Superliner Replacement Costs

[lrh442]

At the current trajectory, the Superliners will wear out with no replacement on the horizon and the end of the LD trains in the west will be a fait accompli. Insert your boiling-the-frog analogy here as we slowly run these cars into the ground.

I’m trying to triangulate on how much it would cost to re-equip the Superliner fleet, and how long would it take.

The original SL1 order circa 1977 was for 284 cars at $250M, or $0.9M each (seems like a good deal, eh?). Adjusted for inflation that would cost $3.9M each today. The SLII order circa 1991 was for 195 cars @ $450M, or $2.3M each. Inflation brings that to $4.4M each today (ouch). A little averaging and 10% uplift means that the cost of new Superliner-like equipment would be ~$4.5M each today.

Amtrak originally purchased 479 cars, of which 430 are still on the roster (but not necessarily operational). If we targeted 479 cars at $4.5M each that’s $2.15B.

As a point of reference, the inflation-adjusted cost of the Viewliner IIs is $2.8M each.

Any thoughts on the accuracy of these numbers, and how long it would take to produce cars?

 

[jis]

Alstom probably has a production line in place already that can churn out those types of cars (that will even pass the buff-strength test with ease) in relatively short order. That line at present is busy producing cars for METRA.

Nippon-Sharyo OTOH, not so much. CAF, who knows? Bombardier will be Alstom by the time this happens anyway.

 

[user 1215]

I'd be happy to see the AutoTrain equipped with ALL lay-flat seats in coach in addition to the standard sleeper services. I mean, EVERYONE, after all is travelling overnight, end to end, right?

 

[Qapla]

I don't need a "lay-flat" seat to sleep. There are other improvement that would not the type of redesign making open-air sleepers out of coach cars that would increase the cost of riding coach.

 

[jiml]

I'd be happy to see the AutoTrain equipped with ALL lay-flat seats in coach in addition to the standard sleeper services. I mean, EVERYONE, after all is travelling overnight, end to end, right?

I'd venture to say that a car with this type of seating could be a very low-cost upgrade from basic coach, with the same design also being useful system-wide for an enhanced business class on overnight trains. Not sure that every coach seat on the AT should receive the same treatment.

 

[20th Century Rider]

Sorry folks... I'm not a fan of the Superliner design... with those tight spiral staircases, the 'underground' lower floor; the lack of ventilation, plumbing problems, and on the older cars, the single WC on the upper floor to serve all the roomettes unless they want to navigate those stairs at night for where most of the WC's are; the fire alarms that go 'cheep cheep' to warn the battery is out... but they're to 'cheep' to replace them... which says something about the Superliner itself... cheep!

Ooooooh, do I miss those smooth riding, gliding, and comfy Pullman cars. I do wonder why the newer things get on those rails, the more we long for what was long ago???

 

[jiml]

You're right on some of your points, but I'd have to differ on ride quality. Some of those heritage cars were pretty rough-riding (and still are on VIA), whereas few railcars I've ever experienced ride as smooth as a Superliner. I'm sure part of it is sheer weight and how it's distributed.

 

[20th Century Rider]

You're right on some of your points, but I'd have to differ on ride quality. Some of those heritage cars were pretty rough-riding (and still are on VIA), whereas few railcars I've ever experienced ride as smooth as a Superliner. I'm sure part of it is sheer weight and how it's distributed.

Certainly the 2nd level is smoother as it is much higher off the tracks. But there was something about the suspension on the pullmans... especially on the Pennsy and Central that I remember.

RE the VIA cars - extremely old now and one must wonder if they have been properly maintained over the decades and decades of use.

 

[PaTrainFan]

While not perfect, I am a fan of the double decker Superliners but want to believe there are ways to improve on the design and functonality. At the time the Superliners were designed, the claim was that the higher cost was justified due to the higher capacity. From what I have seen in photos the Viewliner II sleepers don't appear to be a major improvement in the details other than being new. On the other hand, if they can resurrect the stainless steel Budd cars from the 50s as a bright, shiny new fleet, including domes, I'd be a HUGE fan.

