Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement discussion (2022 - 2024Q1)

[user 14106]

Based on an RPA hotline that came out today it sounds like they may have gotten some indication from management that they have decided on bilevel. And that this is a bilevel order.

 

[Paniolo Man]

Based on an RPA hotline that came out today it sounds like they may have gotten some indication from management that they have decided on bilevel. And that this is a bilevel order.

This has been beat into the ground. It will be a Bilevel order.

From the procurement portal:

Amtrak intends to issue an RFP to all qualified and interested Trainset Manufacturers (Car Builders) to provide Bi-Level Equipment, Supplies, and TSSSA services for the manufacture and replacement of Amtrak’s Long-Distance Fleet.

That seems to preclude any possibility of this order being single-level.

 

[danasgoodstuff]

I'm guessing something got lost in translation from replacing a bi-level fleet to necessarily replacing it with bi-level, and somewhere in the future they'll realize the screwup but by then it may be too late. Elevators break and take up space.

 

[Anderson]

How hard would it be to just build modern superliners from the original plans?

Anything can be done from yesteryear blueprints - - -
But why duplicate something from your grandfathers railroad era ?
Put some thought into modern day design and creature comforts !
Wide (tinted) windows
Elevators for bi-level cars for elderly and mobility passengers
LED dimmable lighting
Just some of the many advances that could be entertained - - -

alstom last built cars mostly based on the design in 2005, it can be done the question is why would you do that when theres a lot of shortcomings

So, the answer here, IMO, is "Because clearly it takes too gods-blessed long to do anything else". This is a "bird in the hand" situation - if the choice is between "Yesterday's cars in two years or tomorrow's cars in ten years", I'll take the former (and I feel like that's only a modest exaggeration after the CAF affair). Heck, if you don't like the Amfleets I'm sure you could pull some old Budd/Pullman designs (and if you lack blueprints, go look at what VIA has as a starting point). Big windows, etc. there. So yeah, I often put thought into these things...I just often end up deciding they're not worth the hassle after that thinking (and, all too often, experiencing them).

At some point you're just reinventing the wheel because you're bored, and I think railcars in the US probably got there a while back. But nobody ever wants to admit "This years designs didn't work and nobody liked them, so we're going to roll back the changes until we can make a better effort". [1]

[Also, I don't trust the folks with new designs not to screw up stuff that already works. The Siemens/Talgo seats frankly stink like a durian compared to Amfleet Business Class seats. Whomever either specced or designed those seats should feel great and everlasting shame.]

[1] Microsoft is a serial offender, but the most obvious case was Google foisting a Gmail overhaul some years back. When they finally jammed it down everyone's throat they were stuck implicitly admitting that like 40% of users had repeatedly rejected it given the choice, in spite of multiple prompts. And then there's the local Panera where I talked with the manager one day about their digital kiosks. Corporate wanted like 60-65% of transactions on them but they couldn't get over 30% no matter how much prompting they did, partly because nobody was ever really in a hurry there and partly because the floorplan put them out of the way. Steve Jobs once said "People don't know what they want until you show them." No, they often don't want what you're showing until you beat them into submission and give them Stockholm syndrome.

 

[sportbiker]

alstom last built cars mostly based on the design in 2005, it can be done the question is why would you do that when theres a lot of shortcomings

There's a middle ground. All the stuff that needs FRA approval already has it (Nippon Sharyo has exited the chat). All the other stuff such as interior fitments, HVAC systems and the like, are just matters of how the chassis is upfitted. New upfitting designs are easy to implement relative to getting the basic chassis right. Such upfitting could include ideas from Amtrak's "fixed set" proposal for an accessible LD consist.

Seems to me this could get us a new fleet far, far faster than starting from scratch, and likely for less cost.

 

[user 14106]

I have to imagine Alstom is going to be in the running simply being in control of the Superliner designs. Unfortunately as stated CAF showed that you can even run into major delays even when you use an existing design, The quickest direction would be to find something off the shelf. But this order is likely to be so customizd such a thing probably doesn't exist.

 

[Anderson]

There's a middle ground. All the stuff that needs FRA approval already has it (Nippon Sharyo has exited the chat).

ROFL!

 

[Anderson]

I have to imagine Alstom is going to be in the running simply being in control of the Superliner designs. Unfortunately as stated CAF showed that you can even run into major delays even when you use an existing design, The quickest direction would be to find something off the shelf. But this order is likely to be so customizd such a thing probably doesn't exist.

So...don't bleeping customize it? *furrows eyebrows*

[Like, *ignoring* the split fleet problem, this alone says "Just dust off stuff from 1956 and go".]

