RFP issued for Amfleet I replacement

[jiml]

Unfortunately the FRA crafted regs for ADA compliance is not particularly high on common sense. It does require an ADA compliant room in every car. Of course I have at time pondered what they mean by a "car". If there are three carriages articulated together with full width vestibules using Jacobs Trucks to articulate them, are they one car or three cars?

If one wanted to create a Sleeper version of the Acela II say with a Charger at each end, would they insist that each 65' car have an ADA compartment? What if indivual car lengths were 40'?

 

[NES28]

None of the ideas discussed for lower level handicapped rooms provide any access to the the diner or sightseer lounge. Which is why I suggest that they will, eventually have to be replaced by single level cars. What can be done to make make them attractive?

 

[Mailliw]

That's a valid concern, but even the Viewliners only give a wheelchair user access to the dining car if they're in the one directly connected to any; I they're in the 2nd or 3rd car they're out of luck.

 

[NES28]

Please explain why this is true. Siemens Brightline cars apparently are wheelchair accessible throughout.

 

[Mailliw]

The corridor in the Viewliners is too narrow for wheelchairs and there isn't enough space to turn the chair between the Bedrooms and Roomettes. It would be possible to design a new sleeping car without that problem, but might end up losing capacity.

 

[PVD]

Interior width of car with 2x2 seating leaves a wide enough aisle. That is not the case with roomettes on both sides of the car.

 

[me_little_me]

The corridor in the Viewliners is too narrow for wheelchairs and there isn't enough space to turn the chair between the Bedrooms and Roomettes. It would be possible to design a new sleeping car without that problem, but you'd likely loose capacity.

Therein lies a problem. To make a single level with more sleeping capacity, it must be longer making trains that fit fewer and fewer stations. One possible solution is more trains per day but then Amtrak management doesn't want that.
To make a multi-level with more sleeping capacity, more trains is one solution as would alternate (but uncompliant by today's rules) ADA cars where say, one car with internal elevator and 3-4 ADA rooms upstairs nearest the Diner & Lounge which would also be ADA compliant. Stations ADA compliant at the center of the train where the ADA rooms are would allow the other cars to have non-ADA rooms and therefore allow the train, not the car, to be better compliant overall with higher capacity.

 

[Mailliw]

Everything would be much easier if ADA requirements were rewrite to apply at the trainst level instead of at the individual car.

 

[NSC1109]

I would love to see a modern Slumbercoach design. Personally I'd be fine with sections or couchettes, but I admit they may not be popular generally. It seems like a roomette is the best compromise.

Ive been working on one based off the Viewliner design but it’s nowhere near ready to be shown. I’m not even sure I still have it on my laptop hard disk but I’ll look for it.

 

[Andrew]

A dual mode charger is going to be no heavier than the ALP-45DP (which is only slightly heavier than the regular charger). It will likely have the same starting tractive effort as the regular charger, be capable of 4000 hp in diesel mode (higher in electric), and have similar higher speed tractive capabilities to the regular charger.

My money is still on Siemens getting the AMF1 replacement order... they literally already have a coach design that's being tested right now lined up to bid with.

Wouldn't a dual-mode Charger locomotive be heavier than a Sprinter, and thus would increase wear and tear on the tracks?

Also, if Siemens for some reason is not bidding on the Amfleet replacement contract, would that make Alstom the front-runner?

 

[Mailliw]

Probably, there aren't exactly many options. Other than CAF or the Chinese I think Stadler would be the only other contender.

 

[sttom]

Therein lies a problem. To make a single level with more sleeping capacity, it must be longer making trains that fit fewer and fewer stations. One possible solution is more trains per day but then Amtrak management doesn't want that.
To make a multi-level with more sleeping capacity, more trains is one solution as would alternate (but uncompliant by today's rules) ADA cars where say, one car with internal elevator and 3-4 ADA rooms upstairs nearest the Diner & Lounge which would also be ADA compliant. Stations ADA compliant at the center of the train where the ADA rooms are would allow the other cars to have non-ADA rooms and therefore allow the train, not the car, to be better compliant overall with higher capacity.

One way to solve this would be to have the ADA requirements be based on a percentage of capacity rather than how it works now. About an eighth of the population has a mobility disability, setting the ADA rule to be a minimum of one eighth of capacity be "accessible" would make it so Amtrak or other operators would have some flexibility in what seats and beds they can offer and still make sure there is still capacity on their trains. It would require Amtrak's management to read and do math, which might be hard for some people at Amtrak but it could work.