 

[20th Century Rider]

While not perfect, I am a fan of the double decker Superliners but want to believe there are ways to improve on the design and functonality. At the time the Superliners were designed, the claim was that the higher cost was justified due to the higher capacity. From what I have seen in photos the Viewliner II sleepers don't appear to be a major improvement in the details other than being new. On the other hand, if they can resurrect the stainless steel Budd cars from the 50s as a bright, shiny new fleet, including domes, I'd be a HUGE fan.

exactly

 

[cirdan]

At the end of the day I'm not too picky about what replaces the superliners. As long as we can continue to have LD trains with a reasonable level of comfort and amenities. And if that happens I will continue to be a fan and continue to ride them.

 

[user 1215]

I don't need a "lay-flat" seat to sleep. There are other improvement that would not the type of redesign making open-air sleepers out of coach cars that would increase the cost of riding coach.

I'd venture to say that a car with this type of seating could be a very low-cost upgrade from basic coach, with the same design also being useful system-wide for an enhanced business class on overnight trains. Not sure that every coach seat on the AT should receive the same treatment.

I agree that there is a need for coach on just about every other long distance train. But I stand by the belief that an all-sleeper train is suitable for the AutoTrain only. A similar approach to business class on international airlines, but made much cheaper (ie: no entertainment system, mechanical recline vs electric, no weight saving requirements, etc) IN ADDITION TO restoring the full dining experience would make this route the flagship of Amtrak. Then, on the supposed "real" flagship, the EB, add this class of service to the existing fleet.

I think that there is a real need to bridge the gap between nostalgia, modern demands, and attracting the next generation of clients. Of course, this is all dependent on reliable performance, and consistent onboard service, and firing bad employees.

 

[jiml]

I agree that there is a need for coach on just about every other long distance train. But I stand by the belief that an all-sleeper train is suitable for the AutoTrain only. A similar approach to business class on international airlines, but made much cheaper (ie: no entertainment system, mechanical recline vs electric, no weight saving requirements, etc) IN ADDITION TO restoring the full dining experience would make this route the flagship of Amtrak. Then, on the supposed "real" flagship, the EB, add this class of service to the existing fleet.

I think that there is a real need to bridge the gap between nostalgia, modern demands, and attracting the next generation of clients. Of course, this is all dependent on reliable performance, and consistent onboard service, and firing bad employees.

I don't think you can eliminate basic coach as a budget option on the Auto Train without hurting its "bottom line". By eliminating the coach meals already Amtrak has lowered the bar and there will always those seeking the lowest-cost alternative. However I was also agreeing with your concept, but suggesting it should be offered as a mid class not only on the Auto Train but on overnight trains system-wide.

 

[Exvalley]

I'd be happy to see the AutoTrain equipped with ALL lay-flat seats in coach in addition to the standard sleeper services. I mean, EVERYONE, after all is travelling overnight, end to end, right?

I like the concept, but my only concern is that the lie-flat seats would take more revenue away from roomettes than they would generate.

 

[railiner]

I think that there is sufficient spacing on existing Superliner coaches.
If they would eliminate the seatback tables, and allow the seatbacks to recline further. say to the degree of the old Heritage transcontinental trains, sleep would be much better.
If tray tables were deemed a feature that would be expected in modern trains, they could install the 'armrest hideaway' design used on some airliner seats (usually bulkhead), although those are probably more costly and maintenance intensive.

And while making improvements for sleeping, better window shades, also like Heritage design, would be my choice, rather than those flimsy curtains...

 

[user 1215]

Check this out. I like the over/under concept. Many of these concepts could be modified to rail use and be an awesome option.
zephyr seat is a lie-flat airline seat for economy class travelers (designboom.com)

 

[Chris I]

I like the concept, but my only concern is that the lie-flat seats would take more revenue away from roomettes than they would generate.

It's just another product to offer. Lie-flats would take up less floor space per passenger, and be priced accordingly. Similar to what we now see with "economy plus" on many airlines.

IMO, I think single-level equipment needs to be procured for the LD routes. Austria has been making big investments in night trains, and they have some really nice single level offerings:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/23/business/overnight-train-austria.html

 

[sttom]

I have looked into the costs of what it would cost to replace the Superliners and $4-$5 million per car is a very likely number. The capacity ratio of Superliners to Viewliners is 2:3 so $10 million in Superliner capacity would be about $12 million in roughly equivalent Viewliner capacity. The Superliners can be improved on, I would like it if stairs like in the California Cars were installed instead of the current ones.

