Hypothetical High Platform Superliner Replacements

[SubwayNut]

I felt the same way when I first saw the Santa Fe High Level Cars, which ended up becoming the Pacific Parlor Cars on the Starlight.( alas Long gone )

I have similar feelings about the Superliners, growing up in New York City I road Amtrak regularly within the Northeast, (always on the single-level fleet). A moment I'll never forget was when on my first cross-country Amtrak trip from Seattle back to New York (with a couple of stops in coach) when I was 16 and first climbing the stairs onto the upper level of my Superliner Coach in Seattle, and being amazed at the size of the railcar and being so far off the ground. I remember having similar feelings the next morning walking back to the attached in Sponkane Portland section and setting foot in the Sightseer Lounge Car for the first time while going through Western Montana/Glacier National Park.

I still remember the first double-decker railcar I road also a then brand-new LIRR C3 on the Ronkonkoma-Greenport Scoot, when I was 10.

 

[George Harris]

As far as the bad fittings go, it is very common for foreign suppliers to provide an initial shipment (which will be tested) of conforming goods and then when full approval is given ship defective goods. As payment has often been made before the defect is discovered, the purchaser gets stuck.

True, very true. Generally the "look pretty" parts stay look pretty, but material quality is a different story. As an example, ask the state of California about what happened when they took "buy America" out of the specs for the new eastern half of the Bay Bridge. Yes they got Chinese steel for a lot less money, but they are having quality problems with some of it with issues that have been know in steel manufacture since the 1930's.

 

[JWM]

I stated my advanced age earlier in another thread. Look, whatever new LD equipment is coming, it won't be dome cars and such from the 1940's and 50's. I would like to see a proper dining car and a separate lounge car for coach and sleeping car passengers on LD trains. I loved the repurposed Santa Hi-Level lounges that Brian Rosenwald came up with for the Coast Starlight even though I never saw parlor spelled "parlour" before they arrived on the CS. With larger windows and perhaps sightseer lounge cars using the model of Seaboard's 5 double bedroom "sun room" on the "Silver Meteor" it would keeps costs down. All this is pure conjecture on my part. Thoughts.

 

[Cal]

I stated my advanced age earlier in another thread. Look, whatever new LD equipment is coming, it won't be dome cars and such from the 1940's and 50's. I would like to see a proper dining car and a separate lounge car for coach and sleeping car passengers on LD trains. I loved the repurposed Santa Hi-Level lounges that Brian Rosenwald came up with for the Coast Starlight even though I never saw parlor spelled "parlour" before they arrived on the CS. With larger windows and perhaps sightseer lounge cars using the model of Seaboard's 5 double bedroom "sun room" on the "Silver Meteor" it would keeps costs down. All this is pure conjecture on my part. Thoughts.

I think the Eastern trains definitely should have a lounge other than the cafe car. On my Cardinal trip it just didn't feel like that great of a place to spend time in, I would much rather be in my room. I saw a great lounge concept on here, I don't remember where but it had similar seating to the lounge chairs on the SSL's. But if something like it were to be implemented (I know I'm dreaming), it would be amazing

 

[cocojacoby]

There are many legitimate complaints about Superliners.
That said, I fell in love with them the moment I saw them and am always a little in awe.

I totally agree with you. The last Amtrak trip I took was on the Auto Train and I felt the same way. These cars, even though years old now, still look great and are really impressive to see and ride on. The Sightseer Lounge is a beautiful unique car and even though the scenery along that route is nothing special, sitting up there and taking it all in is something special.

If you catch a few of the videos on YouTube from foreign visitors, they are incredibly impressed with the Superliner and also the big city American train stations.

I hope they survive for many more years.

 

[John819]

If it were not for the ADA issue (no wheelchair access to upper level) and the inability of Superliners to access NYP, they are great. But these two issues will probably mean that the Superliner is the last double decker car that Amtrak will have.

That being said, there is also a big advantage if the entire fleet were to use the same type of equipment. Whether using the Siemens Venture as a base or a new design, you could create a series of long distance cars - coaches (both standard and business class), food service cars, sightseeing/observation cars, sleepers, and baggage cars that would use the same shell and undercarriage. This would be a long term process, replacing equipment as it wore out, rather than all at once.

