Dual Level Vs. Single Level Cars

[Devil's Advocate]

For a long time most of what I've ridden were Amtrak Superliners. I had ridden the Acela and some other commuter lines here and there but I didn't really know much about Amfleet cars. After having ridden the Silver Meteor I was surprised to find that the single level cars seemed just as good as the Superliners, at least from my perspective. What I want to know is why Superliners are so ubiquitous on LD trains? For folks on the top level the Superliners offer a somewhat more expansive view but other than that I don't see why anyone would strongly prefer them over any of the Amfleet trains. And for mobility impaired customers it's probably a huge pain to get up and down the steps on a Superliner. Sure, they can remain sequestered in their downstairs rooms but that's not really the same thing and it won't give them the sort of experience many of us take for granted. At first glance it seems like Superliners bring a lot of extra weight without a lot of extra seats or creature comforts to make all that weight worthwhile. Sure, they have a cool and imposing look when they pull into the station, but other than that I'm not sure what the appeal is for Amtrak or for her customers. Or am I just missing whatever it is that makes Superliners so much better that they're used almost anywhere that doesn't have low ceilings to negotiate?

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Cheaper to build, shorter consists, better passenger to weight ratio.

 

[haolerider]

For a long time most of what I've ridden were Amtrak Superliners. I had ridden the Acela and some other commuter lines here and there but I didn't really know much about Amfleet cars. After having ridden the Silver Meteor I was surprised to find that the single level cars seemed just as good as the Superliners, at least from my perspective. What I want to know is why Superliners are so ubiquitous on LD trains? For folks on the top level the Superliners offer a somewhat more expansive view but other than that I don't see why anyone would strongly prefer them over any of the Amfleet trains. And for mobility impaired customers it's probably a huge pain to get up and down the steps on a Superliner. Sure, they can remain sequestered in their downstairs rooms but that's not really the same thing and it won't give them the sort of experience many of us take for granted. At first glance it seems like Superliners bring a lot of extra weight without a lot of extra seats or creature comforts to make all that weight worthwhile. Sure, they have a cool and imposing look when they pull into the station, but other than that I'm not sure what the appeal is for Amtrak or for her customers. Or am I just missing whatever it is that makes Superliners so much better that they're used almost anywhere that doesn't have low ceilings to negotiate?

Given the fact that the western trains generally have a much more scenic route, the Superliners provide increased viewing from the upper decks and the Superliner Observation car is an added benefit. I actually prefer the Viewliner Sleepers since they have the sink and commode and especially the windows at the top bunk. When traveling alone, I sleep on the top bunk, keeping the seats available for middle of the night reading. I have no idea regarding the rides or other mechanical benefits, but I know I don't like to sleep in the upper bunk of a Superliner, nor do find it as comfortable as the Viewliner. I don't know if the Superline is better than the Viewliner, but I would assume it was made for a different visual experience.

 

[the_traveler]

When Amtrak was ordering new cars to give train travel "a new look" 30+ years ago, they ordered Superliners. Partly because most trains of old were single level. However due to height restriction inside the tunnels in Baltimore and New York City, Superliners could not be used on any train going thru those tunnels.

With the exception of the CL and Auto train, every train east of CHI and NOL goes thru one or both tunnels. Thus they must be single level, while the trains of the west are Superliners! That is also why the dome car was removed at ALB and WAS, and when the Cardinal was a Superliner it only ran to WAS.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It's nice to have a raised perspective in all the cars, that's true, but I'd give it up in a heartbeat for a true dome car or two. Unfortunately I don't think you can you match up a dome car with a Superliner train and get the same above-the-train view that we had before Superliners.

 

[abcnews]

I know I like the additional light - from the skylight windows in the Viewliner. Also like the additional height / headroom. I also kind of prefer the Heritage Diner over the SL diner - because of the additional head room. I guess I prefer higher ceilings.

 

[dlagrua]

The Superliners and the Viewliners serve different purposes. Amtrak would probably like to have an all Superliner fleet as you can fit more passengers in the sleepers but as mentioned the tunnels and the restrictive heights on the Eastern routes will never make this possible. What I do not understand is why the Viewliner sleepers were built with only two bedrooms. This is inconsistent with the capacity of the Superliners that contain 5 + one family bedroom and the H room.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Because you could only run with ten roomettes on a train then.

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Sure, they have a cool and imposing look when they pull into the station...

