Hopefully this new long-distance fleet will be all single level cars, then all the long distance cars will have the same specs and can be used all over the system. Also, with single level cars, there will be adequate clearance in the upper berths to allow people who aren't so limber to use them. Plus ADA compliance is easier with single level cars, no need to worry about elevators, etc.
Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement discussion (2022 - 2024Q1)
- Thread starter Steve4031
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
As does San Antonio and Marshall on the Eagle Route.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2017
- Messages
- 2,830
I believe if they exercised the option with Siemens there would be some design work and design approvals involved to come up with a long distance Venture variant before they’d start building they wouldn’t be carbon copies of the Airo sets that have been ordered for corridor service. But the scope of the option is only for replacing Amfleet II - so yes just long distance coaches and food service/lounge. It’s not just ordering more units of what they’ve already come up with - I believe there’s a design component to the option.
Isn't the main difference between the short/medium (corridor service) coaches and the LD coaches just seats and seat pitch? I think seat selection for a car order is almost an afterthought. The buyer (Amtrak) would just tell the vendor "For this batch of 250 coaches, use the XX seats with the YY cushions and the optional foot rests, and pitch the seat rows at ZZ inches apart." Everything else (from the trucks, the brakes and the car bodies to the restrooms, AC, electirical power, vestibules, would be exactly the same. "Oh, and include the window shades. The really opaque ones so the passengers can sleep."
An LD cafe car might require more food storage (an extra refrigerator or two and more shelves) at the expense of a table.
Full diners are only on the LD trains and they should know how to build those. There were a whole bunch of diners in the VL2 order. Did they just one-for-one replace the Amfleets or did they retire a lot of older Horizon diners?
Same with baggage cars.
Sleepers are the big issue. Unless someone else can build a VL2 clone (but faster and better than the previous batch) or CAF can convince Amtrak they've learned their lessons and can produce more VL2's cheaper and faster and more reliably now they actually know what they are doing, they will need a new design, and all the subsequent crash testing and durability and functional testing which always delays everything.
The observation car (and there had better be one) would take more thought since it requires changes to the window geometry - but yeah, the changes to the coaches seem essentially cosmetic to me, in much the way Frontier and Delta use the same planes but with very different seats installed inside them.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2017
- Messages
- 2,830
Essentially - but the seat backs in most variants of the Venture coaches do not recline back. They may also want some differences in terms of storage for baggage. Also it wouldn’t be delivered as a complete trainset it would be at most some married pairs or individual cars and it would have to be compatible for passing through to Viewliner cars. There might be a difference in what they’d want to put on a long distance version for seats. Whether Siemens have something they’ve already come up with that’s available off the shelf Amtrak could simply select for long haul seats it’s possible though I doubt it. When I say design I don’t mean a huge amount of scope - but even if it’s simply they have to come up with a long distance version of the seats and a different layout of the interior that’s still design work. Given this was an option I doubt much if any design development work was done as part of the base scope.
lrh442
.
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2018
- Messages
- 106
As we speculate on who might be awarded the contract for the LD fleet replacement I compiled some info on which manufacturers produced cars for North America in the past. Additions, corrections, clarifications are welcome.
Builders by Fleet Type:
Amfleet 1 – Budd (plans purchased by Bombardier in ’87) 492 cars 1975-77
Amfleet 2 – Budd (plans purchased by Bombardier in ’87) 150 cars , 1980-83
Superliner 1 – Pullman Standard (absorbed by Bombardier 1987) 284 cars 1975-81
Superliner 2 – Bombardier (acquired by Alstom 2021) 195 cars 1991-96
Horizon – Bombardier (acquired by Alstom 2021) 104 cars delivered 1988-1990, based on Comet railcar
Viewliner 1 – Amerail/Morrison Knudsen (now Alstom?) 50 sleepers 1995-96
Viewliner 2 – CAF 130 cars 2015-2021. Delivery delayed years and multiple problems. CAF was chosen over Alstom, the only other bidder.
Acela – Alstom
California Car – Amerail/Morrison -Knudsen. 1994-1997. Reliability problems. Later rebuilt by Alstom.
