ParanoidAndroid
OBS Chief
Yes, a real Viewliner lounge with windows to the ceiling would be great. At the moment, it's just a normal car with a cafe counter and consequently less windows.
Superliners on Cardinal route?
- Thread starter norfolkwesternhenry
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
One of the main attractions of train travel is the ability to look out thriugh a window and see something, even if it isn't always attractive scenery. Windows on Amfleet 1 cars are very small, Am 2 is better, but there is plenty of room for improvement. What comes next in single level cars has a strong possibility of not being a Viewliner derivative.
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
I'd like to see a reroute of the CL through Pennsylvania and then down the NEC to WAS. That would essentially be the Three Rivers 2016 up to PHL and would give WIL/BAL a much faster direct ride. You wouldn't have to get stuck with CSX anymore. Last time I was on the CL we were literally stuck outside of WAS after the lounge had been closed at the end of each trip. You'd probably add about 2-3 hours to the trip between PGH and WAS (if the CL left PGH at 5:30am instead of 7:30am it gets to PHL by about 1pm and then WAS between 3-4pm) but you wouldn't have to deal with freight traffic east of HAR and you'd add BAL and WIL. Then the departure out of WAS would be 1pm (maybe 2pm) instead of 4pm. You'd still be able to transfer in WAS to/from the SM and Crescent with the proposed WAS times (plus you can transfer out of PHL as well). Of course this route would require VL's. Maybe if PennDOT ever got working on HSR between HAR and PGH then the Pennsylvania route would be faster than the CSX line. Supposedly PA did get money from the 2009 stimulus. Was all of it spent on the Keystone portion? I thought there were at least plans to upgrade HAR-PGH.
west point
Engineer
According to another source HVAC units will not ever be put on the roof tops. The present V-2s all have them now underneath the cars. It takes special equipment to remove roof top units where as removing under car units is very simple taking less than an hour.. For the far flung LD routes special equipment would not be financially prudent. Most baggage handling stations have the needed fork lift or can get one quickly. Of course underneath units have removal problems at most high platform stations except a few such as Sacramento. As well overhead units have the problem of removal under CAT or short clearance stations such as NYP.
Commuter agencies have servicing facilities close to any end of the line.
Commuter agencies have servicing facilities close to any end of the line.
Last edited by a moderator:
norfolkwesternhenry
Lead Service Attendant
Amtrak should build/acquire new observation/dome cars, and install prestige accommodations for extra price, running only CHI-WAS, because that would be an excellent sightseeing car, that was where I spent all but four waking hours on my last trip on the Via Canadian
brianpmcdonnell17
Conductor
I am all for a CHI-PGH-PHL-NYP train, but I don't think it makes sense to reroute the entire CL via PHL. Service would be completely cut to Connellsville, Cumberland, Martinsburg, Harpers Ferry, and Rockville. It would also not add stops to any currently unserved stations. Also, the majority of people on the CL are going to WAS, and this proposal would add hours to the route time to WAS. The shortest current route to BAL is WAS, so a direct train via PHL would save an hour at most against transferring to an Acela, NER or MARC. WIL is not that large of a city, and is a short Amtrak or SEPTA ride from PHL. I think the added ridership at WIL and BAL would not offset the lost stations, not to mention lost riders at WAS. If anything were to be routed HAR-PHL-WAS, it should be a Keystone. While it would have an indirect routing, there is not much competition presently in the that market. Driving takes about 2.5 hours and a train could probably make it in 4.
I can't imagine an A/C unit being swapped anywhere other than at a maintenance point, the units come up with standard lifting equipment, unless you build an overhead crane into a car barn. and right now, nobody's changing an A/C enroute on any route. It is spec'd as a roof unit in the "Next Gen Single Level Car Committee Report Specs" Of course that is subject to change, but it's what is most currently supported.
Last edited by a moderator:
ParanoidAndroid
OBS Chief
Say a train via PHL to WAS would depart PGH at, say 7:00am and 42 to NYP would depart at 8:00am or something. Put cars on the first one and send it to WAS, stopping at HAR and PHL and others along the way. Pennsylvanian 42 wouldn't have cars from the CL and it'd get into NYP at 5:20pm. Now, only passengers to Trenton and Newark from west of PGH would have to transfer.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
I agree. The concern about accessing AC units en route to fix them is mostly bogus. no one does that. They get fixed at the maintenance facilities where there is equipment to do such stuff.
The Acelas already have the units on the roof. Almost all new commuter equipment has them on the roof. Saying that Amtrak would be unable to handle such is completely bogus IMHO. Afterall the far flung networks all over the world are able to handle AC units on the roof. There is no exceptionality of inability or incompetence in America in this respect I think.
