RFP issued for Amfleet I replacement

[jis]

I wonder if they also might 'split' the award, so as to ensure a future pool of bidders? If one company seems to always 'win', they just might put all the other companies out of the market. While that may be 'only fair', it might limit future choice...

I suspect they would need to announce that as a possibility to be their intent before the bidding begins. Typically trying to change the rules midway is invitation for law suits and infinite delays. As long as the original bidder is able to meet all the pre-stated bid conditions, I don't think they can just go and change the rules of the game midway. If the original winner of the preferred bidder part of the process turns out to be unable to meet the deadlines set in the original RFP then it becomes a different ball game. Notice what ultimately happened to Nippon-Sharyo.

 

[railiner]

I suspect they would need to announce that as a possibility to be their intent before the bidding begins. Typically trying to change the rules midway is invitation for law suits and infinite delays. As long as the original bidder is able to meet all the pre-stated bid conditions, I don't think they can just go and change the rules of the game midway. If the original winner of the preferred bidder part of the process turns out to be unable to meet the deadlines set in the original RFP then it becomes a different ball game. Notice what ultimately happened to Nippon-Sharyo.

I wasn't referring to this Amtrak bid, but more about understanding the NY MTA bids that PVD referenced. Besides the buses mentioned, NY has also split awards for things like the R-160 and other subway car orders among more than one manufacturer. Whether they announced that possibility in advance, I don't know.

I am also unclear of how buyer's can get away with not accepting the lowest bid for what is specified. I know that one 'workaround' for the buyer (transit authority) is to write the specification in a detailed way, that only the favored bidder has the ability to provide, for one reason or another...

 

[jis]

I am also unclear of how buyer's can get away with not accepting the lowest bid for what is specified. I know that one 'workaround' for the buyer (transit authority) is to write the specification in a detailed way, that only the favored bidder has the ability to provide, for one reason or another...

There is absolutely no problem rejecting the lowest bid if the vendor is unable to provide sufficient details on how they propose to meet the requirements within the bid. That is why you have the bid conferences with each vendor. Lowest bids are rejected more often than we know because the bids themselves usually are trade secrets, and unless the decision is challenged in court, which happens sometimes, but not necessarily that often, there is no way for outsiders to know.

Then again there are buyers who sometimes have completely incompetent bid evaluators. So it can go both ways.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Then again there are buyers who sometimes have completely incompetent bid evaluators. So it can go both ways.

Sounds like what happened with Amtrak's Fiasco with CAF and the the Viewliner II Order.

 

[Willbridge]

There is absolutely no problem rejecting the lowest bid if the vendor is unable to provide sufficient details on how they propose to meet the requirements within the bid. That is why you have the bid conferences with each vendor. Lowest bids are rejected more often than we know because the bids themselves usually are trade secrets, and unless the decision is challenged in court, which happens sometimes, but not necessarily that often, there is no way for outsiders to know.

Then again there are buyers who sometimes have completely incompetent bid evaluators. So it can go both ways.

In 1978 the first Edmonton LRT line opened with Duncan turnstiles. They were an established American company that had labour troubles, and so we had machine troubles. Our maintainers showed me the dents in their interiors where hammers had been used to make parts fit. Passengers paid their fare and nothing happened. When the slug detector feature was turned on the machines rejected Canadian coins.

In 1994 the first Denver LRT line opened with Schlumberger TVM's, a company that had never built a TVM before and thought it would be nice to get into that business. RTD tried to take the next higher bidder but a court ordered otherwise. Federal judges have reserved underground parking places so they don't have to gamble with a TVM slot. As soon as possible the fault-prone machines were yanked. I still remember not feeling sorry when I saw them huddled together waiting for a ride to the scrapyard.

In both places the next order of TVM's came from competent suppliers.

 

[rickycourtney]

I am also unclear of how buyer's can get away with not accepting the lowest bid for what is specified. I know that one 'workaround' for the buyer (transit authority) is to write the specification in a detailed way, that only the favored bidder has the ability to provide, for one reason or another...

Basing an award solely on the lowest bidder is one of the mistakes new agencies make. The best practice is to come up with evaluation criteria and "weights" then award the contract to the lowest, responsible bidder.

LA Metro had two pretty bad purchase processes... they bought 50 LRV's from Siemens that were delivered three years late, then they bought 50 LRV's from Breda which were also three years late, and massively overweight.

As they prepared to make a big order for 235 LRV's they had learned their session and issued an RFP with the following evaluation criteria and weights:

• Experience and Past Performance - 40 percent
• Price - 30 percent
• Technical Compliance - 20 percent
• Project Management Experience - 10 percent

CAF, Kinkisharyo, and Siemens all bid on the contract. CAF was the lowest bidder ($786 million), but Metro was worried about "CAF's past performance in the U.S. market, their technical compliance and project management team." They ultimately awarded the contract to Kinkisharyo who bid $890 million, which was lower than Siemens ($941 million), but higher than CAF.

