I don't either. The ceiling height in Superliners is too low except for coaches, although the narrow twisting stairways are a problem for more than a few people. I do like Superliner coaches for their reclining seats, leg-rests, comfortable padding, etc.
Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement discussion (2022 - 2024Q1)
- Thread starter Steve4031
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
amtrak if they were willing to work on a number of stations could get them to 17ft. thats an extra 10in over superliners and 18in over Hi-levels. that would help the cramped feeling some, the twisting stairs need to be replaced with a straight stair.
Straight stairs could result in very long and fatal falls.
it works just fine on the California cars which are used in closer to regional or short distance intercity. Split in about half are even more common found on most bi level cars.
Moving away from bi level cars is absolutely what Amtrak should do. From a fleet commonality standpoint (ignoring several other good reasons to do so), it’s the best move. This reduces the massive cost of diverse rolling stock and opens up equipment pools from east to west. It’s a no brainer pretty much across all fronts.
I disagree. Fleet commonality is way overblown. Granted, you don’t want variety just for the hell of it, but there are very good reasons to have bi-level cars on routes that can accommodate them (assuming the ADA issue can be satisfactorily resolved).
There are more LD routes that can use bi-level cars than LD routes that need single-level cars. Plus, given that these are generally two-night trains (all single-level routes are one-night), the total fleet needs of Superliners exceeds that of single-levels. By very rough count, I estimate the number of consists for Superliner equipment to be more than double the number of Viewliner/Amfleet consists needed. While it should be noted obviously that not all consists are the same, I think most here can agree that all LD consists are too short (with the possible exception of the Auto Train because of technical reasons). What Amtrak *should* do is grow the fleet such that they can properly equip full consists on all routes. By having enough cars (and using them for revenue service), the relative spare ratios don’t get out of whack (which is what really kills you when you have variable fleets).
It’s not like an airline where operating crews can only work one type. The fleet is (or should be, if Amtrak does it right) large enough that having a couple of different maintenance bases isn’t a big deal, still enabling each one to focus their spare parts supply. I don’t think being able to move an extra car from the Silver Meteor to the Empire Builder is a good enough justification for hamstringing the capacity of 9 out of the 15 long-distance routes.
A properly configured bi-level car should be able to handle 50% more capacity than a single-level of similar density (Superliner sleepers already do). So, converting the Superliner fleet to single level and getting equivalent capacity means 50% more cars required on 2/3 of the LD consists in operation, and at that point maintenance does become an issue because now you need yard space and shop capacity for that much more equipment (and maintenance costs are more driven by the number of cars rather than the number of people the car can carry).
If I can summarize the arguments pro/con bi-levels vs single level for the Superliner replacement.
Bi-levels:
Shorter trains for the same capacity
Less yard and shop space needed
No need to extend platforms
Continuity - less of a change
Single level:
Commonality of fleet
Easier to achieve ADA compliance
Bi-levels:
Shorter trains for the same capacity
Less yard and shop space needed
No need to extend platforms
Continuity - less of a change
Single level:
Commonality of fleet
Easier to achieve ADA compliance
Good list. Commonality of fleet really breaks down into two equally valid sub-categories - commonality when it comes to parts, maintenance and training and the flexibility to use equipment system-wide with no restrictions. Single level options are also more likely to be available "off the shelf", although Alstom does have access to the Superliner 2 blueprints.
west point
Engineer
What is needed for single level and other is simple. Make provisions that allow use of either type depending on needs. The Capitol and CNO are routes that should be designated as such. Although right now the terrible shortage of equipment makes its hard to do this.
Amtrak uses 3 train sets for each of the above routes. if each set was 13 cars with 10 revenue that leaves 60 possible cars. No reason that maybe only one train would need substituting. The biggest problem is fixing the reservation system so it can quickly reassign sleeper assignments.
Amtrak uses 3 train sets for each of the above routes. if each set was 13 cars with 10 revenue that leaves 60 possible cars. No reason that maybe only one train would need substituting. The biggest problem is fixing the reservation system so it can quickly reassign sleeper assignments.
