likes with an updated interior similar in construction to the Surfliners. As I stated before, if the states are paying for this, Amtrak should want to put an order in for some EMD locomotives too. Just like California didn't want to use a mismatched aesthetics wise Genesis/Surfliner looking train, neither will the midwest states fronting the money. They are going to want a sleek looking train, even if it will only do 79mph.

 

[jis]

In other news, so these will be Superliner look a likes with an updated interior similar in construction to the Surfliners. As I stated before, if the states are paying for this, Amtrak should want to put an order in for some EMD locomotives too. Just like California didn't want to use a mismatched aesthetics wise Genesis/Surfliner looking train, neither will the midwest states fronting the money. They are going to want a sleek looking train, even if it will only do 79mph.

Haven't seen any mention of any diesel locos so far. The only mention of locos have been of the electric kind for the NEC so far.

Of course individual state might do somepurchasing of their own, but that would not be part of an Amtrak announcement, just like North Carolina has purchased EMD locos separate from any Amtrak purchases.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

If anything he;s said in this thread turns out to be right I'll eat my shoe for dinner.

 

[jis]

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

If anything he;s said in this thread turns out to be right I'll eat my shoe for dinner.

I just heard from one of the horse's mouth a few moments back that there are no takers for the Viewliners RFP yet, so I would be surprised if an actual order for Viewliners is announced in Jan.

I have no problem believing that an order will be placed for the corridor bi-levels in the near future. I am quite dubious about an LD bi-level of any kind in the near future.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

If anything he;s said in this thread turns out to be right I'll eat my shoe for dinner.

I just heard from one of the horse's mouth a few moments back that there are no takers for the Viewliners RFP yet, so I would be surprised if an actual order for Viewliners is announced in Jan.

I have no problem believing that an order will be placed for the corridor bi-levels in the near future. I am quite dubious about an LD bi-level of any kind in the near future.

The part I'm dubious about is the whole sleepers and LD coaches bit-- I have no problem believing they are going to get some bi-levels for the Midwest... and I have no problem with them getting it-- I just don't know how big this order can be. I haven't heard about enough money being put in anybody's hands to warrant such an order?

 

[Mark]

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

If anything he;s said in this thread turns out to be right I'll eat my shoe for dinner.

I just heard from one of the horse's mouth a few moments back that there are no takers for the Viewliners RFP yet, so I would be surprised if an actual order for Viewliners is announced in Jan.

I have no problem believing that an order will be placed for the corridor bi-levels in the near future. I am quite dubious about an LD bi-level of any kind in the near future.

The part I'm dubious about is the whole sleepers and LD coaches bit-- I have no problem believing they are going to get some bi-levels for the Midwest... and I have no problem with them getting it-- I just don't know how big this order can be. I haven't heard about enough money being put in anybody's hands to warrant such an order?

Bi-levels for the midwest? These new cars should be rated for 110 mph or better. I think that sooner or later the CHI-STL route will see 110 mph.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

GML, if what you say turns out to be true, that would be indeed very very good news. I look forward to such.

If anything he;s said in this thread turns out to be right I'll eat my shoe for dinner.

I just heard from one of the horse's mouth a few moments back that there are no takers for the Viewliners RFP yet, so I would be surprised if an actual order for Viewliners is announced in Jan.

I have no problem believing that an order will be placed for the corridor bi-levels in the near future. I am quite dubious about an LD bi-level of any kind in the near future.

The part I'm dubious about is the whole sleepers and LD coaches bit-- I have no problem believing they are going to get some bi-levels for the Midwest... and I have no problem with them getting it-- I just don't know how big this order can be. I haven't heard about enough money being put in anybody's hands to warrant such an order?

Bi-levels for the midwest? These new cars should be rated for 110 mph or better. I think that sooner or later the CHI-STL route will see 110 mph.

That should be easy as pie. The Superliners are rated for 100mph and they are the product of decades old technology. The Viewliners can do 110mph and the Amfleets are an easy 125. Double-decked at 110mph should be easy, after all-- the Europeans do it. Speed limits in the midwest have more to do with not having electrified lines and rough track than railcars with limits.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The Surfliners are rated at 125. No reason new bilevels couldn't be.

They could take money from the stimulus plan since an order of this magnitude would keep and create more jobs in the US.
In other news, so these will be Superliner look a likes with an updated interior similar in construction to the Surfliners. As I stated before, if the states are paying for this, Amtrak should want to put an order in for some EMD locomotives too. Just like California didn't want to use a mismatched aesthetics wise Genesis/Surfliner looking train, neither will the midwest states fronting the money. They are going to want a sleek looking train, even if it will only do 79mph.

