If many trains are currently selling out (when their consist are at their normal length), then maybe.
Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement discussion (2022-23)
- Thread starter Steve4031
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Septa9739
Train Attendant
That’s the theory I’m working on. Trains are selling out in February/March at their current lengths. Summer trains are already reaching high levels. I think vastly more capacity is needed, and if they close a coach during the low season, it’s there if they need it. Sleepers go like hotcakes and frankly it might not be so bad if prices per unit slid a bit, maybe a big bit so I can afford one sometime.
And I do hope that they consider long-term ridership. As climate change becomes more prevalent, and calls for more sustainable transit increases, Amtrak may find itself needing more trains. These cars may have to last a while, so hopefully they're prepared for a growing demand
A mixed level is an interesting idea, I wonder about the engineering on such. I mean you’re gonna have transition between coaches low deck coaches are clearly going to low to do so will a high deck meet a single deck?
Presumably these would be made by the same company throughout the consist, si I imagine they could find a way.
In the past they did single level with Dome cars for sleepers, lounge and dinner. It might be ironic if the next Generation of American long distance train rolling stock ended up looking like a 1950s streamlined coaches.
Presumably these would be made by the same company throughout the consist, si I imagine they could find a way.
In the past they did single level with Dome cars for sleepers, lounge and dinner. It might be ironic if the next Generation of American long distance train rolling stock ended up looking like a 1950s streamlined coaches.
Last edited:
I'm sure some regulatory agency would find a reason they can't do dome cars. Our loss.
Mailliw
OBS Chief
Dome cars might run afoul of ADA requirements since they'd only be partially accessible. Also the clearance issue would keep them out of the Northeast, but that's not that big a deal.
I think a new-built dome car could be made accessible with a lift to the upper level: either a vertical lift, with a gate on one end to the vestibule level, and on the opposite end to the upper level (with some space for wheelchair maneuvering), or a folding inclined lift on a staiway. The 2 or 3 steps from the vestibule level to the lower level under the dome could easily be replaced by a ramp.
I don’t think the North East even factor here as the NEC is to be covered by the Airo trains on most routes, And the Viewliner II coaches which bridge in to it from outside are some of the newest rolling stock in the system making them likely to not need replacement until after the Superliners.
As to ADA.
Besides if you absolutely insist on mono level coaches you loose one of the best features of the LD fleet. The Observation cars are a cash cow in their own right. Like Dining cars vs the flex menu argument from a purely practical perspective they don’t need Observation cars as just transit but from an amenities perspective it’s a big selling point. Many will buy a coach ticket along the Empire builder, SW Chief, Texas eagle and California Zephyr just to catch some of the sights. The old Railroads knew this which is why they ordered Domes and developed Hi levels like the Superliners. Now you can do a mono level observation car (Some NEC routes I think could really use one) but it’s a 180* the raised domes gave close to 360*.
As to ADA.
He’s right. And no matter if mono, bi or multiple levels. The LD set will have to have a lift anyway.
Besides if you absolutely insist on mono level coaches you loose one of the best features of the LD fleet. The Observation cars are a cash cow in their own right. Like Dining cars vs the flex menu argument from a purely practical perspective they don’t need Observation cars as just transit but from an amenities perspective it’s a big selling point. Many will buy a coach ticket along the Empire builder, SW Chief, Texas eagle and California Zephyr just to catch some of the sights. The old Railroads knew this which is why they ordered Domes and developed Hi levels like the Superliners. Now you can do a mono level observation car (Some NEC routes I think could really use one) but it’s a 180* the raised domes gave close to 360*.
If the wheelchair access can be worked out, all the past experience indicates that the public likes domes. In the Portland<>Seattle pool the customers drove NP and GN people to despair, wondering why they couldn't have domes on their trains like the UP. In Portland Union Station the UP Domeliners were spotted with a dome across the High Shed (On Track 11?) so that they were framed by other lesser trains.
There were solutions for Eastern clearance restrictions.