Last edited:
Paniolo Man
Train Attendant
Amtrak's needs are diverse enough that this level of commonality is not necessary.
They operate hundreds of bilevel cars and hundreds of single-level cars, the fleets are large enough to justify different equipment. The maintenance convenience of commonality is outweighed by the impracticality of operating the same fleet on every route. Different routes have different needs. Once your fleet is large enough, pursuit of excess simplicity creates logistics headaches that outweigh the added convenience. Commonality of most components can be achieved with separate single and bilevel equipment built by the same manufacturer.
ADA compliance isn't as hard as some folks make it seem, adding a lift can be done without a significant impact on capacity by making newer cars a few feet longer than Superliners. Plus, single level equipment comes with it's own headaches. You'd need boarding ramps on platforms or wheelchair lifts in cars. I'd bet the farm on Amtrak sticking with BiLevel equipment on most LD routes, deviation from the status quo brings more problems than it solves.
Cars being "off the shelf" doesn't really matter here. Amtrak's order will be large enough to create a standard of it's own. They have the advantage of creating a fleet large enough that there will always be a market for parts and service, so they don't really need to bother with trying to buy the same stuff as commuters and regionals. They should focus on producing a fleet that fulfills their needs, there is no need to adapt equipment designed with other uses in mind.
In other news, I toured the Stadler US Facility on Saturday and it seemed like they had their eye on the Amtrak order. They have plans in hand to triple their manufacturing footprint ready to go "upon customer need". I don't think they are the most likely choice, but they definitely have a shot. I'd love to see the new fleet rolling out of Salt Lake City.
keelhauled
OBS Chief
Yea that was what they said about the Viewliners too, almost word for word...as long as the fleet is at the mercy of public funding I don't think that phrases like "will be" and "always be" hold very much weight.
frequentflyer
Conductor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,172
If Amtrak would have gotten the budget to buy the amount of VLs they wanted, it would have been a more successful fleet. I still have the Amtrak magazine somewhere that had the Viewliner debut article from 1984.
I found a video on You Tube that showed Superliner type trains are being used in Russia. I know its now off limits to engage in any business with Russia, the point is that we are not the only country using double deck sleepers. Except for the room, arrangements they look very much like Amtraks
See them here for a tour:
See them here for a tour:
As long as they are well designed and have adequate, pleasant non-revenue lounge space (Seaboard's Sun Lounges are a model). But I really don't trust Amtrak on that.
If the new order results in trains like the current single level LDs in the east, I'd agree that would harm them and remove much of their appeal.
What's wrong with the single level eastern LD trains? I actually prefer the Viewliner sleepers to the Superliners, which have insufficient headroom for the upper berths. The Viewliner Dining cars are very nice. The Amfleet 1 coaches are perfectly fine. About the only thing that could be improved is the cafe-lounge car situation, and that can easily be solved in a new car procurement. I've enjoyed my rides on the Cardinal and the Lakeshore Limited, despite the substandard food, and the Silvers now have decent food again in their nice new dining cars. I see no reason why single level trains everywhere shouldn't have great appeal. After all, the classic streamliners were all single level trains.
Agreed. I vastly prefer the single level sleeper cars. For one, it’s less claustrophobic in the top bunk.
Not that this is a deal breaker per say but I find it hard to understand why one would think that a strictly single level LD fleet would somehow ruin everything.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
They desperately need a Lounge Car that does not have the look and feel of a Hospital lounge, and on the soft side train crew should be banned from occupying any space in them. They should be given their own lounge in their Dorm Car.
Interestingly, this was one of the complaints on the Grounded Life couple's more recent videos. Although they somewhat "sugar-coated" it by blaming Amtrak for not providing employees enough space, the fact that one of Amtrak's more public "non-railfan" advocates noticed the problem is significant.
I prefer the Viewliner roomettes, too.
