Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement discussion (2022 - 2024Q1)

[frequentflyer]

1. • Trainset / Semi-Permanent Coupling
   These Alternative Design Standards are based on the concept of an accessible core trainset offering enhanced mobility between cars and access to train amenities, and utilizing semi-permanent coupling.

No doors to pass through between cars, definitely makes it easier to transgress through. Amtrak taking the opportunity to reimagine the sleeping car.

JIS had a good post on Siemens present bilevel rolling stock since Amtrak seem to like using off the shelf equipment that has proven itself. Could lead to standard LD consists no matter the where on the system.

Could Siemens Viaggio be the next sleeper car?

"
The height of Viaggio Twin is 15'1" above TOR. If their hypothetical American cousin has to operate into NY Penn Station they will have to lose about 7" of their height which is likely quite doable. A potential 14'6" tall Viaggio Twin could be a universal car for the entire Amtrak system giving it much better fleet utilization and allocation flexibility. Of course to what extent the current style Roomettes can be fit into that height specially with the upper berth is another matter.

OTOH, it could be a great opportunity to try out lie flat seat pods possibly with high separators making it almost like a single seat roomette, fitting 36 to 40 such in the mid section, and ADA accommodation either at the lower level or at the mid level depending on where the doors are. Of course to be able to operate at both at high and low level platforms the doors will probably have to be at mid level.

Incidentally the NJTransit and MARC Bombardier/Alstom MLVs are 14'6" tall too."

 

[frequentflyer]

Also tells me, if Amtrak is leaning toward bilevel equipment, management knows "see level" is still a selling point.

 

[railiner]

A potential 14'6" tall Viaggio Twin could be a universal car for the entire Amtrak system giving it much better fleet utilization and allocation flexibility. Of course to what extent the current style Roomettes can be fit into that height specially with the upper berth is another matter.

The Roomette berth height is already an issue for many, on the 16'2" Superliner bilevels...I don't think squeezing them down into 14'6" cars is happening...

 

[wrowland]

The Roomette berth height is already an issue for many, on the 16'2" Superliner bilevels...I don't think squeezing them down into 14'6" cars is happening...

Coffins would have more space if they did this.

 

[jis]

The Roomette berth height is already an issue for many, on the 16'2" Superliner bilevels...I don't think squeezing them down into 14'6" cars is happening...

14'6" cars would be a little tighter but on the 15'1" Nightjet cars they have an alternating low floor/high floor arrangement for the rooms and each room does have two berths as illustrated in this video (skip to about 7:00):



The US loading gauge also is more squarish roof line than the curved one standard in Europe.

If the Amtrak requested change in rules happens these cars could work as the corridor is at the 4' platform level, with no sharp curves, with each roomette accessed via stairs (skip to around 6:00). Of course the ADA accommodation would be in a standard single level car. Interesting concept. We can almost see where Amtrak is trying to go.

 

[JWM]

14'6" cars would be a little tighter but on the 15'1" Nightjet cars they have an alternating low floor/high floor arrangement for the rooms and each room does have two berths as illustrated in this video (skip to about 7:00):



The US loading gauge also is more squarish roof line than the curved one standard in Europe.

If the Amtrak requested change in rules happens these cars could work as the corridor is at the 4' platform level, with no sharp curves, with each roomette accessed via stairs (skip to around 6:00). Of course the ADA accommodation would be in a standard single level car. Interesting concept. We can almost see where Amtrak is trying to go.

These are the original "City Night Line" cars which operate on a few Nightjet routes. The rest are single level "Comfortline". The new sleeping cars will be on one level with compartments.