I'll throw my hat into this interesting topic. Though it may not be substantive to some folks, I think the LD Superliner trainsets are aesthetically pleasing and quite impressive to take in. And with romantic names such as the Empire Builder and the Coast Starlight, having an attractive and substantial trainset reinforces their significance and plays into their romanticism.

It always makes me smile when the train is pacing cars on some highway, and the drivers inevitably rubberneck and point as they admire the gleaming trainset overtaking them.

 

[me_little_me]

I think a major reason is the ability to put more rooms and features on the train. Downstairs, the sleepers have handicap and family rooms as well as roomettes adding bigger rooms for them w/o taking away any space upstairs. Storing excess baggage downstairs is so much better than doing so in the room especially if you have a bigger bag and may want access to it. There is room for more toilets/showers downstairs.

Two levels gets the serving area out of the lounge car upper level so there is more seating and the car has a toilet. For the diner, the cooking downstairs means the excessive heat from the kitchen doesn't result in a hot chef and freezing patrons. Also more room for seats.

There are more seats available in coach in the Superliner.

I think the Superliner concept is much better concept. I like being higher up. I like the layout better including lack of toilets in the roomettes.

 

[spacecadet]

The very simple answer as to why Superliners are so ubiquitous on western trains is cost. There is no other reason. Bi-level cars are a cost-saving measure. You fit more passengers per car, which lets you run shorter trains, use less fuel and potentially fewer engines, and you have less maintenance to deal with (one Superliner coach can fit almost as many passengers as two heritage fleet coach cars, meaning Amtrak basically replaced two cars with one when they bought the Superliners).

Amtrak would love nothing more than to run Superliners everywhere for this reason, but they don't because they won't fit into NYP and under some of the overpasses in the Northeast, and also because they just don't have enough for all the routes they even could run on.

But it's got nothing to do with customer preference. It is simply cost. I don't think anyone's mentioned either that Amtrak didn't do this first - Santa Fe was running hi-level cars on their trains towards the end, just before the Amtrak takeover, and for the same reason. The Superliner cars are direct descendants of these hi-level cars - basically they're the second generation long-haul bi-level car produced by Pullman-Standard.

Personally, from a customer perspective I think there are pros and cons to both the Superliners and the single level fleet... I like the SSL cars on Superliner trains that have them (eastern lounge cars are a joke in comparison), but on the other hand I like Viewliner sleepers better than Superliner sleepers due to the extra height and obviously the extra window for the top bunk. I also still just love the heritage diners. Nothing beats those old cars if you ask me, but they're kind of anachronistic now and won't be in the fleet for much longer.

 

[mfastx]

Amtrak would love nothing more than to run Superliners everywhere for this reason, but they don't because they won't fit into NYP and under some of the overpasses in the Northeast, and also because they just don't have enough for all the routes they even could run on.

You would think they would rather have the high speed trainsets on every route rather than the Superliners. I know I would.

 

[railiner]

Lots of good points made here. I would like to add that if you compare ride qualities, the upper level of the Superliner cars do exaggerate the sideways rolling motion somewhat. On the other hand, the upper level is quieter, as you are more insulated from roadway noise.

 

[AlanB]

Just for the record, a Superliner coach holds 75 passengers, assuming that it's not coach/bag or other altered car. An Amfleet II coach, the single level car, holds 59 passengers.

A Superliner sleeper holds 46, assuming all rooms are filled to capacity, which never happens. A Viewliner holds 30, again assuming that it's filled to capacity. And since the attendant's room is counted in those totals and never shared, no sleeper is ever filled to 100% capacity.

 

[arrow3]

I also prefer the Superliners for many reasons. Most of these were already mentioned.

*They look nice from the outside. People say "wow' when they see them. I think many non-Amtrak or first time Amtrak riders are impressed when they see them and did not expect something like that.

*The layout of the cars is better - diner has an entire floor for seating and an entire floor for cooking. Lounge has an entire floor for sightseeing and the lower level for the cafe and booth seating.

*Coach seats on the second floor give better views.

*Roomettes don't have toilets in them!

 

[arrow3]

Amtrak would love nothing more than to run Superliners everywhere for this reason, but they don't because they won't fit into NYP and under some of the overpasses in the Northeast, and also because they just don't have enough for all the routes they even could run on.

I wonder if the new ARC tunnel that was going to be built would have been tall enough to allow Superliners coming from NJ to access Penn Station.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

The very simple answer as to why Superliners are so ubiquitous on western trains is cost. There is no other reason. Bi-level cars are a cost-saving measure. You fit more passengers per car, which lets you run shorter trains, use less fuel and potentially fewer engines, and you have less maintenance to deal with (one Superliner coach can fit almost as many passengers as two heritage fleet coach cars, meaning Amtrak basically replaced two cars with one when they bought the Superliners).

