Hi-Level Sleeper - The Car that Never Was

[Brian Battuello]

In another topic, there was discussion of the history of the Santa Fe Hi-Level cars that eventually became the model for the Amtrak Superliners. Designed for the all-coach El Capitan train, they had coaches, a diner and a lounge car with overhead windows. The cars were extremely popular. Budd proposed a Hi-Level sleeping car, but it was never made.

I did some internet research, but other than a brief mention in Wikipedia, there was no record of the car's proposed design.

"Santa Fe considered equipping the Super Chief with Hi-Level sleeping cars, and Budd drafted a design for such a car in 1957. In this design there was an aisle on the lower level only, and set against one side instead of centerline. The lower level also contained six single bedrooms and a toilet. The upper level would have eight two-person "Vista Bedrooms" which spanned the width of the car. Access to these rooms would be from four sets of stairs from the lower level aside. Each Vista Bedroom would contain an individual toilet and two beds: one stacked above the bed in the single bedroom beneath, and one lengthwise over the aisle. Nothing came of this proposal."

I was intrigued about the "Vista Bedrooms" so did some more digging. There were no diagrams on the internet but I found one obscure reference.

"Elevations and plan of these cars can be found on page 489 of Dubin's "More Classic Trains" (Kalmbach, 1974)"

So off to Ebay, and $10 later found myself the proud owner of this extremely heavy book. And sure enough:



The car had a very odd design. The lower level (the lower diagram) had an aisle and six small single bedrooms, each with a tiny window. The bathroom was down the hall.

The upper level had eight double bedrooms, each with a toilet. Because there was no aisle, access to the eight upstairs rooms was by four staircases from the lower aisle. Each bedroom had a bench seat/bed, similar to the lower bedrooms, but also had a second bed across a window. The description says that you had to step up to the cross-window bed, but the diagram doesn't show that. I'm also curious why the lower level had so much empty space between the single bedrooms. It seems as if the upper bedrooms extended down into that space, but that shouldn't have been necessary.

I would love to see a detailed room layout of the proposed "Vista" rooms. I was very disappointed to find out that the "Vista" rooms didn't have the overhead window. That would have been spectacular.

Also interesting is that the car only had end doors on the lower level, so would not be compatible with the existing Hi-Levels on the El Capitan.

Still...

 

[railiner]

In another topic, there was discussion of the history of the Santa Fe Hi-Level cars that eventually became the model for the Amtrak Superliners. Designed for the all-coach El Capitan train, they had coaches, a diner and a lounge car with overhead windows. The cars were extremely popular. Budd proposed a sleeping car to match the set, but it was never made.

I did some internet research, but other than a brief mention in Wikipedia, there was no record of the car's proposed design.

"Santa Fe considered equipping the Super Chief with Hi-Level sleeping cars, and Budd drafted a design for such a car in 1957. In this design there was an aisle on the lower level only, and set against one side instead of centerline. The lower level also contained six single bedrooms and a toilet. The upper level would have eight two-person "Vista Bedrooms" which spanned the width of the car. Access to these rooms would be from four sets of stairs from the lower level aside. Each Vista Bedroom would contain an individual toilet and two beds: one stacked above the bed in the single bedroom beneath, and one lengthwise over the aisle. Nothing came of this proposal."

I was intrigued about the "Vista Bedrooms" so did some more digging. There were no diagrams on the internet but I found one obscure reference.

"Elevations and plan of these cars can be found on page 489 of Dubin's "More Classic Trains" (Kalmbach, 1974)"

So off to Ebay, and $10 later found myself the proud owner of this extremely heavy book. And sure enough:

View attachment 38231

The car had a very odd design. The lower level (the lower diagram) had an aisle and six small single bedrooms, each with a tiny window. The bathroom was down the hall.

The upper level had eight double bedrooms, each with a toilet. Because there was no aisle, access to the eight upstairs rooms was by four staircases from the lower aisle. Each bedroom had a bench seat/bed, similar to the lower bedrooms, but also had a second bed across a window. The description says that you had to step up to the cross-window bed, but the diagram doesn't show that. I'm also curious why the lower level had so much empty space between the single bedrooms. It seems as if the upper bedrooms extended down into that space, but that shouldn't have been necessary.