Surfliner – Alstom 2000-2002
Bi-level equipment (Next Gen) – Mfr by Nippon Sharyo, designed by Sumitomo. Failed buff strength tests in 2015. No cars delivered.
Venture – Siemens. (successor to failed Next-gen Bi-level design by Nippon Sharyo).
Airo – Siemens
Avelia (new Acela) – Alstom. 26 train sets @ $2.2B sched for service 5/2021. None currently in service.
Due to mergers, acquisitions, and bankruptcies, all of the manufacturers of the fleets listed above consolidate down to Alstom, CAF, and Siemens.
Alstom, through their extensive lineage to Pullman Standard, Bombardier, Budd, AmerRail/Morrison Knudsen have in their corporate lineage the DNA of Amfleet 1 & 2, Superliner I & II, Horizon, Viewliner I, and the California Cars. Those, in addition to Acela, Avelia, and Surfliners. It's an extensive resume but the Avelia fleet is suffering from significant problems that have delayed delivery.
CAF, stumbled badly with production of the Viewliner II. Both CAF and Amtrak may have enough of a lingering sour taste in their mouths to say "no mas."
Siemens is currently struggling with introduction of the Venture fleet.
Based on recent track record there are no obvious frontrunners here for the LD fleet replacement. Perhaps a manufacturer new to N. America will win the prize.
Builders by Fleet Type:
Amfleet 1 – Budd (plans purchased by Bombardier in ’87) 492 cars 1975-77
Amfleet 2 – Budd (plans purchased by Bombardier in ’87) 150 cars , 1980-83
Superliner 1 – Pullman Standard (absorbed by Bombardier 1987) 284 cars 1975-81
Superliner 2 – Bombardier (acquired by Alstom 2021) 195 cars 1991-96
Horizon – Bombardier (acquired by Alstom 2021) 104 cars delivered 1988-1990, based on Comet railcar
Viewliner 1 – Amerail/Morrison Knudsen (now Alstom?) 50 sleepers 1995-96
Viewliner 2 – CAF 130 cars 2015-2021. Delivery delayed years and multiple problems. CAF was chosen over Alstom, the only other bidder.
Acela – Alstom
California Car – Amerail/Morrison -Knudsen. 1994-1997. Reliability problems. Later rebuilt by Alstom.
Surfliner – Alstom 2000-2002
Bi-level equipment (Next Gen) – Mfr by Nippon Sharyo, designed by Sumitomo. Failed buff strength tests in 2015. No cars delivered.
Venture – Siemens. (successor to failed Next-gen Bi-level design by Nippon Sharyo).
Airo – Siemens
Avelia (new Acela) – Alstom. 26 train sets @ $2.2B sched for service 5/2021. None currently in service.
Due to mergers, acquisitions, and bankruptcies, all of the manufacturers of the fleets listed above consolidate down to Alstom, CAF, and Siemens.
Alstom, through their extensive lineage to Pullman Standard, Bombardier, Budd, AmerRail/Morrison Knudsen have in their corporate lineage the DNA of Amfleet 1 & 2, Superliner I & II, Horizon, Viewliner I, and the California Cars. Those, in addition to Acela, Avelia, and Surfliners. It's an extensive resume but the Avelia fleet is suffering from significant problems that have delayed delivery.
CAF, stumbled badly with production of the Viewliner II. Both CAF and Amtrak may have enough of a lingering sour taste in their mouths to say "no mas."
Siemens is currently struggling with introduction of the Venture fleet.
Based on recent track record there are no obvious frontrunners here for the LD fleet replacement. Perhaps a manufacturer new to N. America will win the prize.
I doubt Amtrak would get their new fleet without MU controls on all cars. at this point at least 25% of superliners have had it added and the cost savings is so minor
That's where the MBTA went with the Red and Orange subway car replacements, contracting to CRRC to build a new factory in Springfield (apparently managed by a Mr. H. J. Simpson) which has only delivered 5% of the new Red Line cars in a decade, and falls further behind every day.
If a new manufacturer is chosen, no matter how experienced, Amtrak MUST supervise them with extreme diligence.
