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

[fengshui]

I think the important thing to note about the aforementioned five-year plan is that the process will be pretty formal, with likely both Amtrak-produced RFI and RFPs published publicly. We will learn a lot about Amtrak's priorities and goals from those documents, whenever they are released.

 

[jis]

The stadler cars could work if they could build a sleeping car version. Maybe rooms on the lower level and seats on the upper level. Not every car would need dining room tables. I think staffing levels are much higher on the Rocky Mountaineer.

Their 18’ height however may present a challenge at Chicago Union Station.

 

[Steve4031]

Their 18’ height however may present a challenge at Chicago Union Station.

This is why you are a true asset to AU. Your knowledge and attention to detail always informs diplomatically. Thank you.

 

[Maglev]

I just wanted to put this picture here of what a Roomette would look like with an accessible hallway. There would not be enough room to stand between the hallway wall and the bed. Here are the "steps" in an Accessible Bedroom:

 

[GDRRiley]

Their 18’ height however may present a challenge at Chicago Union Station.

I believe that height means they are also an issue in some tunnels out west that haven't been increased in size.
I know for sure most of the bridges and tunnels on the Coast starlight route in central callifornia are not double stack compatible as UP has proposed the state paying to make that happen.

 

[joelkfla]

I just wanted to put this picture here of what a Roomette would look like with an accessible hallway. There would not be enough room to stand between the hallway wall and the bed. Here's the "steps" in an Accessible Bedroom:

View attachment 30407

What Accessible Bedroom is that? And what does it have to do with the width of a Roomette?

 

[Maglev]

What Accessible Bedroom is that? And what does it have to do with the width of a Roomette?

That is a Superliner Accessible Bedroom. It has the same bed arrangement as a Roomette, but the steps are narrower due to the extra width of the hallway. In a Roomette with an accessible hallway, the whole room would only be this wide.

 

[joelkfla]

That is a Superliner Accessible Bedroom. It has the same bed arrangement as a Roomette, but the steps are narrower due to the extra width of the hallway. In a Roomette with an accessible hallway, the whole room would only be this wide.

Thx. Only been in the Superliner Accessible Room once, and I'd forgotten that the berths were set up like a Roomette, rather than a Bedroom as they are in the Viewliners.

 

[Gemuser]

Stadler could build a nice bilevel for Amtrak and have lower level vestibules.

https://www.railvolution.net/news/new-carriages-for-rocky-mountaineer-delivered

The stadler cars could work if they could build a sleeping car version. Maybe rooms on the lower level and seats on the upper level. Not every car would need dining room tables. I think staffing levels are much higher on the Rocky Mountaineer.

Stadler can build anything! [Railway car universe!] That is their specialty, see their web site. The end result may not satisfy the operators economic models but it would work. Reducing the height to Superliner standard should not be a major problem, budgets might be the problem

 

[Barb Stout]

Stadler could build a nice bilevel for Amtrak and have lower level vestibules.

https://www.railvolution.net/news/new-carriages-for-rocky-mountaineer-delivered

One thing that drew my attention in this article you posted is "They can be operated in a temperature range of -25 to +50 °C. " -25C is -15 F and it frequently gets that cold in Canada and parts of the US. So I'm wondering what happens to train function below -15F. And I'm assuming that the Rocky Mountaineer doesn't operate in the winter or am I wrong?

 

[Andrew]

If Amtrak goes with a bi-level coach order, I wonder if Stadler would have the capacity to quickly manufacture hundreds of cars.

Also, Hitachi is building a new factory in Maryland, so I wonder how that will fit into the equation.

 

[Steve4031]

I still think standardizing with venture cars is the key. This would eliminate concerns with clearance and could open up opportunities for different long distance run through routes.

One interesting example imho would be a second version of the Lakeshore Limited that ran to NYP and then continues up to Boston. This provides a one seat ride from providence, New Haven and Stamford to pouts west of Albany.