I would love to see a detailed room layout of the proposed "Vista" rooms. I was very disappointed to find out that the "Vista" rooms didn't have the overhead window. That would have been spectacular.

Also interesting is that the car only had end doors on the lower level, so would not be compatible with the existing Hi-Levels on the El Capitan.

Still...

The fact that Santa Fe didn’t order any, kind of speaks for itself. And Budd didn’t think enough of the design to build a prototype as a sales tool, to try to drum up orders from any other road, either.
Only 22 total berths in a two deck sleeper?
Very impractical…

 

[Brian Battuello]

No indication of what they would have charged for these premium rooms.

Consider the 6 cabin, 12 berth Prestige cars on the Canadian at roughly $5k per person. Mostly sold out last time I looked.

 

[Brian Battuello]

By the way, when I was researching this, I happened to come across an ad for the El Capitan advertising Chicago-Los Angeles coach seats for the low price of $66 in 1956. That's only $765 per person in today's dollars. You can get a low bucket coach seat on Amtrak for around $144 off season...

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Kind of looks like what CityNightLine did with there double level cars. No full length compartments, but a low level passageway with stairs going up or down depending on your room.

 

[jiml]

VIA entertained a similar proposal based on the familiar Hawker-Siddeley (now Bombardier/Alstom) lozenge-shaped commuter cars after their debut with GO Transit. It was in the same period that they "test drove" Amtrak Superliners out west. They refurbished the ex-CP stainless fleet instead of either option.

 

[railiner]

No indication of what they would have charged for these premium rooms.

Consider the 6 cabin, 12 berth Prestige cars on the Canadian at roughly $5k per person. Mostly sold out last time I looked.

Good point!
Although I’m not sure if the Super Chief/El Capitan of the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were serving the same market as today’s Canadian does…mostly discretionary spending for a “cruise train” experience. I believe a significant number of Prestige Class passengers are wealthy overseas tourists.
The advent of the jetliner captured most of the transcontinental rail travel market.
But who knows, a Prestige-like car on an Amtrak train might prove viable…

 

[Brian Battuello]

Any thoughts about the huge open spaces on the lower level beneath the upper rooms? Hard to believe they needed both levels. Seems like they could have had many more of the single roomettes.

 

[JamesWhitcombRiley]

Any thoughts about the huge open spaces on the lower level beneath the upper rooms? Hard to believe they needed both levels. Seems like they could have had many more of the single roomettes.

My guess is the first level bedrooms had a low ceiling. So it would be awkward to have passageways under the stairs to lengthwise rooms. The first level hallway had a normal ceiling height, which is why the lengthwise beds upstairs were on a raised platform. Also, only one small bathroom downstairs!

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

The beds on the Budd design are over each other. So it’s like a cross section roomette. Or a stacked coffin type set up. You really don’t need a full headspace over the bed. Roll out and stand fully upright. A small set of stairs to get in the next compartment and the two beds are over each other but completely different space.

Have a book somewhere just not with me.

 

[toddinde]

The fact that Santa Fe didn’t order any, kind of speaks for itself. And Budd didn’t think enough of the design to build a prototype as a sales tool, to try to drum up orders from any other road, either.
Only 22 total berths in a two deck sleeper?
Very impractical…

The same capacity of a 10/6. Not very efficient, but I’ll bet it would have been beautiful knowing Budd products.

Good point!
Although I’m not sure if the Super Chief/El Capitan of the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were serving the same market as today’s Canadian does…mostly discretionary spending for a “cruise train” experience. I believe a significant number of Prestige Class passengers are wealthy overseas tourists.
The advent of the jetliner captured most of the transcontinental rail travel market.
But who knows, a Prestige-like car on an Amtrak train might prove viable…

Amtrak is planning that for the new order.

 

[zephyr17]

Although I’m not sure if the Super Chief/El Capitan of the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were serving the same market as today’s Canadian does…mostly discretionary spending for a “cruise train” experience.

Like most of the name trains of the day, the Super Chief was a a train designed for and marketed to the business travel market. The only streamliner era name train specifically designed for the leisure travel market was the California Zephyr.

By the late 1950s the expense account traveler was deserting rail travel in droves. Coach bookings held up and Santa Fe's long distance service was holding up remarkably well. They kept their standards up on the sleepers because, well, they were Santa Fe. Their passenger services were still making a small profit well into the mid-1960s.