The PRIAA Committee specs HVAC as 2 package units in the roof. It is the industry standard for most new cars passenger, subway, and commuter all over the world. That is not likely to change.
Last edited by a moderator:
You know that Philly is not the center of the universe and not all eastern trains need to run through Philly, right? Converting the CL to single level and running it through PHL would add roughly 3 hours to the trip and a lot of miles. Not a winner for CHI/CLE/PGH to WAS travelers. Believe it or not, there are also people who take the CL to and from Harpers Ferry, Martinsburg, Cumberland, Connellsville. Rockville as well, but Rockville is a DC Metro stop on the Red Line, so one can take the Metro to DC Union Station from there.
MARC operates on the WAS to Martinsburg segment and Maryland does have long range plans to add a 3rd track and other upgrades to the parts of the route for expanded and faster Brunswick line service. The CL will someday benefit from those improvements on that portion of its route.
PA did get funding from the 2009 stimulus and FY2010 grants for a series of improvement projects for the eastern Keystone corridor. The last 3 public grade crossings were separated and closed, some funding for engineering and EIS studies, and $40 million in FY2010 funds for construction of a revised State interlocking at Harrisburg.
ParanoidAndroid
OBS Chief
Yes, neutrino trains going through Philly 
But TBH the Cardinal isn't the fastest train and there's no others to Chicago. So I think Philly should have another LD train, or at least cars on the Pennsylvanian or something. But without sacrificing the Cardinal (ie deleting it).
But TBH the Cardinal isn't the fastest train and there's no others to Chicago. So I think Philly should have another LD train, or at least cars on the Pennsylvanian or something. But without sacrificing the Cardinal (ie deleting it).
Last edited by a moderator:
Even if there were roof mounted A/C units, those are typically at either end of the car....there would still be plenty of room for windows in between them....the duct would go down the center, like the old dome cars....
The restrooms and cafe section could be located at either end, to preserve the 'sightseer' area.....
The restrooms and cafe section could be located at either end, to preserve the 'sightseer' area.....
Yeah...better watch out, or they'll run a section of the Pennsylvanian down the old Port Road to serve Baltimore and Washington, and run the New York section via the "New York and Pittsburgh Subway" to save time....
Then guess what? NO train thru Philly (30th Street)..... :lol:
Don't worry....you can always use North Philadelphia..........
Last edited by a moderator:
Seaboard92
Engineer
Actually most passenger cars for a long time have had air conditioning units over the bathrooms. At least on most cars I've worked on
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Actually it surprised me when they put the A/C Units in the Viewliners under the floor. The roof AC units AFAIK are sealed units that are handled as a single unit for replacement. They do not consist of multiple pieces hanging at various places. I can understand Amfleets having them where they are because the sealed AC units were not quite available yet. But Iowa pacic has gone so far as to place sealed AC units on the roof of its domes too, at least the ex Santa-Fe ones running in Saratoga and North Creek. All the new MTA EMUs have ceiling units as do most other new cars.
I guess one problem they'd have in Viewliners is that at the non-vestibule end the ceiling height would be a foot and a half or so lower, causing an incursion into the space of the end Roomettes. That could be addressed by placing the shower and the staff room in that area.
Seaboard92
Engineer
Actually most passenger cars for a long time have had air conditioning units over the bathrooms. At least on most cars I've worked on
the next gen specs call for hermetically sealed package units, one at each end. I too was surprised by the VL order.
norfolkwesternhenry
Lead Service Attendant
I love the double windows of the Viewliners, esp. for dining cars, they make the Superliner diners look like prisons, but vice versa with the SSL vs Amfleet Cafe.
The R-32 weren't air/conditioned when they were built. When NYC added A/C retrofits to many series of cars, the used the ceilings at both ends, and also had piping to the undercarriage that went inside of poles in the car. The R-32 (in my opinion) is one of the best series of subway cars we have had. They did a similar retrofit on some other types of cars also. Even the later subway cars purchased with A/C had equipment mostly in the ceilings, until they went to the easily removable package units they use today.
While domes can fit on the trains running through the Washington Union Station trackage -- tunnels to the south of the station and catenary to the north, I do recall from many, MANY years ago that the B&O required that the domes on their Columbian and Capitol Limited be emptied prior to entering the throat trackage around Union Station out of concern for a wire coming down onto the dome.
ParanoidAndroid
OBS Chief
Shouldn't be too hard, that happens all the time for the SSL at the end of the Superliner routes.
In leaf season a dome runs on the Adirondack between Albany and Montreal, It is removed at Albany under the premise that it wont clear into NYP, but I don't know if that is a hard rule, or a cautious approach. I'm sure someone here will know the clearances for NYP, and the associated tunnels to SSYD and/or the Hudson River to the NEC.