My main complaint about the current eastern LD trains is lack of good lounge space. I prefer to spend a lot of my time not in my room. It is tolerable for the comparatively short eastern train runs, it would not be for the long hauls in the west. The Amcafes really do not cut it as lounges, and with the crew routinely homesteading the tables their appeal is reduced even further. While the Viewliner Diners make for pretty decent "sleeper lounges" l think that use will be discontinued as traditional dining returns.
If you read my post carefully, my complaint was about the single level eastern trains is as they are currently operated, not single level trains generally. With adequate and comfortable non-revenue space, such as a modern equivalent to Seaboard's Sun Lounges, I have no objection at all to single level LD trains and said as much in my prior post. My favorite train currently operating is VIA's Canadian, which has tons of non-rev lounge space even discounting the domes. I have very fond memories of Santa Fe's Super Chief and the Rio Grande Zephyr. My issue is Amtrak seems to want to minimize non-rev space and I am afraid any new LD car order will be more along the lines of the current eastern LD fleet and not include adequate lounge space, unlike the classic single level "name" trains. They have said several times in the past they'd like to only have one food service car per train.
My concern would really apply whether or not a new LD fleet would be single level or bilevel. For single level, I stand by my contention that current Amtrak single level LD model is lousy.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2017
- Messages
- 2,829
I’d pretty much agree with the sentiment. I like the Viewliner equipment and diners but the lounge isn’t the greatest particularly with the crew taking half of it in some cases. Some of the reason for its inadequacy is due to the airplane inspired Amfleet design - an extremely dated look that will almost certainly be going the way of the dodo in whatever direction they go. I would suspect pretty much anything they come up with would be better than the AmCans. Given what was shown on those concept ideas that were being distributed to some that they seem to actively be considering a luxe sleeper product like Prestige class with the new equipment I would think they’re going to try to come up with a nice lounge car. But we’ll see.
That was largely during the period in which Mica’s meddling was the law and it’s now gone. As a result I wouldn’t overly worry too much about some of the ideas and things they did during that period as at the end of the day the Mica nonsense is what was spurring the crazy cost cutting on the non revenue side. I certainly disagree with much of the approach that was taken during the Anderson era to try to comply with that, but the fact does remain the law did say they had to do something so I mostly blame Mica and the congress at the time for the food and beverage follies which they’re having to roll back. I don’t see the Mica influenced stuff having any impact or consideration on the new equipment.
That was largely during the period in which Mica’s meddling was the law and it’s now gone. As a result I wouldn’t overly worry too much about some of the ideas and things they did during that period as at the end of the day the Mica nonsense is what was spurring the crazy cost cutting on the non revenue side. I certainly disagree with much of the approach that was taken during the Anderson era to try to comply with that, but the fact does remain the law did say they had to do something so I mostly blame Mica and the congress at the time for the food and beverage follies which they’re having to roll back. I don’t see the Mica influenced stuff having any impact or consideration on the new equipment.
Last edited:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
They have been in service on the Moscow - Sochi - Adler route since 2013
https://www.railwaygazette.com/rzds-double-deck-sleeping-cars-enter-service/38853.article
https://www.russiantrains.com/en/train/moscow-sochi-train
Those are all built to Russian Loading Gauge which would be too wide and too tall for general operation in the US. Finland had similar cars built by Skoda Transtech again built to Borad Gauge loading standards similar to Russian ones.
The RZD cars are built by Transmashholding's Tver Carriage Works, located in Tver, North of Moscow on the Moscow - St. Petersburg Route. That is where the River Volga is crossed. I passed by there on my trip from Helsinki to Moscow.
TransitTyrant
Service Attendant
500-600 cars, would’ve been quite the order.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2005
- Messages
- 963
Any new news on a possible order for new equipment? With what’s turning into monthly minor derailments and Amtrak’s hesitation to fully embrace wreck/mothball repairs it appears a day of reckoning may be approaching and there doesn’t seem to be much urgency.
Last edited:
Nothing is set to come out for a while.
Amtrak just needs to rebuild as many existing cars as they can to strech the fleet till the 2030s
- Status