Last edited:
While I do like your design (in general).
The size of the room, just seem a bit off.
Of course the lack of space for a overnight bag can be adjusted by rising the chairs and the bed, so you can place the luggage under the beds.
Nightjet is use the front to back beds set up, but generally not a queen size.
I do like, and appreciate your idea. Just not sure if there actually space to do so.
No problem with single level cars, they could just install windows in the lounge cars similar to the Superliner Sightseer Lounge, there just wouldn't be the lower level. Or they could have the sort of panorama cars used by the Swiss railways, which could also be used for at least some of the coaches.
I rode in a dome once on the Northeast Corridor and it was the best ride ever. Sat right behind the engineer:
It didn't serve Penn Station in New York. Perhaps the tunnel clearances at Grand Central, which it did serve, are different from those in Penn Station.
The bedroom module is 7' 6" wide or 90". A double bed is 53/54" wide. That would leave 36/37" for the bathroom. Plenty of room.
Of course it ran to Penn Station. It also offered across-the-platform transfers to waiting Metroliners.
Last edited:
UAC Turbotrains were the Sports cars of the railroads, low and fast the hight maxed at the Exhaust of 13 foot 10 inches same for the modern Acela Express with the Pentagraph down. Plenty clearance for NY Penn. it’s actually shorter than the Venture cars and Chargers Amtrak is buying now for use in services through Penn.
Correction for my self. Amtrak Superliner dorm cars are designed to bridge between bilevel cars and standard single level cars. So it is possible and on a fixed train consist could done by a manufacturer. As it’s likely whoever wins the contract to replace the Superliner might just be making the whole train a semi permanent unit save for the Charger at the front (unless it’s Siemens who makes that to.)
Endgame it’s all a question on what compromises FRA/Amtrak as well as the venders are willing to make for handicapped passengers on LD.
All single level may be easier to move in but trades off in needing more cars and looses the views. This could to degrees be brought back by a modified Coach observation lounges. One point to remake is that it would still require a lift system for wheel chairs to access the deck at low level platforms.
All Bilevel means a shorter consist but hight limitations. It’s lower level allows easy walk on roll on boarding but accessing the main upper deck will demand a lift system. It allows excellent side and sky views.
Going all one or the other is probably the safest bet.
Mixed Single and Bilevel schemes would require a maker whom manufacturers both and interest from Amtrak and FRA. It would allow the bests of both worlds well still having the problems of both too. A transitional coach would be needed in the consist one that can be accessed by a wheel chair if said coach is a passenger accessible one. Again a lift would be needed. Loading could be done at lower platforms if cars allowed it.
The Dome car idea comes to mind as a compromise as they were traditionally modified from standard level coaches. Loading on such would be the same as single level requiring a lift system for wheelchairs from low platforms. Once aboard though the question of accessibility to the upper platform is still vali. From an amenities standpoint it could allow a perspective view not seen on American rail outside vintage rail cars now out of normal usage. From a cost standpoint a maker would need to modify the mold lines of a standard coach or source a similar configuration from their lines. Not impossible but likely expensive and probably not going to happen.
Correction for my self. Amtrak Superliner dorm cars are designed to bridge between bilevel cars and standard single level cars. So it is possible and on a fixed train consist could done by a manufacturer. As it’s likely whoever wins the contract to replace the Superliner might just be making the whole train a semi permanent unit save for the Charger at the front (unless it’s Siemens who makes that to.)
Endgame it’s all a question on what compromises FRA/Amtrak as well as the venders are willing to make for handicapped passengers on LD.
All single level may be easier to move in but trades off in needing more cars and looses the views. This could to degrees be brought back by a modified Coach observation lounges. One point to remake is that it would still require a lift system for wheel chairs to access the deck at low level platforms.
All Bilevel means a shorter consist but hight limitations. It’s lower level allows easy walk on roll on boarding but accessing the main upper deck will demand a lift system. It allows excellent side and sky views.