 

[GDRRiley]

I don't see amtrak going for bi level cars that can fit into the NEC loading gauge, I expect they'll be closer to full plate F (~17ft) than the superliners at 16ft 2in
a core fixed set of sleeper, dinning car, lounge, coach I think is likely then add on single cars to fill our the rest

 

[GDRRiley]

The only thing I don't like is only 2 accessible bathrooms per train. Accessible bathrooms are not restricted to use by disabled persons.

the issue is they take up a large amount of space so amtrak wants to have redundancy but not have every bathroom be that

 

[west point]

I don't see amtrak going for bi level cars that can fit into the NEC loading gauge, I expect they'll be closer to full plate F (~17ft) than the superliners at 16ft 2in
a core fixed set of sleeper, dinning car, lounge, coach I think is likely then add on single cars to fill our the rest

That height above top of rail awful close to ceiling of CHI Union station.

 

[GDRRiley]

That height above top of rail awful close to ceiling of CHI Union station.

yes it is, amtrak will likely be limited by how close to that they want to go

 

[lordsigma]

I don't see amtrak going for bi level cars that can fit into the NEC loading gauge, I expect they'll be closer to full plate F (~17ft) than the superliners at 16ft 2in
a core fixed set of sleeper, dinning car, lounge, coach I think is likely then add on single cars to fill our the rest

I agree. If they go with this bilevel concept it will probably be replacing Superliners only as well as for any potential new services where bilevels can run. Amtrak does possess a number of options on its contract with Siemens which include an option for replacement for the Amfleet 2 equipment for the overnight routes that operate into New York. So that is an option for the Amfleet 2 equipment if they go bilevel elsewhere.

 

[nferr]

Also tells me, if Amtrak is leaning toward bilevel equipment, management knows "see level" is still a selling point.

I don't think current Amtrak management gives a crap about "see level". If they go bilevel it's because of capacity per car IMO.

 

[GDRRiley]

I agree. If they go with this bilevel concept it will probably be replacing Superliners only as well as for any potential new services where bilevels can run. Amtrak does possess a number of options on its contract with Siemens which include an option for replacement for the Amfleet 2 equipment for the overnight routes that operate into New York. So that is an option for the Amfleet 2 equipment if they go bilevel elsewhere.

They could go ventures or order another batch of viewliners for eastern LD fleet, ideally whatever they pick it will have coaches, better lounge cars and something like slumber cars, high density sleeping cars good for an overnight trip

 

[lordsigma]

They could go ventures or order another batch of viewliners for eastern LD fleet, ideally whatever they pick it will have coaches, better lounge cars and something like slumber cars, high density sleeping cars good for an overnight trip

Could be combination order too of Venture for the coach and lounges and a rebuild program for the Viewliner 1s .

My current prediction is starting to center on a program including 3 separate components that would be bid separately. If you asked me today what I’d predict is going to happen it would include:

1) a bilevel program consisting of a fully accessible core trainset with a base level of coaches and sleepers and both diner and lounge and additional add on coach and sleeping cars for additional capacity.

2) a option execution to Siemens for single level long distance coaches and lounge cars based on the Airo trainsets.

3) a Viewliner 1 sleeper life extension or replacement program.

 

[Trogdor]

I don’t expect anything major to be done with the Viewliner 1s. The plan to reconfigure them to be similar to the V2s was dropped, supposedly due to the high complexity of the work that would be involved (apparently the sleeper modules aren’t that “modular” after all). The best we can likely expect is another refresh in a few years where they replace seat cushions, carpets, curtains, etc.

There is little chance, IMO, that they try to order another set of Viewliner either. I would hope their experience this last time would shy them away from it again. It’s possible that an off-the-shelf carbody design can accommodate an extra row of windows if they really want them. But if not, it’s probably not worth all the headache and expense of a custom design for a handful of cars when they can get something more ready-made and, hopefully, use the money saved to buy more of them.

 

[nferr]

I don’t expect anything major to be done with the Viewliner 1s. The plan to reconfigure them to be similar to the V2s was dropped, supposedly due to the high complexity of the work that would be involved (apparently the sleeper modules aren’t that “modular” after all). The best we can likely expect is another refresh in a few years where they replace seat cushions, carpets, curtains, etc.

