Amtrak features and comfort updates

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

mgkeihl

Train Attendant
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
30
On my trips in a roomette, I found I was more comfortable with the bed made up all the time. I used my airline carry-on sized bag as a back rest support (with the pillows) during the day. I’m short, so there was room for my cpap on the bed. I carried a power strip which provided more outlets for charging and using the cpap. I don’t know what I’d do if I had to share the tiny space. It was good to be able to lie down when I got dizzy from the train motion. In the future I will bring something I can use as cup holders to put on the little shelf next to the seat/bed.
I did this too!! No issues with attendant, they just said sure. I liked sitting cross legged looking out window. And as a light sleeper, was all set for short naps! Also I was alone in the roomette.
 

The Quaking Widow

Train Attendant
Joined
Sep 30, 2022
Messages
34
Location
Live in Toledo
Did you tell the room attendant in advance that you would like to have the bed stay made up until departure time? Was there a issue with the request?
On both to and fro, the attendants were Ok with the early set up. One asked that I let him unmake the bed about 2 hours out from the station as it was the terminus and there were lots of things to be done. On the return trip I think the suspension system on our car was worn out, awful lurching throughout. I had such trouble getting upstairs and crossing into the dining car for breakfast that I decided to take the rest of my meals in my room.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
5,346
Location
Baltimore. MD
I can see that on Viewliners, but cannot imagine willingly choosing the "coffin" on Superliners.
The existence of the "coffin," by the way is a good reason why one might want to have Amtrak pick single-level trainsets when they replace the current long-distance fleet.

For the uninitiated, the "coffin" refers to the restricted headroom and lack of access to a window that one finds in the upper berth of a Superliner Roomette.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2022
Messages
24
Location
San Diego
The existence of the "coffin," by the way is a good reason why one might want to have Amtrak pick single-level trainsets when they replace the current long-distance fleet.

For the uninitiated, the "coffin" refers to the restricted headroom and lack of access to a window that one finds in the upper berth of a Superliner Roomette.
I appreciation the clarification - I am an uninitiated person in the various lingo and acronyms.
 

crescent-zephyr

Engineer
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
4,350
The existence of the "coffin," by the way is a good reason why one might want to have Amtrak pick single-level trainsets when they replace the current long-distance fleet.

For the uninitiated, the "coffin" refers to the restricted headroom and lack of access to a window that one finds in the upper berth of a Superliner Roomette.
New single level trainsets could have the same headroom and lack of windows…. Unless we get more viewliners.

Also…. New custom bi-levels could have better headroom and windows.
 

John Santos

Lead Service Attendant
AU Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2018
Messages
311
New single level trainsets could have the same headroom and lack of windows…. Unless we get more viewliners.

Also…. New custom bi-levels could have better headroom and windows.
Unlikely. Any new bi-level would have the same height restrictions as the SuperLiners. (Using more modern design, they might be able to get an inch or two of additional height by making the roof and 2nd floor structure a little thinner, but they would still have to pass crash test strength standards, so it would be an enormous amount of money for very little gain.)

There is no reason why a new single-level sleeper should have less height than a ViewLiner and Amtrak should demand any proposals be at least as tall inside and have at least the same window area as the VL1 and VL2s. They might not be identical, but the ceiling height, bed length, width and accessibility (the ease of climbing into the upper bunk) would have to match or exceed the ViewLiners, if Amtrak is remotely competent.
 

jis

Chief Dispatcher
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2003
Messages
35,207
Location
Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
Unlikely. Any new bi-level would have the same height restrictions as the SuperLiners. (Using more modern design, they might be able to get an inch or two of additional height by making the roof and 2nd floor structure a little thinner, but they would still have to pass crash test strength standards, so it would be an enormous amount of money for very little gain.)

There is no reason why a new single-level sleeper should have less height than a ViewLiner and Amtrak should demand any proposals be at least as tall inside and have at least the same window area as the VL1 and VL2s. They might not be identical, but the ceiling height, bed length, width and accessibility (the ease of climbing into the upper bunk) would have to match or exceed the ViewLiners, if Amtrak is remotely competent.
I agree. Until they rebuild Chicago Union Station increasing vertical clearance there will be no bi-level higher than Superliners and there will be no significant increase in headroom in bi-levels operated by Amtrak.

And yes, there is absolutely no reason that new single levels would be any shorter than 14'6" which is the max allowed and which is the height of the Siemens Ventures, and also there is absolutely no reason that they could not have two rows of windows like in Viewliners. However it is not clear what good two rows of windows would do in standard Coaches where the upper level windows would be above the luggage rack mostly covered up by bags in a loaded train. They would be great in Lounges, Diners and Sleepers, and Amtrak could specify such. Viewliners are not the only cars in the world with two rows of windows.
 
Last edited:

Siegmund

Lead Service Attendant
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
415
Location
northwestern Montana
Out of curiosity... is there any other place in the system that can accommodate the existing superliners, but cannot accommodate Plate F (17'0")?

On the freight system, if your route is not limited to Plate E (15'9") it will almost certainly be certified to accommodate Plate F everywhere on the main line. It seems that if there are exceptions, they are going to be passenger-only trackage like CUS.
 

west point

Engineer
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Messages
3,857
Location
SW ATL airport
Out of curiosity... is there any other place in the system that can accommodate the existing superliners, but cannot accommodate Plate F (17'0")?
That is a very important question. What is needed is a survey probably of ETTs to dermine clearances. Where double stacks operate ( that is plate "H" ) there will not be a problem on main lines. You do need a survey of stations that have station tracks to verify platforms have no problems. Canopys might be a problem with some especially any canopy that overhangs a station track.

Brought this up before but WASH 1st street tunnel has clearanance problems which limit heights for any WASH - SE destination. The CAT at the station would need raising. Now Auto train could be equipped as it also carries plate "H" auto carriers. Do not remember any impediments on the Sunset route. Then there is also a possible Coast Starlight route. With those 3 routes for higher passeger cars then if Sunset becpmes daily Amtrak would need ~~ 140 cars. Number is a substantial order. As well it would give an additional 2 or more cars to be assigned to each remaining train that now operates with Superliners.

The order would be for various types of cars. IMO transition cars to Superliner cars would be called for to allow mix and match..
 
Top