This contract was done in 2010-2012... roughly the same time that Amtrak placed the order for the Viewliner II with CAF... and we all know what a disaster that turned out to be, for exactly the reasons LA Metro identified, so it was a great call.

So that's how buyers can get away with not accepting the lowest bid... and how it can actually be a better deal for taxpayers.

 

[railiner]

Reminds me of when RTD wanted to buy MCI 102-A3's for their Northern operations (Boulder and Longmont), but were forced by political pressures to buy Neoplan AN340/3, partly because Neoplan had built a bus assembly plant in Lamar. They made sure to write the next specs, so that they could get their desired MCI's....

 

[nullptr]

Looks like it will be venture coaches. They are saying dual powered locomotives though.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2021/07/07/amtrak-new-trains-northeast/
As anyone seen a more detailed press release? I'm curious if all the train sets will be dual powered.

This is in the article

The train, built with bidirectional capacities, will reduce turnaround times while their dual-power engines — electric and diesel — will help reduce time it takes for trains to transition from electrified into non-electrified territory. The fleet will include diesel-only train sets for use on the West Coast, where tracks are not electrified, and some battery-diesel hybrid trains.

 

[frequentflyer]

So what will these dual powered locomotives look like? Chargers or Sprinters?

 

[jis]

Looks like it will be venture coaches. They are saying dual powered locomotives though.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2021/07/07/amtrak-new-trains-northeast/
As anyone seen a more detailed press release? I'm curious if all the train sets will be dual powered.

This is in the article

I have seen a privately shared equipment order roster which I am unable to share in toto, well because it is private, but can share some overall information from it.

They will use whatever power is attached to them. On the corridor they will be ACS64 powered. They could continue to operate off NEC with power change pending acquisition of additional power. The present deal will not include any power heads as far as I understand it. It is stricly a replacement for Amfleet I cars with 7 car train sets with a cab car at one end and a type "H" coupler at the other end to attach whatever power one wants to attach. In spiriti you could view them as the American version of the Austrian Railjet configuration.

So the net net answer is No, the trains will not be dual mode powered, at least initially, Initially they will be powered by Sprinters and P42s, since there are no Corridor Chargers being ordered for the east coast yet.

However, the overall architecture is very flexible as far as power choice goes and this is not a one shot deal, there will be additional orders of power heads between now and 2031, which most likely will involve third rail dual mode for Empire Service, and may include catenary dual mode down the line for Virginia service and such. The battery thing is intriguing and I am not sure where they intend to use that since they are usually not long range.

 

[Eric S]

Here's Amtrak press release: Amtrak to Transform Rail Travel with $7.3 Billion Investment in State-of-the-Art Equipment - Amtrak Media

Just started to read it myself, not sure how much additional information is contained within.

EDIT:
Hmm, the release seems to have been removed from Amtrak's website. I'll update the link if I see it reposted.

 

[nullptr]

Here is the press release from Siemens, not much more information though.
https://press.siemens.com/global/en...-awarded-historic-34-billion-contracts-amtrak
The way they discuss the battery version makes me think it's just to increase fuel efficiency like the Wabtec FLXdrive prototype

The order includes dual power and hybrid battery trains. The first will be delivered in 2024, while the first of its kind Venture Hybrid battery train will begin testing in 2025. The trains for the Northeast Corridor and State Supported routes will be delivered from 2024 through 2030. Through the use of multi-power systems, including hybrid battery operation, they will also provide a substantial environmental benefit through reduced emissions compared to the existing fleet.

Update to include a graphic from Siemens

 

[Mailliw]

This is good news. And apparently there's an option to expand the order up to 130 trainsets in the future if funding becomes available.

 

[frequentflyer]

Here is the press release from Siemens, not much more information though.
https://press.siemens.com/global/en...-awarded-historic-34-billion-contracts-amtrak
The way they discuss the battery version makes me think it's just to increase fuel efficiency like the Wabtec FLXdrive prototype


Update to include a graphic from Siemens
View attachment 23492

So NEC trains will have a cab car at one end then. Only the LD trains will need the Sunnyside Y.

 

[frequentflyer]

Present NEC trains are 7-8 cars, will the new trainsets match that?

 

[Eric S]

Looks like Amtrak's press release is back up: Amtrak to Transform Rail Travel with $7.3 Billion Investment in State-of-the-Art Equipment - Amtrak Media

Reading through the press release, dual-powered locomotives are mentioned (specifically in reference to Virginia trains) as well as a battery-hybrid version for Empire Service (perhaps instead of third rail?).

 

[frequentflyer]

I guess soon we will officially see the new Phase 5,6, or whatever livery Amtrak is on. We should be seeing a model or mock up soon.

Not a good day at Stadler.