 

[Trogdor]

One way to solve this would be to have the ADA requirements be based on a percentage of capacity rather than how it works now. About an eighth of the population has a mobility disability, setting the ADA rule to be a minimum of one eighth of capacity be "accessible" would make it so Amtrak or other operators would have some flexibility in what seats and beds they can offer and still make sure there is still capacity on their trains. It would require Amtrak's management to read and do math, which might be hard for some people at Amtrak but it could work.

It takes some nerve to not only insult Amtrak management employees (which I’m guessing you’ve never met) but then also to completely dismiss the struggles faced by those with disabilities saying they should only have access to a small fraction of the facilities that an able bodied person should enjoy.

 

[NES28]

Yes, converting Superliner trains to single level would require building longer platforms, in some cases restoring ones that used to be there.

 

[IndyLions]

It takes some nerve to not only insult Amtrak management employees (which I’m guessing you’ve never met) but then also to completely dismiss the struggles faced by those with disabilities saying they should only have access to a small fraction of the facilities that an able bodied person should enjoy.

OK – I’m not trying to be insensitive here. Disabled people deserve to have access to as many facilities as possible. In some cases extraordinary measures should be taken to achieve this, and in all cases reasonable accommodations should be made.

But what is a reasonable accommodation? Should any activity in which it is impossible for a disabled person to participate be banned?

To me, it is a reasonable accommodation to provide a spacious room in which the disabled person can navigate, restroom facilities which are effective and pleasant, large windows which provide a view out both sides if possible, and the ability to dine in one’s room with good quality service.

Requiring that every other facility on the train (diner, lounge, etc) be completely accessible to a disabled person is a step too far. It basically sets up barriers, in my opinion, that over time would just eliminate long-distance train travel in this country.

 

[jiml]

OK – I’m not trying to be insensitive here. Disabled people deserve to have access to as many facilities as possible. In some cases extraordinary measures should be taken to achieve this, and in all cases reasonable accommodations should be made.

But what is a reasonable accommodation? Should any activity in which it is impossible for a disabled person to participate be banned?

To me, it is a reasonable accommodation to provide a spacious room in which the disabled person can navigate, restroom facilities which are effective and pleasant, large windows which provide a view out both sides if possible, and the ability to dine in one’s room with good quality service.

Requiring that every other facility on the train (diner, lounge, etc) be completely accessible to a disabled person is a step too far. It basically sets up barriers, in my opinion, that over time would just eliminate long-distance train travel in this country.

Like most sensitive subjects today, this is a tough one to navigate. You're not wrong, and has any other mode of transportation been forced to make as significant accommodation? It's not like airlines have been required to take out the first two rows of FC to accommodate persons with disabilities. There aren't even seats set aside in coach with extra manoeuvring room nor are there reasonable accessible bathrooms. Same goes for buses - sure they put a wheelchair symbol over the first couple of rows, but the space is no different than anywhere else on the bus and bathroom access is a joke.

 

[MARC Rider]

Why all the posts about sleeper cars in a thread that's supposed to be about Amfleet-1 replacement? The Amfleet-1s were designed for short-haul corridor service, and trains using them won't need sleeping car service.

 

[joelkfla]

Same goes for buses - sure they put a wheelchair symbol over the first couple of rows, but the space is no different than anywhere else on the bus and bathroom access is a joke.

If you're talking about transit buses, the space is very different. Seats fold up, and there are tie-down devices under the seats. Buses are also required to have wheelchair ramps or lifts, and floor space for maneuvering chairs between the accessible entrance and the tie-downs. Historically, the lifts were very complex mechanically and caused a lot of maintenance; but not so much now with ramps on low-floor buses.

I don't have any figures, but my gut feel is that transit companies as a whole have spent more on accessibility over the years than has Amtrak.

 

[sttom]

It takes some nerve to not only insult Amtrak management employees (which I’m guessing you’ve never met) but then also to completely dismiss the struggles faced by those with disabilities saying they should only have access to a small fraction of the facilities that an able bodied person should enjoy.

1) I did not say that people with a mobility disability should be excluded from the trains, if anything I would want the capacity rule with more of a solid definition of what "accessible" means with respects to transportation than just assuming someone somewhere will ask the question of when an accommodation of a disability becomes unreasonable.
2) I understand very intimately what a person with declining mobility and cognition faces. My grandfather towards the end of his life couldn't climb the steps to the top level of a California Car when he rode the train. So I get it. My main concern with having someone like my grandfather go to the upper level of a bi level train would be if it was safe. If he could only navigate the stairs while the train is stopped, that was a concern for me. Also, what happens if a train crashes? Is it safe for someone with an impairment to be somewhere that can't be easily evacuated? It would be one thing for me to get out of the upper level of a car, but not someone who has trouble walking let along someone who can't walk at all.