You must be joking. First of all, EMD is out of the passenger engine business and hasn't built a pax engine in nearly a decade. If Amtrak was going to acquire a Pax engine with EMD prime movers, Wabtec is a better bet. And they won't be F59 PHi. And besides railfans, nobody with a vested interest in this (passengers not yet riding do not have a vested interest) cares about how sleek the engines look compared to the cars.

The part I'm dubious about is the whole sleepers and LD coaches bit-- I have no problem believing they are going to get some bi-levels for the Midwest... and I have no problem with them getting it-- I just don't know how big this order can be. I haven't heard about enough money being put in anybody's hands to warrant such an order?

So is Amtrak. They are not placing an order for them, merely keeping an option open to exercise using the shell from a currently produced train car, if and when money becomes available. Think about it. If they are asking someone to design a bi-level car for them, it would be downright stupid for them not to request that it be designed so that it can accept, at reasonable marginal cost, the ability to be a sleeper and/or long-distance oriented coach.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

I don't think they need to worry about designing it-- between the California cars and the Superliners Bombardier should have no problem releasing a new bi-level with only modest updates to the current design.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I don't think they need to worry about designing it-- between the California cars and the Superliners Bombardier should have no problem releasing a new bi-level with only modest updates to the current design.

That assumes Bombardier gets the contract which is not a guarantee. The original California cars were made by M-K, while the Surfliner and second series California cars were made by Alstom. Alstom has as good a chance of taking this on as Bombardier. Possibly a better one.

We already discussed that this order is primarily corridor equipment. The Alstom design is both more recent and more corridor friendly.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Then Alstom-- the point is the same, you're just plucking nose hairs.

The design is sound, all you need is a modest update.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

That's not true. Not all cars make usable sleepers. The Amfleets don't make good sleepers, for instance. This would ensure all proposals are capable of being a sleeper.

 

[Kramerica]

According to the latest NARP Blog:

An Amtrak spokesman tells the Train Riders Association of California (TRAC) that Amtrak will make a “dramatic and bold” announcement on new equipment purchases in January, reports NARP Council member Jim Loomis. We should expect nothing less.

I think the best we can hope for in January will be "meets our expectations". I can guarantee that there will be no “dramatic and bold” from Amtrak unless you're talking negatively. My guess is we'll all be pretty disappointed come January. I base this on the not “dramatic and bold" but "a day late and a dollar short” Viewliner RFQ.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

That's not true. Not all cars make usable sleepers. The Amfleets don't make good sleepers, for instance. This would ensure all proposals are capable of being a sleeper.

Then Bombardier would be the best for the contract.

Besides who says they're going to order sleepers and commuters from the same company? I STILL say its asinine to order Superliner III sleepers before the Viewliner II contracts are even ordered. You risk some politician moving to cut Amtrak's budget and eventually the know-nothings on Capitol Hill will say "hey, you just got new cars, you don't need anymore" and BAM the Viewliner II order gets reduced or cut.

 

[AMTK 365]

I'm in agreeance with those who think the announcement will have something to do with the Viewliner order. That makes the most sense to me. If not the viewliners, it might be in regard to the new power they'd like to get on the NEC ("equipment" can mean locomotives too). THAT is just speculation on my part though.

The mention by GML of purchasing single-level cars to run on the reinstated western trains got the gears in my mind going. Here's something to chew on...I'd have to check, but I believe the reports that were released on these trains specified the use of Superliners, which Amtrak is obviously short of right now. However...if the initial Viewliner proposal/order was increased and the options for extras were exercised, the new cars, combined with the current single level fleet, could potentially be used in place of Superliners on several trains (specifically the Capitol Limited and City of New Orleans, but also possibly the Auto Train). If they did that, they would be able to shift the Superliners to other trains that need them and may even have enough to cover the Pioneer and North Coast Hiawatha.

Again, this is mostly just pure thought or speculation on my part. Regardless of how "bold" the announcement may be, I think we should try to view this in a positive light. At this point in time, any new equipment announcements are a definite improvement over the status-quo.

 

[AlanB]

However...if the initial Viewliner proposal/order was increased and the options for extras were exercised, the new cars, combined with the current single level fleet, could potentially be used in place of Superliners on several trains (specifically the Capitol Limited and City of New Orleans, but also possibly the Auto Train).

The Auto Train will never go back to single level. It would result in too much loss of revenue, between the reduced carrying capacity and the loss of the Deluxe sleepers. The Auto Train is one train that regularly sells out most of it's Bedrooms, and each days train has a minimum of 25 and most trains have 30 Bedrooms up for sale. And of course they have many more roomettes too, with 5 to 6 sleeping cars on each train.

They also couldn't feed everyone with single level dining cars either, at least not without putting on about 8 to 10 single level dining cars.