There is little chance, IMO, that they try to order another set of Viewliner either. I would hope their experience this last time would shy them away from it again. It’s possible that an off-the-shelf carbody design can accommodate an extra row of windows if they really want them. But if not, it’s probably not worth all the headache and expense of a custom design for a handful of cars when they can get something more ready-made and, hopefully, use the money saved to buy more of them.

The Viewliner I's should have a couple more decades in them with decent maintenance and refreshes. Of course Amtrak has shown an incomptence to do that so far. The Viewliner II's are basically new. That's over 75 Viewliner sleepers and crew cars. The dining cars are new. Long distance coaches should be fairly easily modified for Amtrak use from just about any new coach design. They definitely need to design a decent long distance cafe/lounge car for single level use.

 

[Steve4031]

Do they have enough sleepers and diners to make the Cardinal daily with a diner and ensure that the Crescent, Silver Star, and Silver Meteor have diners and sleepers?

 

[Septa9739]

On the property, there is ample sleeper and dining equipment to run the Cardinal daily. Whether there is enough active on the roster to do so today without reassignments, I doubt. There was also a question of three sets or four to run the service (I vote 3 and risk the occasional short turn at Washington), which would play into that discussion. I think there was a consensus at Amtrak for 4. I remember something about using 3 Cardinal sets for the current service, rather than the 2 that would seem intuitive. If they are indeed using three, an aggressive Amtrak could in theory make the Cardinal daily on no additional equipment, reduce away pay, and add 175,000 annual passengers, and significantly improve the operating ratio of this struggling route. If I remember correctly, it would be done already, but one of the projections showed a slight increase in total loss for the project, causing a political ruckus. In any case its the 40 year old Amfleet II’s that are the more imminent problem. My long guess is that the current single level long haul fleet will be the last to be re-equipped in about 2033.

 

[lordsigma]

I don’t expect anything major to be done with the Viewliner 1s. The plan to reconfigure them to be similar to the V2s was dropped, supposedly due to the high complexity of the work that would be involved (apparently the sleeper modules aren’t that “modular” after all). The best we can likely expect is another refresh in a few years where they replace seat cushions, carpets, curtains, etc.

There is little chance, IMO, that they try to order another set of Viewliner either. I would hope their experience this last time would shy them away from it again. It’s possible that an off-the-shelf carbody design can accommodate an extra row of windows if they really want them. But if not, it’s probably not worth all the headache and expense of a custom design for a handful of cars when they can get something more ready-made and, hopefully, use the money saved to buy more of them.

Good point. Perhaps they’ll just hold on to the viewliner 2s and go with something more off the shelf to replace V1s.

 

[west point]

A problem is that Amfleet-2s have on average 50% more mileage than Amfleet-1s. As well VAmfleet-2s have traveled over various freight RRs that on average have worse track than on NEC.

 

[jis]

Here is a quick preview of what Amtrak is proposing (I photographed these from the Zoom window during the presentation at the Amtrak meeting today (8/30/23). The first one is for the core single level train set, and the second for the core bi level trainset. Presumably additional non-ADA cars can be added to each train set beyond these core 6 cars. The diagrams are pretty self explanatory. Just follow the color codes from the explanation included. Remember that the focus of this meeting was on presenting the concept of a trainset core that provides a set of common services in an accessible way in a train distributed among multiple semi-permanently coupled car.

Note that this is not about what any non-accessible accommodation will look like and such. This concept is going to be presented to FRA and other ADA related powers that be to get approval since this is a variation of what is in the current regulations. So, while it may be fun to speculate as to what Amtrak has on its mind based on this, these diagrams do not represent what the final requirements will be in the RFQ. The actual detailed designs will be done by the selected vendor and not by Amtrak. Only concepts for inclusion in the RFP will come from Amtrak.





They said they will eventually share the slideset used at Amtrak Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

You can submit comments at Amtrak - Have Your Say. Only Accessibility related feedback please as this presentation is about accessibility.

 

[lrh442]

For the bi-level roomette sleeper, car 08, looks like there are only two shared restrooms. If correct, this implies in-room toilets in each roomette?