One thinks this is the reason why equipment procurement takes so long. Instead of clearly write out specifications they micromanage the process causing massive change orders, and delays to the project.
the lack of watching over Alstom is why there are dozens of trains made and some entire car types without the units being certified for service
Maybe, from what I have read is Alstom has not been able to meet a FRA requirement. Apparently FRA want the manufacturers to design software to test if new equipment will meet there standards. This may of been an Amtrak, FRA or Alstom oversight issue. I don’t know.
As opposed to...not testing stuff or to subcontracting it out? If the former that's an absurd requirement, and it's no wonder nothing gets built in this country anymore if that's representative of the regulatory state.
I still believe that Alstom or Stadler will win this contract (assuming that Siemens is too busy with the Airo order).
TheMalahat
Service Attendant
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2016
- Messages
- 107
In fairness to Siemens, it's really looking like it's specifications from the State Order of Ventures that are causing issues unique to that order. Via hasn't had similar issues, and Brightline doesn't appear to have (but being fully private, if they did, maybe we wouldn't know with no reporting requirement).
That was really interesting to read, thanks for compiling it.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2017
- Messages
- 2,830
I’d also add we also might not know if Via has either. Neither of these carriers is under as much of a spotlight from internet commentators as Amtrak is.
It seems that the design, testing, and manufacturing process nowadays takes so long, that technology changes and improvements occur at a much faster rate, hence the desire of customer's to constantly request updates and modification's, which further delays completion.
At some point, they have to just take it as it is, and wait for future orders to bring improvements...
frequentflyer
Conductor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,172
Marshall Texas? Since when? Why?
This proposal makes the most sense, which means it most likely will not be instituted. To have an entire fleet which is interchangeable between all LD trains (i.e. Southwest Airlines with all 737s), interchangeable parts for maintenance, add or subtract cars based on demand, enough room for decent mattresses in sleepers (i.e. former Heritage sleepers), etc. And they could even bring back dome cars!!!!
Opps, Senior Moment, my Bad!
I meant to say that Ft Worth used to have a backup move into/out of the Station when the Eagle used the UP Main Line to Dallas by the now gone Infamous Tower 55.
Don't know how Marshall got included?
( the Eagle does make 2 Spots there on the Station Track, one for the Crew Change,and one for Passengers.)
Last edited:
How hard would it be to just build modern superliners from the original plans?
Anything can be done from yesteryear blueprints - - -
But why duplicate something from your grandfathers railroad era ?
Put some thought into modern day design and creature comforts !
Wide (tinted) windows
Elevators for bi-level cars for elderly and mobility passengers
LED dimmable lighting
Just some of the many advances that could be entertained - - -
alstom last built cars mostly based on the design in 2005, it can be done the question is why would you do that when theres a lot of shortcomings
I got the impression that the FRA was demanding an incredibly detailed model of the NEC (or everywhere the new Acelas would ever run carrying passengers?) including ever switch, cross-over, bridge, tunnel, station, all the catenary, all the ATC systems, etc. that they could then use to predict the wear and tear on the locomotives. cars and infrastructure over the expected lifetime of the new trains. Also, that Alstom was having great difficulty building this model, including gathering all the incredibly detailed information about the infrastructure it requires and the incredibly hairy computer model needed and/or getting the model to run in faster than real time (i.e. taking less than 30 years to compute the results of running the trains for 30 years!
If my impression is correct, then I suspect they asked some "expert" what is possible and the expert stared up at the sky and rolled of a list with no thought to the practicality of any of it. (I used to work for someone like that; he was brilliant and a wonderful human being, but we had to stop him, using force if necessary, every now and then, especially if he was talking to customers. "Oh no, Tim is looking up at the ceiling again!") Either that or Alstom has hired a crew of incompetents or a crew managed by incompetents.
What they should do is take whatever model they used 30 years ago for the original Acelas, update the maximum speed by 10 mph (or whatever) and fix any obvious defects that are in the original model, and they should have done that 5 years ago and it shouldn't have take more than a year, much less if they had any institutional knowledge of the first time they had done it. (I know, dream on; institutional knowledge is something the MBAs discarded because they can't put a value on in their spread sheets.)
----
Edited to add that this has little to do with the Long Distance fleet.
- Status