 

[87YJ]

Idea.. After flying into Narita airport outside Tokyo a few times. There you take the shuttle train in & out from Tokyo to the airport (think around 45min). Why not do the same for the big east cities for the superliners. With the web of trains in and around and under the cities that the people are use to using anyway. Or do people back east just have to have service @ a location they have used their whole life? Asking as a non-city person.
That would just leave the lifts for the wheelchairs. As a design Eng. that problem could be overcome. How do I know.. My wife has ben a para for over 55 years and I have made her life a dream. A train is a piece of cake in the world I lived in as the cars are old and a new piece of paper(screen) to draw on gives you the room to design. I have seen how the ADA works one set of rules for us and another for those..
I know someone will bring up the crash testing, with the design power we have today in the computer world there is no reason to fail, unless you have poor engineering personnel.

 

[Ryan]

It’s not even clear what you’re asking or that you even understand what you’re asking. Do you genuinely think that you can get Superliners along existing Amtrak routes to within 45 minutes of every major city along the route and subsequently asking everyone wanting to go to those cities to get off the train and transfer to another train for a ride into their final destination?

The first assumption is untrue. The second request is ridiculous. In service of something completely not worth doing? Yeah, no. That isn’t going to happen.

 

[Tlcooper44]

It’s not even clear what you’re asking or that you even understand what you’re asking. Do you genuinely think that you can get Superliners along existing Amtrak routes to within 45 minutes of every major city along the route and subsequently asking everyone wanting to go to those cities to get off the train and transfer to another train for a ride into their final destination?

The first assumption is untrue. The second request is ridiculous. In service of something completely not worth doing? Yeah, no. That isn’t going to happen.

Yeah, but.... double decker=double the fun.

 

[87YJ]

Guess I miss spoke Just getting people to and from the big LD hubs. Cities are still spreading, so make the LD stations way outside the city so you can double deck everywhere if wanted. Train travel needs to leave the 1900's

 

[Cal]

Cities are still spreading, so make the LD stations way outside the city so you can double deck everywhere if wanted. Train travel needs to leave the 1900's

I feel it would be more practical to add one (or more) stops on the outskirts of the city and suburbs instead of not serving downtown. Similar to Boston and Boston Back Bay.

 

[87YJ]

It's not stopping downtown service, City folk travel all the time on the transit(rail). Its just a idea. That would allow more SL's to maybe roam the east. JMHO

 

[sttom]

If it were not for the ADA issue (no wheelchair access to upper level) and the inability of Superliners to access NYP, they are great. But these two issues will probably mean that the Superliner is the last double decker car that Amtrak will have.

That being said, there is also a big advantage if the entire fleet were to use the same type of equipment. Whether using the Siemens Venture as a base or a new design, you could create a series of long distance cars - coaches (both standard and business class), food service cars, sightseeing/observation cars, sleepers, and baggage cars that would use the same shell and undercarriage. This would be a long term process, replacing equipment as it wore out, rather than all at once.

I've mentioned this a few times, but the whole "non standard equipment" thing is only a problem if you have 3 cars that are different in a fleet of 500 than two different types in a fleet of several hundred cars. Airlines operate hundreds of planes of various types from primarily two manufacturers and they aren't going under due to having "non standard aircraft" which in their case would be whatever aircraft type isn't the plurality.

As for ADA, there still hasn't been hard rules about whether or not ADA is actually going to change, just that they are studying a change. And if ADA kills the Superliners, a single level replacement would also be affected by the changes. Beyond requiring a chair lift, if a person in a wheelchair is required to have full, independent and unobstructed access to the whole train, sleeping cars might be on the chopping block in general. Since there is only so much you can do with the internal arrangement of a rail car before a sleeper couldn't be built. For example, you would need to eliminate the bedrooms in a Viewliner and make the roomettes narrower to fit a standard sized wheelchair, let alone a wide one.

Superliners could be saved, but it will depend on what the "reasonable accommodations" are. Would having 2 sightseer lounges per trainset with them having chair lifts be reasonable even if you have to plan on having passengers with disability to the shuffle between cars when the train is stopped? As mentioned previously, I was concerned about my non disabled grandpa walking around on trains as he got older. Then there is also the issue with platform heights. Is a platform level with Superliners good or are we just going to be stuck with dealing with NEC rules everywhere, nevermind the disruption that will bring to people and transit systems outside of the NEC? Like with SMART near me, the platform heights will limit the lines expansion beyond its current boundaries or for intercity trains to ever share a line with it. The more this goes on, the more I think ADA needs a rethink because while I feel for people who need it, we shouldn't push it so far that it becomes impossible to have certain forms of transportation. I know on here, people have pointed out that carting you to your seat in a wheel chair is a good enough accommodation for an airline. And I know for sure Southwest's bathrooms are barely large enough for me to stand in it let alone fit a wheelchair.