 

[jis]

Stadler can build anything! [Railway car universe!] That is their specialty, see their web site. The end result may not satisfy the operators economic models but it would work. Reducing the height to Superliner standard should not be a major problem, budgets might be the problem

It depends on where one wants the bottom floor to be. One of the distinguishing features of the Rocky Mountaineer double deckers is that the lower floor is at the standard level same as that for single level cars thus allowing for uninterrupted travel at the same level throughout the train. At 18 feet this mean that each floor has a 7' ceiling 7'+7'+4' = 18'

If you try to do the same thing with a 16' tall car one lands up with 6' ceiling heights in each floor. While 7' is marginally acceptable 6' is more or less unacceptable. This would mean that for a 16' car one would need to go with tri-level as most multi-level cars in the US are, if the vestibule has to be at the same level as for single level cars. Alternatively one would have to revert back to the Superliner configuration where the inter-car walkway is at the height of the upper level and hence incompatible with single level car vestibule height, and has all the potential ADA issues. No matter what the engineering prowess of Stadler is they cannot beat simple arithmetic I am afraid.

 

[GDRRiley]

I still think standardizing with venture cars is the key. This would eliminate concerns with clearance and could open up opportunities for different long distance run through routes.

One interesting example imho would be a second version of the Lakeshore Limited that ran to NYP and then continues up to Boston. This provides a one seat ride from providence, New Haven and Stamford to pouts west of Albany.

Venture cars to not need to be the standard out west. amtrak is not going to run a LA or SF to NYC train
amtrak does need more single level cars for LD but those could be just more viewliners not made by CAF.

People get all focused on standardization but realize the superliner fleet was as big or larger than the amfleet I cars. its fine to have 2-3 large fleets that cover all their needs instead of trying to get 1 family do do it.

 

[Nick Farr]

it would be fairly easy to make some/all of the coaches/sleepers have elevators for wheelchair users. Some cars like dinning and lounge cars assuming they keep the same layout would not need them.

If you've ever dealt with ADA compliant elevators in public transit, you will know that this is *absolutely* not the case. Even the dumb waiters in the cafe car have a lot of maintenance problems that come up--and you don't have nearly the same weight/duty/safety cycle for those.

Then you're taking away at least 1/8th of the footprint of the car to make sure there's enough clearance for the elevator on both levels and its mechanical systems.

Further, elevators in public transit are fixed into the ground. Developing a wheelchair lift that can survive hundreds of thousands of acceleration and braking cycles and lift 300 lbs is a technical challenge that I'm not sure has been addressed in the industry.

Then, you have the issue of making sure the hallways are wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs. Because--if not, why would you have elevators?

If you're talking about one car per consist that's tied to the cafe car, then--perhaps this could work. But it's unrealistic to think you'll be able to put accessible bedrooms in each car with an elevator.

If you were to go with bi-levels and accessible bedrooms in each car, it would be much easier to have elevators at each station to provide mobility between levels.

If you look at it, the scale and the mathematics say that it's better to build more single-level standard cars across the entire network than to literally design a new bi-level car to replace the ones we have.

 

[MARC Rider]

Why the strong feelings about the desirability of bi-level cars? Before the Superliners debuted in in the mid-1970s, nearly all of the long-distance passenger train cars in the US were single level cars, with the exception of the Santa Fe Hi-level cars on the El Capitan (which were the models for the Superliners.) Some of the best rail riding experience in history was done on trains with single-level cars. So what if they have to double-spot at a few more stations? You're not riding a long-distance train to make speed records, anyway. As far as the views, they can easily either build Vista-Dome cars (which are better than bi-level Sightseer Lounges, anyway), or, if ADA rules make domes impossible, they can build single level "panorama cars" like the ones of the Glacier and Bernina Expresses in Switzerland.

 

[railiner]

If they did decide to make all long distance trains single level, for a sightseer type lounge car, they could use the type of Panorama car used by VIA Rail and Alaska RR, with glass roof panels. And to improve the experience further, they could take a page out of Disney Cruise Lines book, and have 'virtual railfan windows' on the bulkheads at each end, a video screen fed by roof mounted tv camera's showing front and rear views in real time...