Santa Fe was pretty much marketing comfort with good speed to leisure travel coach passengers by the 1960s. But in no way was it marketed as a "cruise" train. While onboard service quality on the Canadian does approach Santa Fe standards, Santa Fe would not have ever permitted such a leisurely schedule as the Canadian, which is about 24 hours longer than CN's Super Continental was on the same route. On the other hand, everything got out of the Super Chief/El Cap's way. If they didn't, heads would roll.

 

[railiner]

On the other hand, everything got out of the Super Chief/El Cap's way. If they didn't, heads would roll.

Those were the days…
Even on the notoriously “anti-passenger” Penn Central, The Broadway Limited received similar attention, and was always under the scrutiny of the Chairman, checking the morning report for any delays to it.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

Weren't the Hi-Level cars slightly lower than the superliners? Like about 8" lower? That's enough to not allow a full height bedroom. It looks like the upper level is only four risers above the hallway, which would be about 24"+/- (probably plus, depending on how high they went with the risers, like more then 7"). Also, probably needed head height for the toilets above (and water tanks presumably - wonder if upper level had retention toilets or needed flushing water). There was probably some storage for luggage or equipment there too.

 

[railiner]

Weren't the Hi-Level cars slightly lower than the superliners? Like about 8" lower?

Precisely…Hi Levels stood 15’ 6” above the rail, compared to Superliner’s 16’ 2””.

When passingl from a Hi Level trans-dorm to a Superliner car, the buffer bridge plates were at an awkward angle to negotiate…

 

[cirdan]

View attachment 38231

The car had a very odd design. The lower level (the lower diagram) had an aisle and six small single bedrooms, each with a tiny window. The bathroom was down the hall.

The upper level had eight double bedrooms, each with a toilet. Because there was no aisle, access to the eight upstairs rooms was by four staircases from the lower aisle. Each bedroom had a bench seat/bed, similar to the lower bedrooms, but also had a second bed across a window. The description says that you had to step up to the cross-window bed, but the diagram doesn't show that. I'm also curious why the lower level had so much empty space between the single bedrooms. It seems as if the upper bedrooms extended down into that space, but that shouldn't have been necessary.

I would love to see a detailed room layout of the proposed "Vista" rooms. I was very disappointed to find out that the "Vista" rooms didn't have the overhead window. That would have been spectacular.

Also interesting is that the car only had end doors on the lower level, so would not be compatible with the existing Hi-Levels on the El Capitan.

Still...

The split level design with individual stairs up to every bedroom reminds me of the Austrian sleepers that have a similar design.

Edit: I see Just-Thinking-51 beat me to that observation.

​

 

[Bob Dylan]

Precisely…Hi Levels stood 15’ 6” above the rail, compared to Superliner’s 16’ 2””.

When passingl from a Hi Level trans-dorm to a Superliner car, the buffer bridge plates were at an awkward angle to negotiate…

The Pacific Parlor Cars ( ex Santa Fe Hi Levels/RIP) had this set up on the Coast Starlight between the PPC and the Sleeper(s) and Diner.

 

[railiner]

When crossing between the two car types, besides watching your footing, you also had to watch your head…especially going from a Superliner to a Hi Level…

 

[jiml]

When crossing between the two car types, besides watching your footing, you also had to watch your head…especially going from a Superliner to a Hi Level…

I remember the yellow caution tape above the doorway on at least one of them in the PPC days.

 

[west point]

Weren't the Hi-Level cars slightly lower than the superliners? Like about 8" lower? That's enough to not allow a full height bedroom. It looks like the upper level is only four risers above the hallway, which would be about 24"+/- (probably plus, depending on how high they went with the risers, like more then 7"). Also, probably needed head height for the toilets above (and water tanks presumably - wonder if upper level had retention toilets or needed flushing water). There was probably some storage for luggage or equipment there too.

When crossing between the two car types, besides watching your footing, you also had to watch your head…especially going from a Superliner to a Hi Level…

I experienced 3 problems when transiting from the Pacific parlor cars to Superliners. One was the slight slope from PPC to SL that I warned more than one person to watch out for, 2nd was the headroom problem that needed more protection, the 3rd was that there were not grab irons on both side of the crossing. Cannot remember just how but I know there were not 4 irons with 2 on each car.