I would note that Amtrak offers less sleeper accommodation choices than any of its predecessors did pre 1960. Most of them had at least 5 different bed types and Amtrak has 3, not counting the Accessible Room as different from a Bedroom. Part of the problem is Amtrak has chosen to not have a middle ground between Sleepers and Coach which forced them to design the sleepers to serve as both a form of transportation and appeal to tourists. Whereas all of its predecessors at various times had a "tourist" option which was cheaper than the first class option.

 

[Qapla]

With more emphasis being placed on "social/physical distancing" - it would nice if Amtrak offered larger rooms with more space instead of trying to squeeze the most people into smallest space they can (roomettes are very small). Of course this would put less revenue producing rooms in each car which would make them want to raise prices even higher.

Better funding and less emphasis on "profit" would fix that without charging passengers prices that would dissuade them from paying outrageous ticket prices.

Think about it ... the Interstate Highways are large, smoother and there are even more exits that there was when the system was when the system was new - and yet, those costs have been "absorbed" and we are not charged more to drive on "freeways" now then we did before.

 

[20th Century Rider]

Some things to note about the European versions of sleepers... most accommodations don't have private facility and require a public lavatory at end of the car... also, in the lower cost versions there can be as many as 6 bunks in a roomette [3 x 3] and you would be sleeping along with strangers. Don't think that would go over well in America.

I do like the former idea of roomettes in the older Pullman coaches... would require the use of a public restroom at end of car but each accommodation for one would be closed off to offer privacy as do the present day roomettes. Perhaps there could be a design where two roomettes can be conjoined for couples traveling together.

Without a doubt... the Europeans know how to design fast, comfortable, and efficient trains!
https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2019/11/27/obb-shows-faith-in-night-trains/

 

[railiner]

Think about it ... the Interstate Highways are large, smoother and there are even more exits that there was when the system was when the system was new - and yet, those costs have been "absorbed" and we are not charged more to drive on "freeways" now then we did before.

I would think that every time they open up a new interchange in a limited access highway, the development it causes more than pays for the cost, by way of increased real estate value, land and sales taxes, etc...

 

[sttom]

Highways generally don't pay for themselves with extra development. If anything they tend to cause suburban sprawl which can't even maintain itself on its "extra" tax revenue. Most suburban cities need constant cycles of growth just to bring in enough money to pay for street repaving. Also, highways especially interchanges, taking large amounts of valuable land off the tax rolls in city centers.

 

[lrh442]

If it costs ~$2B to re-equip the western LD fleet, and you get 40 years out of that equipment, that works out to $50M per year depreciation. Not an unreasonable expenditure IMO.
Meanwhile, Amtrak happily spends $2.1B on the the Acela II to replace equipment that is only half the age of the workhorse Superliners, and the NEC needs $35B+ for backlogged SOGR mtc.
Note to Amtrak management: Be careful what you wish for. If the LD trains disappear, good luck getting congressional support from flyover country to prop up the NEC.

 

[joelkfla]

With more emphasis being placed on "social/physical distancing" - it would nice if Amtrak offered larger rooms with more space instead of trying to squeeze the most people into smallest space they can (roomettes are very small). Of course this would put less revenue producing rooms in each car which would make them want to raise prices even higher.

If you're in a fully enclosed compartment, no matter how small or large, you're "socially distanced" from everyone outside that compartment. There's no need to increase distancing within a compartment, as presumably everyone sharing a compartment is in the same social unit.

 

[Deni]

Some things to note about the European versions of sleepers... most accommodations don't have private facility and require a public lavatory at end of the car... also, in the lower cost versions there can be as many as 6 bunks in a roomette [3 x 3] and you would be sleeping along with strangers. Don't think that would go over well in America.

I know that is a conclusion we always jump too, but I wonder if it's really true. People riding in coach on LD trains already sleep in a room with up to 60 people, often with a stranger shoulder to shoulder. Same with overnight flights, crammed in with hundreds of people. And we have certainly seen with airplanes that people will put up with a lot to get from point A to point B.

I think a lot of the crowd that takes coach on LD trains would be hip to the European model of sleepers, especially if they were way more affordable than getting a roomette. I've had many conversations with coach travelers over the years that have said as much. When I've traveled overseas I always run into Americans traveling the same way, and I've heard many say they wish they could travel that way in America. I'm not sure why we always assume something like this wouldn't fly in America. We seem to be a culture of if it's not the way we currently do it then people won't buy in to it. I think there's a good chance that if you build it they will come.