 

[user 14106]

So...don't bleeping customize it? *furrows eyebrows*

[Like, *ignoring* the split fleet problem, this alone says "Just dust off stuff from 1956 and go".]

It very well may be the way to go but some things would have to change. Dealing with the accessibility issue alone would involve substantial design work even if you went with a superliner based car body. Building just a superliner 3 with the same layout and just updated interiors wouldn’t fly accessibility wise. Stuff from 1956 today would be, by definition, custom equipment. It isn’t based on a currently produced off the shelf car product.

 

[rs9]

It very well may be the way to go but some things would have to change. Dealing with the accessibility issue alone would involve substantial design work even if you went with a superliner based car body. Building just a superliner 3 with the same layout and just updated interiors wouldn’t fly accessibility wise. Stuff from 1956 today would be, by definition, custom equipment. It isn’t based on a currently produced off the shelf car product.

Thank you for saying this. I'm in no way an expert on railcar procurement, but I am baffled by the desire to simply replicate Amfleet, Viewliner and Superliner cars for a future order. The rest of the world has moved on! This reminds me of Metra's (Chicago) RFP for essentially an exact replica of their galley passenger cars. No one responded to their RFP, if I recall correctly.

I get the sense that most folks here are generally sleeper passengers, which is fine. But to speak as a long distance coach passenger, Amfleet and Superliner coach cars have a lot of problems to them. Given that this is likely the only chance in the next 3-4 decades to correct these issues, I am at a complete loss as to why we would give up on this chance.

 

[John Santos]

Thank you for saying this. I'm in no way an expert on railcar procurement, but I am baffled by the desire to simply replicate Amfleet, Viewliner and Superliner cars for a future order. The rest of the world has moved on! This reminds me of Metra's (Chicago) RFP for essentially an exact replica of their galley passenger cars. No one responded to their RFP, if I recall correctly.

I get the sense that most folks here are generally sleeper passengers, which is fine. But to speak as a long distance coach passenger, Amfleet and Superliner coach cars have a lot of problems to them. Given that this is likely the only chance in the next 3-4 decades to correct these issues, I am at a complete loss as to why we would give up on this chance.

How many of those problems are basic design problems versus wear-and-tear or surface issues? Even something like bathrooms that break a lot or adding built-in, fold-out lifts for wheel-chair access at low level platforms do not require a total redesign of the existing cars. Seat comfort, lighting, electric outlets in the rooms and at the seats, signage, larger trash bins, A/C and heating issues, rattling and loud doors, etc. are all the sorts of things that can be fixed in new cars of an existing design. Even maintenance issues like the ease of replacing a faulty AC or a defective truck or broken coupler or the number of miles between various forms of routine or preventive maintenance can be accomplished by tuning the existing designs, and do not require a new design.

Some things that can't be fixed without a totally new design would be making the corridors wider in the sleepers to allow wider wheelchair access or structural strength issues or (probably) adding windows to the upper bunks in Superliner roomettes. It may or may not be possible to add elevators to Superliner cars, and they may not be useful if they only lead to upper level corridors that don't meet ADA width requirements. Lower level gangways between bi-level cars would require a totally new design.

 

[rs9]

How many of those problems are basic design problems versus wear-and-tear or surface issues? Even something like bathrooms that break a lot or adding built-in, fold-out lifts for wheel-chair access at low level platforms do not require a total redesign of the existing cars. Seat comfort, lighting, electric outlets in the rooms and at the seats, signage, larger trash bins, A/C and heating issues, rattling and loud doors, etc. are all the sorts of things that can be fixed in new cars of an existing design. Even maintenance issues like the ease of replacing a faulty AC or a defective truck or broken coupler or the number of miles between various forms of routine or preventive maintenance can be accomplished by tuning the existing designs, and do not require a new design.

Some things that can't be fixed without a totally new design would be making the corridors wider in the sleepers to allow wider wheelchair access or structural strength issues or (probably) adding windows to the upper bunks in Superliner roomettes. It may or may not be possible to add elevators to Superliner cars, and they may not be useful if they only lead to upper level corridors that don't meet ADA width requirements. Lower level gangways between bi-level cars would require a totally new design.

For the single-level fleet, are there any manufacturers that currently produce oblong, airplane tube-shaped rail cars?

For the bi-level fleet, are there any manufacturers that currently produce rail cars with second-level gangways and mid-car staircases, as opposed to end doors and gangways at single-car level?

I understand the desire to roll out new cars as soon as possible, but it would seem to cost Amtrak a lot more money to ask for what essentially amounts to custom manufacturing.

 

[John Santos]

For the single-level fleet, are there any manufacturers that currently produce oblong, airplane tube-shaped rail cars?