 

[Trogdor]

Guess I miss spoke Just getting people to and from the big LD hubs. Cities are still spreading, so make the LD stations way outside the city so you can double deck everywhere if wanted. Train travel needs to leave the 1900's

Your understanding of transportation and urban planning should also leave the 1900s. City centers are actually getting stronger, after a period of decline in the second half of the 20th century. Bringing people into the center of town vs. dumping them at the outskirts is one of the key advantages of rail vs. air travel. Also, as to your Tokyo example, that’s actually one of the reasons why Narita airport has been losing favor to Haneda for international service in recent years.

 

[Tlcooper44]

Your understanding of transportation and urban planning should also leave the 1900s. City centers are actually getting stronger, after a period of decline in the second half of the 20th century. Bringing people into the center of town vs. dumping them at the outskirts is one of the key advantages of rail vs. air travel. Also, as to your Tokyo example, that’s actually one of the reasons why Narita airport has been losing favor to Haneda for international service in recent years.

One of the biggest problems with Amtrak west coast is that people are getting dropped off at non city centers.

Amtrak stations outside the NE corridor (with a few exceptions) suck. You have to Uber, find a friend, or straight up walk it.

 

[87YJ]

One of the biggest problems with Amtrak west coast is that people are getting dropped off at non city centers.

Understand! MRC serving PHX. BUT! Having a light rail line to MRC would serve a lightly used SL(6 stop a week) and serve town that is growing like wildfire(MRC) The only road to PHX is 4 lane and very heavy traffic. Running the train into PHX would only make the travel of the SL longer for the passengers. The same happens in the east when stopping in every downtown station on your way. JMHO

 

[Tlcooper44]

Understand! MRC serving PHX. BUT! Having a light rail line to MRC would serve a lightly used SL(6 stop a week) and serve town that is growing like wildfire(MRC) The only road to PHX is 4 lane and very heavy traffic. Running the train into PHX would only make the travel of the SL longer for the passengers. The same happens in the east when stopping in every downtown station on your way. JMHO

This isn’t true.
if every city has as central a station as any NE Corridor station (or the train stations they used to have before taking them down), more people would take the train. This isn’t a prediction, it’s a fact. The NE corridor has European level ridership. There is no corridor anywhere else in the country that comes even close.

people should have both options. A centrally located station to provide true downtown service, along with an earlier stop perhaps at the very end point of a metro network with park and ride options for suburban passengers.

sacrificing this for a cool double decker car isn’t worth it.

 

[Ryan]

sacrificing this for a cool double decker car isn’t worth it.

Concur! It's not even all that cool. Literally the only advantage that it brings to the table is maybe avoiding a handful of double spots at stations with short platforms.

It's a terrible solution in search of a problem.

 

[cocojacoby]

Guess I miss spoke Just getting people to and from the big LD hubs. Cities are still spreading, so make the LD stations way outside the city so you can double deck everywhere if wanted. Train travel needs to leave the 1900's

Okay but this is an interesting thought. If I was going to Chicago by Amtrak, I can see going to say a new Riverside Amtrak station and parking there or being dropped off just like I would at Logan (albeit with a lot less stress and expense). I know you lose the connection ability in downtown Boston but maybe they could run a CR out just prior to departure. Perhaps the new West Station could be used as Boston's LD terminal?

Actually it's kind of what you got at the other end of some routes. Amtrak Miami for example is nowhere near downtown Miami. West Station would be better than that.

New Auto Train type terminals could be located along major highways which included service capabilities. You actually might find a new type of passenger with this concept. One who just never considered Amtrak for LD travel before.

Of course this does nothing for NEC use.

 

[Tlcooper44]

Okay but this is an interesting thought. If I was going to Chicago by Amtrak, I can see going to say a new Riverside Amtrak station and parking there or being dropped off just like I would at Logan (albeit with a lot less stress and expense). I know you lose the connection ability in downtown Boston but maybe they could run a CR out just prior to departure. Perhaps the new West Station could be used as Boston's LD terminal?

Actually it's kind of what you got at the other end of some routes. Amtrak Miami for example is nowhere near downtown Miami. West Station would be better than that.

New Auto Train type terminals could be located along major highways which included service capabilities. You actually might find a new type of passenger with this concept. One who just never considered Amtrak for LD travel before.

Of course this does nothing for NEC use.

This is essentially Route 128 for the NEC.
It’s a shame the orange line doesn’t go all the way there (as it was planned to).