The question is, if no one is going to ask where the line for "reasonable accommodations" is and frankly it seems like it really is a "it depends on the equipment" question that we keep tap dancing around. It will be fairly easy to make whatever replaces the Amfleets mostly accessible since there aren't rooms to deal with and Siemens at least can build in chair lifts. I would much prefer hard rules over open ended questions that no one seems to ask and no one cares to answer.

If a sleeping car has to be able to navigable by a wheelchair, then there is a very clear prospect that bedrooms on long distance trains might not exist when the current cars reach the ends of their lives. Or at best, we can hope that they will but be narrower and the trains overall having less capacity, neither of which are good for rail in this country. Which would mean having rules passed into legislation saying how this must be handled. It is clear that an accessible room can be made and Amtrak at least has offered them since before it was required but is it possible to offer full access without severely hampering Amtrak or any other operators ability to do its job?

As for Amtrak's management, middle management may be mostly competent, but that only gets you so far. I have worked for companies with reasonably good middle management, but upper management was too busy chasing gimmicks or running out the back door with as much money as they could. And Amtrak's politically appointed upper management seems to be the former and it is by design. And if Amtrak's last 20 years are anything to go by, the competence of the Board and the C Level Managers makes a huge difference in how Amtrak functions. When Amtrak has had good upper management, good things were able to happen in conjunction with the states and their own routes management staff, in times when leadership has been inconsistent at best and bordering on incompetence at worst, a lot of bad can happen. And if there is one thing I learned from working for sinking companies, running on inertia can only get you so far.

 

[jis]

Why all the posts about sleeper cars in a thread that's supposed to be about Amfleet-1 replacement? The Amfleet-1s were designed for short-haul corridor service, and trains using them won't need sleeping car service.

Yes. It is quite likely that the new Amfleet I replacement cars will have wider aisles like in the Brightline cars allowing the use of full width wheel chairs everywhere on the train, rather than being limited to small parts of the train.

Sleeping Cars and Superliners are a different kettle of fish altogether.

 

[jiml]

If you're talking about transit buses, the space is very different. Seats fold up, and there are tie-down devices under the seats. Buses are also required to have wheelchair ramps or lifts, and floor space for maneuvering chairs between the accessible entrance and the tie-downs. Historically, the lifts were very complex mechanically and caused a lot of maintenance; but not so much now with ramps on low-floor buses.

I don't have any figures, but my gut feel is that transit companies as a whole have spent more on accessibility over the years than has Amtrak.

Of course that's the case in city transit buses. I was referring to those comparable with Amtrak, so long distance and regional - probably best identified by having onboard toilets. Even if those buses had more seating space for the disabled, I struggle to see how they'd access the restroom.

Also, to qualify the comments I am certainly not against any or all benefits afforded to those in need, having disabled persons in my family. I just agree with those who were suggesting a more level playing field.

 

[Mailliw]

Getting back to Amfleet replacements; if Amtrak goes with Siemens as expected I think they should include a 2nd, non ADA, restroom in the cars. Venture coaches are about 20 feet longer than the Avelia Liberty cars so it shouldn't be that hard to pull off.

 

[jis]

Getting back to Amfleet replacements; if Amtrak goes with Siemens as expected I think they should include a 2nd, non ADA, restroom in the cars. Venture coaches are about 20 feet longer than the Avelia Liberty cars so it shouldn't be that hard to pull off.

It all depends on how many seats with what seat pitch they want to stuff in each car. The issues are similar to those that we moan about with regards to airline travel Geomtery issues are the same.

 

[nferr]

There would be some potential utility there - at the very least flexibility.

All-Bedroom cars are useful on the Auto Train, because it is a popular route and has a clientele that is looking for more bedrooms. In peak season out west, I could see where an All-Bedroom car would add significant revenue to a route. In off-season, not so much.

An All-Roomette car could be marketed to budget travelers, and provide extra capacity for the budget minded. If you are wanting to make LD trains more appealing to young people, who are already inclined to ride them for environmental reasons, that would probably be a good thing.

Yeah well pricing them at fifty bucks a night would be a good thing too. But not for Amtrak.

 

[me_little_me]

All-Bedroom cars are useful on the Auto Train, because it is a popular route and has a clientele that is looking for more bedrooms. In peak season out west, I could see where an All-Bedroom car would add significant revenue to a route. In off-season, not so much.

Then again, cruise ships move the whole ship between Florida and Europe when it is off-season in one place and in-season in another so cars could be added to the auto-train when the snowbirds are heading south or north and returned to the Empire Builder e.g. during the summer.