I don't think anyone proposes or wants Amfleet style single level coaches with their tiny windows. Lots of companies make Viewliner-style cars (with essential flat sides and much larger windows as coaches, diners and cafe cars. Just fit out the Airo cars (or cars from another manufacturer) with fewer rows of more comfortable seats, farther apart and maybe a luggage rack at one end.

Amfleet 1 and 2 are just coaches and cafe cars. All the sleepers, diners, baggage cars and maybe cafe and business class coaches on the single-level long distance trains are Viewliners (and maybe still some Horizons), not Amfleets. I think this is a non-issue.

For the bi-level fleet, are there any manufacturers that currently produce rail cars with second-level gangways and mid-car staircases, as opposed to end doors and gangways at single-car level?

I don't think anyone makes Superliner look-alikes but several companies have access to the plans and equipment to build new ones.

I think there are too many ADA issues with bi-level long distance cars with mid-level, single-level compatible vestibules and gangways. Access to both lower and upper levels of EVERY car requires multiple steps and would require lifts or ramps (to the lower level) and elevators (to the upper level) at both ends. Unless someone has a really clever solution, this is a non-starter.

I understand the desire to roll out new cars as soon as possible, but it would seem to cost Amtrak a lot more money to ask for what essentially amounts to custom manufacturing.

Very few countries are large enough to require multi-day overnight trains. Russia (no chance of buying equipment from them), Canada and maybe Australia? I think all the European and Chinese overnight trains are a single night, 12-16 hour trips. I don't think there are any such trains in Africa or South America. I don't know about India, but there seem to be some experts here. So I think whatever Amtrak gets from any supplier would necessarily be a smallish, custom order, in that vendor's view.

 

[Siegmund]

...I am baffled by the desire to simply replicate Amfleet, Viewliner and Superliner cars for a future order. The rest of the world has moved on.... But to speak as a long distance coach passenger, Amfleet and Superliner coach cars have a lot of problems to them. Given that this is likely the only chance in the next 3-4 decades to correct these issues, I am at a complete loss as to why we would give up on this chance.

I think what you're seeing is some serious displeasure with what the rest of the world has moved on to. The 50s designs were focused on passenger comfort. The Amfleet I -> Amfleet II -> Superliner -> Viewliner sequence felt like steady improvement. Superliner coaches are the most comfortable public transport, in any country or century, that I've ridden. They did a lot of things right with seat spacing and recline, the choice of leg or foot rests or both, the big overhead luggage racks, and so on. Even the lighting and curtains and A/C were nice for their time.

What would I change if I were starting fresh? There's room for better air handling -- ducts under the floors or inside the luggage racks or something rather than just at the ends of the car; obviously people today expect outlets. I would wish for seats actually aligned to the windows, but I've wished for that my whole life and never gotten it. But I don't feel like they got much wrong.

Most of the design work since then has been focused either on safety or on purely business considerations (squeeze in as many seats as possible, save a few pounds by making the cushions super thin or by not putting down carpet, etc) not on passenger comfort, and we are terrified that's what is going to happen with the new designs.

I would have no objection to an all-new design, perhaps with doors on the lower level, perhaps with elevators, etc., perhaps with 2-1 seating in the areas where wheelchair aisles are required and 2-2 seating where a Superliner width aisle is acceptable... provided it was done with passenger comfort put first. But I know of no modern coach design like that, single or bilevel, in production now.

 

[user 29398]

I am baffled by the desire to simply replicate Amfleet, Viewliner and Superliner cars for a future order. The rest of the world has moved on!

I get the sense that most folks here are generally sleeper passengers, which is fine. But to speak as a long distance coach passenger, Amfleet and Superliner coach cars have a lot of problems to them. Given that this is likely the only chance in the next 3-4 decades to correct these issues, I am at a complete loss as to why we would give up on this chance.

From a fellow coach passenger, I think a lot of the paranoia about all-new designs comes from the failure of the Next-Generation Bilevel Railcar. Delivery was supposed to start in 2015, but it failed FRA safety tests (that we know existing designs pass) and as a result we're still waiting for new long-distance cars and suffering from degraded service caused by equipment shortages. We will likely continue to wait until at least 2030. A similar failure in this proposal would probably result in Amtrak buying even more Venture cars or similar for the long-distance services, just as they turned to Venture cars for the state-sponsored services in 2015. Trouble is (at least in my eyes), there's no sightseer version of the Venture car. If I wanted a modern, utilitarian, commuter-style experience and didn't care about such quaint 19th-century activites as enjoying the view or playing cards in the lounge car I'd just book a ticket on Frontier Airlines. There's a role for those cars to be sure, but long-distance service isn't it. Nobody wants to spend 10+ hours in one.