 

[jis]

I would be interesting to see what the breakdown of configurations and cars are. I knew about the total of 83 sets. I am wondering what the 17 dedicated NY State sets will be configured as and what the hell are they going to use that many sets for. Originally I thought there were to be 8 NY dedicated sets, but maybe those are actually Connecticut/Massachusetts Inland Corridor targeted sets, and NY State get fully configured NEC 7/8 car sets.

I wait with much anticipation for further information.

Exciting times!

The total 83 sets list that I had seen included 5 sets for WashDOT, but there is no mention of that in this press release, so maybe that is separate from this order.

The dollar amount suggests that the order includes some power heads but not enough for all train sets, which makes sense given that the ACS64s are not going to be scrapped so soon. OTOH there is need for corridor diesels/dual modes to retire the army of P42s used in corridor service.

 

[Cal]

When is expected delivery and them being put into service?

 

[jis]

When is expected delivery and them being put into service?

2024-2031 seems to ring a bell. They mention the Battery powered set will be ready for testing in 2025. That would presumably be one of the NY State configured trains.

Coming to think of it, the 17 number for NY State probably comes for the fact that there are 18 ACDMs today.

 

[nullptr]

I'm trying to figure out what went into the $7.3 billion headline number

Amtrak has signed a mammoth contract with manufacturing company Siemens Mobility for 83 new train sets, part of a $7.3 billion plan to upgrade its rolling stock over the next decade.

Under the plan announced Wednesday, Amtrak will replace nearly 40 percent of its rail car fleet by 2031 and invest $2 billion in equipment upgrades systemwide.

Amtrak also is on track to replace its Acela fleet with 28 high-speed train sets from French manufacturer Alstom. Those trains, part of a $2.5 billion project, are expected to enter service next spring after delays caused by testing,

Amtrak’s base contract with Siemens, worth $3.4 billion, calls for 73 multi-powered train sets and the service agreement for Siemens to provide support, parts and materials. Railroad officials said another $1.5 billion would include an additional 10 train sets. Amtrak said the deal also facilitates the procurement of 130 trains to support Amtrak’s growth plans.

3.4 + 1.5 + 2.0 = 6.9 ...

Maybe it represents the full 130 train sets, which 3.4 and 1.5 are a part of. Interesting Siemens' press release went with $3.4 billion.

 

[jis]

I'm trying to figure out what went into the $7.3 billion headline number



3.4 + 1.5 + 2.0 = 6.9 ...

Maybe it represents the full 130 train sets, which 3.4 and 1.5 are a part of. Interesting Siemens' press release went with $3.4 billion.

I think it includes parts and maintenance contract. All of it is not due up front, but over 10 or 20 years, whatever the period of the contracts is. Only $3.4 billion is apparently for the actual rolling stock. Of course even for the purchase, I am sure there will be some financial arrangement made which disperses the payment over a long period rather than all up front, like they did with the Acelas 21s. What exact mechanism, I don't know.

 

[west point]

Here is a Siemens release o battery CAT locos. I have a worry that as the batteries age they will loose ability to run full route. Siemens in the link below seems to indicate the battery can be charged from "overhead cable contacts. Sounds like CAT or just a trolley wire to recharge the battery.

What might be a solution to extend battery distance would be CAT for about a mile from station to save battery life during rapid acceleration. As well the CAT could start charging batteries during deceleration to station

e
Slide 1 of 1

Slide 1 of 1

Slide 1 of 1

Slide 1 of 1

Slide 1 of 1

Slide 1 of 1

Traction batteries for partially electrified sections
All the technological components in our battery-powered trains are installed on the roof or underfloor. Batteries have been proving themselves as an electrical storage system for decades. Equipped with state-of-the-art technologies, they're ideal for use in battery-powered trains with ranges up to 120 km. Batteries can be charged in stations via overhead cable contacts. The acceleration advantage and greater riding comfort of the electric drive as compared to DMUs is especially noticeable on shorter sections.

 

[jis]

120km range won't get it to Albany though. The incarnation that they will use is most likely for use just in the tunnels, and battery will probably be charged from the diesel prime mover while stationary outside the tunnels, or using some sort of electrical shore feed.

 

[AFriendly]

This article states "In addition to the Northeast Regional, other routes that will be serviced by the new fleet include the Adirondack, Carolinian, Cascades, Downeaster, Empire Service, Ethan Allen Express, Keystone Service, Maple Leaf, New Haven/Springfield Service (Amtrak Hartford Line and Valley Flyer), Pennsylvanian, Vermonter and Virginia Services."

No surprises to me except for the Cascades, which is a geographic outlier and I had the impression Oregon and Washington might have had their own plans, but I guess the price was right. I think this is great news overall. Siemens Venture is a solid product from a manufacturer with a good reputation...if anyone can build a fleet that will stand up to the rigors of Amtrak service, it's them. I'm not sure about the semi-permanently coupled trainsets though, and I also feel that an opportunity is being missed to bilevel more trains which would have added capacity.