 

[SunsetLimited01]

Well AlanB is right about that, you can't have the Auto Train go single-level. Back when the Auto Train used single-level cars they had up to 4 diners on both trains and 16-20 cars that were a mix of sleepers, Amfleet coaches, and dome cars. That would be one large consumption of equipment there.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

The Auto Train will never go back to single level. It would result in too much loss of revenue, between the reduced carrying capacity and the loss of the Deluxe sleepers. The Auto Train is one train that regularly sells out most of it's Bedrooms, and each days train has a minimum of 25 and most trains have 30 Bedrooms up for sale. And of course they have many more roomettes too, with 5 to 6 sleeping cars on each train.
They also couldn't feed everyone with single level dining cars either, at least not without putting on about 8 to 10 single level dining cars.

I certainly don't think the Auto Train should go single level, but is there anything preventing the construction of a Viewliner Deluxe Sleeper, and making the Auto Train longer to compensate for fewer passengers per car?

 

[AlanB]

I certainly don't think the Auto Train should go single level, but is there anything preventing the construction of a Viewliner Deluxe Sleeper, and making the Auto Train longer to compensate for fewer passengers per car?

There's nothing that would prevent Amtrak from buying an all Deluxe Viewliner, other than perhaps money.

But there are things that could prevent making the AT longer, namely will the host CSX accept a longer train and the ever present problem of overloading the HEP system.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

But there are things that could prevent making the AT longer, namely will the host CSX accept a longer train

How does the length of the present Auto Train compare with CSX's longest freight trains on that route?

and the ever present problem of overloading the HEP system.

I would expect a lot of the HEP loads to be proportional to the number of sleeping car compartments more than number of cars, although admittedly a bi-level car is probably more efficient to heat/cool as measured per compartment. But there is also always the option of adding a HEP generator at the back of the passenger cars, and designing a sufficient mechanism to control that HEP from the cab at the front of the train. (Or maybe standard MU cabling would be enough; consider that on a Downeaster trainset being operated from a cabbage car, the HEP source is obviously at the back of the train, and presumably the engineer has adequate control of the HEP source in that case.)

I was also wondering if the size of the tracks at the Auto Train terminals is a factor.

Given how high the low bucket prices on the Auto Train are, I would think that if it could be expanded to accommodate more passengers and automobiles, there would be passengers willing to fill the extra space.

 

[AlanB]

But there are things that could prevent making the AT longer, namely will the host CSX accept a longer train

How does the length of the present Auto Train compare with CSX's longest freight trains on that route?

Rough guess at present the AT is probably half the length of CSX's longer trains. That however has nothing to do with what CSX will permit Amtrak to run.

and the ever present problem of overloading the HEP system.

I would expect a lot of the HEP loads to be proportional to the number of sleeping car compartments more than number of cars, although admittedly a bi-level car is probably more efficient to heat/cool as measured per compartment. But there is also always the option of adding a HEP generator at the back of the passenger cars, and designing a sufficient mechanism to control that HEP from the cab at the front of the train. (Or maybe standard MU cabling would be enough; consider that on a Downeaster trainset being operated from a cabbage car, the HEP source is obviously at the back of the train, and presumably the engineer has adequate control of the HEP source in that case.)

I was also wondering if the size of the tracks at the Auto Train terminals is a factor.

Given how high the low bucket prices on the Auto Train are, I would think that if it could be expanded to accommodate more passengers and automobiles, there would be passengers willing to fill the extra space.

Actually one of the bigger power draws are the dining cars, something that you'd now need more of if you went single level. And as has been discussed several times before, adding HEP at the rear of the train is not an option under currrent FRA rules.

And yes, terminals are also a limiting factor. The current train fits in on one platform in Virginia. That platform could probably handle a few more cars, I'm guessing maybe 5 or 6, before you'd run out of space. In Florida, the train already doesn't fit and has to be split, about 3/4ths and 1/4th. This requires extra switching and delays. Between the two sections, they might be able to fit maybe another 3, max 4 cars.

As for the prices, they charge that much because they can. The demand is there. Adding more cars might reduce the prices, but it also increases the expenses too. Don't know if the trade off is worth it.

 

[Shanghai]

What is the Superliner III?

 

[frequentflyer]

gml, please,spare me, can you explain why the surfliners look the way they do? Why do the nocal san joaquin look the way they do? Why go the way of EMD when Amtrak have plenty of GEs around? Why did WaDot choose a different paint scheme or add wings to the talgos if aesthics are not important? Truth be told is if the midwest states are fronting money for equipment you better looks matter. If it did not the surfliner would still be the san diegan with Genesis power and Superliners in phase four paintwbeei