 

[cocojacoby]

Those are pretty clever designs on Amtrak's part. I think bilevel makes more sense and will probably be the way to go. We need to study the designs more closely but some interesting notes include the changes in the stair design (straight and L shaped) and the fact that all seating in the lounges will be on one side only which is going to be awkward for sightseeing.

Also having unnecessary vestibules in the single level diner and lounge is a waste of badly needed space. Having exclusive bedroom cars and roomette cars is interesting and the simplified straight aisle configuration in the roomette car should offer the maximum number of rooms possible. Also on the bilevel note four "Family" or "Deluxe" rooms spread across the entire car width. I will add that the bilevel lounge now has revenue space with rooms on the lower level.

I do take issue with the bilevel car #5 "Accessible Lounge". There are already three ADA bedrooms in the "Accessible Sleeper" #6 (and even room for one more). That is greater than or equal to most Superliner trains now. Car #5 doesn't need a fourth accessible bedroom and future LD bilevel trains will need a full lounge car especially since the lounge has (reduced?) seating only on one side. That car as designed will not offer adequate sightseeing opportunities.

But basically I think Amtrak is on the right track here.

 

[ascii42]

Those are pretty clever designs on Amtrak's part. I think bilevel makes more sense and will probably be the way to go. We need to study the designs more closely but some interesting notes include the changes in the stair design (straight and L shaped) and the fact that all seating in the lounges will be on one side only which is going to be awkward for sightseeing.

Also having unnecessary vestibules in the single level diner and lounge is a waste of badly needed space. Having exclusive bedroom cars and roomette cars is interesting and the simplified straight aisle configuration in the roomette car should offer the maximum number of rooms possible. Also on the bilevel note 4 "Family" or "Deluxe" rooms spread across the entire car width. I will add that the bilevel lounge now has revenue space with rooms on the lower level.

I do take issue with the bilevel car #5 "Accessible Lounge". There are already three ADA bedrooms in the "Accessible Sleeper" #4. That is greater than or equal to most Superliner trains now. Car #5 doesn't need a fourth accessible bedroom and future LD bilevel trains will need a full lounge car especially since the lounge has (reduced?) seating only on one side. That car as designed will not offer adequate sightseeing opportunities.

But basically I think Amtrak is on the right track here.

Based on this from Amtrak's proposal

1. Number of Accommodations
   1. The number of accessible coach spaces in a trainset will be equal to or greater than the number of coach cars in the trainset.
   2. The number of accessible bedrooms in a trainset will be equal to or greater than the number of sleeper cars in the trainset (not including sleeper cars used primarily for crews or other non-revenue purposes).

They need four accessible rooms because there are four sleeper cars counting the lounge but not the utility car. Similarly, the single level design needs three because there are total of three sleeper cars not counting the utility car.

 

[jis]

Those are pretty clever designs on Amtrak's part. I think bilevel makes more sense and will probably be the way to go. We need to study the designs more closely but some interesting notes include the changes in the stair design (straight and L shaped) and the fact that all seating in the lounges will be on one side only which is going to be awkward for sightseeing.

Also having unnecessary vestibules in the single level diner and lounge is a waste of badly needed space. Having exclusive bedroom cars and roomette cars is interesting and the simplified straight aisle configuration in the roomette car should offer the maximum number of rooms possible. Also on the bilevel note four "Family" or "Deluxe" rooms spread across the entire car width. I will add that the bilevel lounge now has revenue space with rooms on the lower level.

I do take issue with the bilevel car #5 "Accessible Lounge". There are already three ADA bedrooms in the "Accessible Sleeper" #4 (and even room for one more). That is greater than or equal to most Superliner trains now. Car #5 doesn't need a fourth accessible bedroom and future LD bilevel trains will need a full lounge car especially since the lounge has (reduced?) seating only on one side. That car as designed will not offer adequate sightseeing opportunities.

But basically I think Amtrak is on the right track here.

Feel free to send them feed back at the email address provided above in my post. But be considerate and provide only Accessibility related feedback, as this activity is about accessibility and not about general LD train design.