 

[Andrew]

A

I still think standardizing with venture cars is the key. This would eliminate concerns with clearance and could open up opportunities for different long distance run through routes.

One interesting example imho would be a second version of the Lakeshore Limited that ran to NYP and then continues up to Boston. This provides a one seat ride from providence, New Haven and Stamford to pouts west of Albany.

Amtrak might order Venture Coaches for the LD trains but order bi-levels for The Auto Train.

 

[Caesar La Rock]

Amtrak may end up getting both single level and bi level equipment, which they've done before as shown in the 1990s with the Superliner IIs and Viewliner Is. Just something that can't be ruled out either.

 

[GDRRiley]

If you've ever dealt with ADA compliant elevators in public transit, you will know that this is *absolutely* not the case. Even the dumb waiters in the cafe car have a lot of maintenance problems that come up--and you don't have nearly the same weight/duty/safety cycle for those.

Then you're taking away at least 1/8th of the footprint of the car to make sure there's enough clearance for the elevator on both levels and its mechanical systems.

Further, elevators in public transit are fixed into the ground. Developing a wheelchair lift that can survive hundreds of thousands of acceleration and braking cycles and lift 300 lbs is a technical challenge that I'm not sure has been addressed in the industry.

there already ones made its not a new idea
this is stadlers Bi level, the wheelchair lift takes up 2 rows of seats.

Then, you have the issue of making sure the hallways are wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs. Because--if not, why would you have elevators?

hallways already need to be wider for ADA and they are no wider than on a single level car

 

[GDRRiley]

Amtrak might order Venture Coaches for the LD trains but order bi-levels for The Auto Train.

auto train isn't that special they won't get custom cars just for it

If they did decide to make all long distance trains single level, for a sightseer type lounge car, they could use the type of Panorama car used by VIA Rail and Alaska RR, with glass roof panels. And to improve the experience further, they could take a page out of Disney Cruise Lines book, and have 'virtual railfan windows' on the bulkheads at each end, a video screen fed by roof mounted tv camera's showing front and rear views in real time...

its far more likely if they went single level they'd bring back a big/great dome full length unit for operations outside of the NEC

 

[user 14106]

auto train isn't that special they won't get custom cars just for it

Maybe maybe not. It is the highest revenue long distance train in the system and had the best revenue vs expenses in the entire Amtrak system in FY2022. I suspect it will be “in mind” when considering the long distance fleet at the least.

 

[TheMalahat]

Regarding the idea of a joint order with VIA, remember that political leadership in Canada nixed purchase of built-in-Canada Bombardier Superliners because of so much of the design work already having been done in the States. That was in spite of a successful demonstration set run on the Panorama. It would have been great to have compatible cars for tour operators and special events, but an actual joint purchase would get tangled up.

That was 40 years ago.

Generally, Canada does not have buy-in-Canada provisions for all except the most-major capital projects. The Siemens order that started service last week is a far better comparison; it has no Canadian content for all intent & purpose.

Via Rail Canada currently has an open invitation for long-distance car builders to make submissions for fleet replacement; Via is ahead of Amtrak right now, but also tends to contract much more slowly.

 

[west point]

I believe that height means they are also an issue in some tunnels out west that haven't been increased in size.
I know for sure most of the bridges and tunnels on the Coast starlight route in central callifornia are not double stack compatible as UP has proposed the state paying to make that happen.

California is so passenger train orientated that a three way ( UP, CA DOT, FED GOV by of Amtrak ) paid proposal might be possible. Does anyone know which tunnels are not plat "H" and what their clearances are?

 

[GDRRiley]

California is so passenger train orientated that a three way ( UP, CA DOT, FED GOV by of Amtrak ) paid proposal might be possible. Does anyone know which tunnels are not plat "H" and what their clearances are?

UP wants the state to pay for it as part of the proposed coast daylight. The state hasn't ordered railcars so a coast daylight isn't happening soon

there are 5 tunnels and Bradley Bridge would need work to get SD to Oakland Plate H cleared. I belive its 3-4 ft of material would need to be removed from the roof.

that doesn't fix moffet which is not plate H

Spoiler: map