Framingham for LSL is the closest for this.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Anytime you want to change any physical infrastructure you are going to run into a swarm of environmentalist luddites, NIMBYs (not in my back yard), and BANANAs (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anybody).

Luddites? Most environmentalists I know are big fans of deploying the newest passenger rail solutions using the latest power generation technologies. Abusing environmental laws to attack new passenger rail in an arbitrary and cynical maner does not make the plaintiff an environmentalist.

Concur! It's not even all that cool. Literally the only advantage that it brings to the table is maybe avoiding a handful of double spots at stations with short platforms. It's a terrible solution in search of a problem.

The advantage of using Superliners is that they can provide more seats and rooms within the length of train that Amtrak is likely to actually run. The NEC is already serviced by a single level fleet so no issue there but the ADA sledgehammer is so overpowered it risks disqualifying anything but single level cars.

 

[Ziv]

I have to admit that one of the things I like best about the SL'ers are the views from up top. An additional 8'ish feet of elevation makes the view just a bit more impressive.
There are quite a few other, more important, factors that will go into choosing the eventual replacement for the SL'ers, so I am not too sanguine about being able to enjoy that enhanced view for more than the next 5 or 10 years though. I imagine the SL'ers will be gone by 2030-35, replaced by single level cars. I will miss the big old beasts.

Concur! It's not even all that cool. Literally the only advantage that it brings to the table is maybe avoiding a handful of double spots at stations with short platforms.

It's a terrible solution in search of a problem.

 

[Ryan]

The advantage of using Superliners is that they can provide more seats and rooms within the length of train that Amtrak is likely to actually run. The NEC is already serviced by a single level fleet so no issue there but the ADA sledgehammer is so overpowered it will risks disqualifying anything but single level cars.

My (perhaps foolish) assumption is that when a Superliner train is equipment swapped for a hypothetical single-level-equipped train, that the number of seats would remain constant, not the number of cars.

Edit to add: Not sure that it's a relevant data point, since management has turned over multiple times since then, but would be interested in the consist of the Cardinal as it went single level to Superliner and back again. Also probably not a great data point since the Card is such a red headed stepchild of a train, but as far as I know it's the only example we've got. Capitol Limited went single level to Superliner, but that was even longer ago.

 

[sttom]

One of the biggest problems with Amtrak west coast is that people are getting dropped off at non city centers.

Some stations aren't in downtown areas. Which can be a problem. I know on the San Joaquin this is true for some towns, but many others are located in vibrant parts of their respective cities, even if they aren't in downtown that doesn't mean they are in a field surrounded by cows. San Jose's station isn't "in" downtown, but it has a light rail connection that is two stops from the CBD and it has housing near it. Just because a station isn't in the geographic center of a place doesn't mean a station is useless. If door to door convenience was the only determining factor in travel, we'd always drive unless we have to cross an ocean. Airports have massive last mile problems and we still fly. A station being in the outer edge of downtown or a lesser one being in a slight inconvenient location isn't going to detract from the usefulness of a potential corridor.

Also, for a single level replacement for the Superliners to have roughly the same capacity, the ratio is 2 Superliners to 3 Viewliners minus the family bedroom.

 

[Tlcooper44]

Some stations aren't in downtown areas. Which can be a problem. I know on the San Joaquin this is true for some towns, but many others are located in vibrant parts of their respective cities, even if they aren't in downtown that doesn't mean they are in a field surrounded by cows. San Jose's station isn't "in" downtown, but it has a light rail connection that is two stops from the CBD and it has housing near it. Just because a station isn't in the geographic center of a place doesn't mean a station is useless. If door to door convenience was the only determining factor in travel, we'd always drive unless we have to cross an ocean. Airports have massive last mile problems and we still fly. A station being in the outer edge of downtown or a lesser one being in a slight inconvenient location isn't going to detract from the usefulness of a potential corridor.

Also, for a single level replacement for the Superliners to have roughly the same capacity, the ratio is 2 Superliners to 3 Viewliners minus the family bedroom.

I would consider a "vibrant part of the city" to be the equal of downtown (and was more or less considering this to be self-evident in my post). The point I was making is that there are many trains where you are neither dropped off in downtown nor "vibrant" locations. Silver Service, Texas Eagle and California Zephyr are especially guilty of this.

This is a double shame because 70 years ago, nearly all of the US had great station infrastructure optimally located in most cities. Cleveland is the saddest example of this. What a beautiful station that could have had potential to be a major intercity and metro hub, all rolled in to one to bring back Cleveland's glory days. Instead, we get a dumb lakefront station.