In an ideal world, of course, we could have trains that have the best amenities from the 20th century and all incorporate the technological improvements of the 21st century, and I sincerely hope that is what we get out of this process. Amtrak's record on procurement, though, is singularly bad, and there's a real risk they drop the ball so badly that we wind up locked into trains that are even worse than the ones we already have for the next 50 years.

The Amfleets themselves originated from a desire to be modern above all else - by making the train cars look as much like airplanes as possible (round cross section, tiny windows, etc.). 'nuff said on the dangers of placing a singular emphasis on being modern.

 

[jiml]

Trouble is (at least in my eyes), there's no sightseer version of the Venture car.

That doesn't mean no one builds them. I believe these are Stadler and operate daily on scenic Swiss routes, although they are first class coaches as opposed to lounges.



From Stadler's web page:

Special requirements are placed on driving trailers, passenger cars, panoramic carriages and sleepers. We build a wide variety of custom-made carriages, meeting every possible wish in terms of interior design, HVAC and technology.

 

[Awesometrainz]

The size of the NJT multi level stuff is prefect for Amtrak ideally they could work in 9 car sets if Alstom does not win the bid these sizes still are prefect for LD trains

 

[joelkfla]

The size of the NJT multi level stuff is prefect for Amtrak ideally they could work in 9 car sets if Alstom does not win the bid these sizes still are prefect for LD trains

This has been discussed before (just last month) in this thread. The height is insufficient for 2 levels of upper & lower bunks. There's also the issue of providing car-to-car ADA access at an intermediate level, requiring a transfer between levels when leaving the car, and another when entering the next car.

 

[Amtrak25]

Those cars have no overhead luggage racks. The upper level ones can fit only a laptop case. They are bad enough on NJT with Airport passengers getting on at Newark.

 

[Septa9739]

Those bilevels are NOT the move. They are barely an upgrade for commuter service. You can argue they aren’t.

Also, I’d like to reiterate that we have NO evidence that the sets will be nine cars. That is based off a schematic for ADA waivers and to my knowledge has never been confirmed on or off the record.

 

[WWW]

The size of the NJT multi level stuff is prefect for Amtrak ideally they could work in 9 car sets if Alstom does not win the bid these sizes still are prefect for LD trains

Note the HC designation on the door before the level split and at the other end of the car.
What kind of platform extends out from the car is unknown - otherwise it appears to be too high for the
current boarding platforms ?

 

[Gemuser]

That doesn't mean no one builds them. I believe these are Stadler and operate daily on scenic Swiss routes, although they are first class coaches as opposed to lounges.

View attachment 35349

From Stadler's web page:

These are fabulous carriages on scenic routes! Rides well & the views are wonderful.
I have ridden them specifically, booked, across the Alps on the Goddard line [pre base tunnel] & on other misc trains on an ad-hoc basis

 

[Willbridge]

Very few countries are large enough to require multi-day overnight trains. Russia (no chance of buying equipment from them), Canada and maybe Australia? I think all the European and Chinese overnight trains are a single night, 12-16 hour trips. I don't think there are any such trains in Africa or South America. I don't know about India, but there seem to be some experts here. So I think whatever Amtrak gets from any supplier would necessarily be a smallish, custom order, in that vendor's view.

Russian overnight trains include German-designed and some German-built cars. This was an older car, but I've seen news reports of more recent purchases.

2010...

 

[jis]

I don't think anyone proposes or wants Amfleet style single level coaches with their tiny windows. Lots of companies make Viewliner-style cars (

Very few countries are large enough to require multi-day overnight trains. Russia (no chance of buying equipment from them), Canada and maybe Australia? I think all the European and Chinese overnight trains are a single night, 12-16 hour trips. I don't think there are any such trains in Africa or South America. I don't know about India, but there seem to be some experts here. So I think whatever Amtrak gets from any supplier would necessarily be a smallish, custom order, in that vendor's view.

Indeed, India has plenty of two nighters and even a few three nighters. India is very generous with Sleeping accommodation. Most overnight trains have 15-20 Sleeping Cars of various levels of comfort. I don't think anyone has ever heard of or seen an overnight train with two Sleepers that we are familiar with in the US.

 

[joelkfla]

Note the HC designation on the door before the level split and at the other end of the car.
What kind of platform extends out from the car is unknown - otherwise it appears to be too high for the
current boarding platforms ?

The doors are at platform level. You can see the platform edge looking past the front of the car. There are a small number of seats in the car at that level, which are supposed to be prioritized for handicapped. Typically, if a wheelchair is in use, a bridge plate will be stowed on the station platform for use by train crew.