Amtrak would love nothing more than to run Superliners everywhere for this reason, but they don't because they won't fit into NYP and under some of the overpasses in the Northeast, and also because they just don't have enough for all the routes they even could run on.

But it's got nothing to do with customer preference. It is simply cost. I don't think anyone's mentioned either that Amtrak didn't do this first - Santa Fe was running hi-level cars on their trains towards the end, just before the Amtrak takeover, and for the same reason. The Superliner cars are direct descendants of these hi-level cars - basically they're the second generation long-haul bi-level car produced by Pullman-Standard.

Personally, from a customer perspective I think there are pros and cons to both the Superliners and the single level fleet... I like the SSL cars on Superliner trains that have them (eastern lounge cars are a joke in comparison), but on the other hand I like Viewliner sleepers better than Superliner sleepers due to the extra height and obviously the extra window for the top bunk. I also still just love the heritage diners. Nothing beats those old cars if you ask me, but they're kind of anachronistic now and won't be in the fleet for much longer.

Slight modification about Santa Fe. They made two separate orders for high level coaches so yes, lots of those. But they built high level diners and lounges only in the first batch. And there were no high level sleepers at all on Santa Fe. But yes, they did, truly, stretch out the coaches as much as possible.

 

[AlanB]

Amtrak would love nothing more than to run Superliners everywhere for this reason, but they don't because they won't fit into NYP and under some of the overpasses in the Northeast, and also because they just don't have enough for all the routes they even could run on.

I wonder if the new ARC tunnel that was going to be built would have been tall enough to allow Superliners coming from NJ to access Penn Station.

The ARC tunnel was not going to connect to Penn Station at all. So while it might have been tall enough to clear a Superliner, it would have been useless to Amtrak.

 

[arrow3]

The ARC tunnel was not going to connect to Penn Station at all. So while it might have been tall enough to clear a Superliner, it would have been useless to Amtrak.

Unless Amtrak was able to use space in the new station. It could happen...

 

[the_traveler]

The ARC tunnel was not going to connect to Penn Station at all. So while it might have been tall enough to clear a Superliner, it would have been useless to Amtrak.

Unless Amtrak was able to use space in the new station. It could happen...

But even if it did, the Superliners could not fit in the East River tunnels - and thus could not get to Sunnyside Yard!

 

[AlanB]

The ARC tunnel was not going to connect to Penn Station at all. So while it might have been tall enough to clear a Superliner, it would have been useless to Amtrak.

Unless Amtrak was able to use space in the new station. It could happen...

But even if it did, the Superliners could not fit in the East River tunnels - and thus could not get to Sunnyside Yard!

One would not have been able to reach the East River tunnels from the new station, so that's a non-issue. What is an issue is that Amtrak would have had no place to service the train, since it could not get to Sunnyside. Additionally, Superliners can only platform at stations with low level platforms. The new ARC station would have been high level platforms.

Suffice it to say that we will never see Superliners in NY. There are just too many obstacles to be overcome as to make it impractical, if not impossible.

 

[lthanlon]

All previous times in sleepers, I've had rooms on the upper level. I'll be on the Empire Builder in about a week and a half -- so, just for a change, this time I got a roomette on the lower level. I'm looking forward to seeing if the viewpoint is all that different.

 

[jis]

The ARC tunnel was not going to connect to Penn Station at all. So while it might have been tall enough to clear a Superliner, it would have been useless to Amtrak.

Unless Amtrak was able to use space in the new station. It could happen...

No it couldn't. Amtrak would have no way to get a Superliner to Bergen interlocking at the west end of that tunnel, as a starter, following any of its regular routes. Superliners would not fit through Newark Penn Station.

Of the other existing routes, Superliners would not fit through the M&E either. They could theoretically come in via the Southern Tier line through Suffern and then now not to be built Loop-de-Loop into Bergen, but that would be a completely new route for Amtrak over a route which NS is busy downgrading. So that's all pretty much a no go. They could bypass Newark Penn via Conrails Ironbound Line, but I am sure Conrail will not look kindly on that idea, and if they did, not clear how a train from that line will make its way to the High Line. There is no connection.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Besides, even if the Superliner fit the tunnel and could have come in to the NYP, the entire NYP platforms are high.

 

[arrow3]

Ok you all got me. I guess this is one thing I won't miss out on then since the tunnel isn't going to be built right now anyway.