Going all one or the other is probably the safest bet.
Mixed Single and Bilevel schemes would require a maker whom manufacturers both and interest from Amtrak and FRA. It would allow the bests of both worlds well still having the problems of both too. A transitional coach would be needed in the consist one that can be accessed by a wheel chair if said coach is a passenger accessible one. Again a lift would be needed. Loading could be done at lower platforms if cars allowed it.
The Dome car idea comes to mind as a compromise as they were traditionally modified from standard level coaches. Loading on such would be the same as single level requiring a lift system for wheelchairs from low platforms. Once aboard though the question of accessibility to the upper platform is still vali. From an amenities standpoint it could allow a perspective view not seen on American rail outside vintage rail cars now out of normal usage. From a cost standpoint a maker would need to modify the mold lines of a standard coach or source a similar configuration from their lines. Not impossible but likely expensive and probably not going to happen.
For anyone who may not be familiar with the Superliner Bedroom setup here is a great video that even answers the upper bunk headroom dimension question:
I really don’t think we are in a position to dream about having dome cars and multi level trains. Amtrak has proven they can’t maintain or properly manage the equipment they have. Imho the best thing Amtrak could do is to contract with Siemens to produce the long distance fleet. And to maintain it.
The dining cars, lounge car and coaches are doable. There is a train in Norway or Sweden that already has airline business class lie flat seats. So it’s possible to have two tiers of coach accommodation. The windows on the venture cars are a vast improvement over amfleet and horizon cars. They would allow for the enjoyment of scenery.
The sticking point is sleeping car configuration. Imho the set up of roomettes and bedrooms could be duplicated by Siemens. It’s just a matter of how many of each type of room.
Because of the legal and ethical need to accommodate wheel chair passengers and others it’s easier to have single level equipment.
The dining cars, lounge car and coaches are doable. There is a train in Norway or Sweden that already has airline business class lie flat seats. So it’s possible to have two tiers of coach accommodation. The windows on the venture cars are a vast improvement over amfleet and horizon cars. They would allow for the enjoyment of scenery.
The sticking point is sleeping car configuration. Imho the set up of roomettes and bedrooms could be duplicated by Siemens. It’s just a matter of how many of each type of room.
Because of the legal and ethical need to accommodate wheel chair passengers and others it’s easier to have single level equipment.
Mailliw
OBS Chief
I suspect if Amtrak orders dedicated loung cars they'll be restricted to sleeping car passengers. Which requires new arrangements to provide food service to coach, but opens up the possibility have a few bedrooms in them.
You could put a folding sink above the toilet; it's not uncommon in RV wet baths. How important is it to retain the option to combine bedrooms into suites?
Amtrak needs to learn how to do this again, their shops at one point rebuild nearly every single legacy car to HEP and have done major repairs to cars sense then.
Siemens getting the LD order means they'll be the primary manufacture for all intercity railcars in this county which is not a good thing. Amtrak would grind to halt if a major flaw was found in say the trucks and they needed to be fixed before being used in service.
Single sourcing that much is a bad thing.
Siemens is already THE Primary manufacturer of modern passenger locomotives and Intercity railcars/coaches in the United States, Period.
In locomotives there are only really 3 modern locomotive that meet tier 4 emissions Siemens Charger series in its various models SCB40, SC44, ALC42 and ALC42E. EMD F125 Spirit and the Motive Power MPI 54AC MPXpress. The numbers game is clear Charger. With 336 units on order or delivered and more orders coming in the US another 35 for Canada. The EMD sits at 40 units well the MPI is 26. With Amtrak looking to replace its old fleet it’s not hard to imagine more Charger orders to replace both Genesis locos as well as Sprinters state and metro commuter lines looking for grants to replace already old equipment the Siemens Charger is likely to remain king even as the others try and pick up what’s left.
Siemens Venture coach in the Midwest sets gave Siemens the crown as the Primary intercity Rail car supplier to North America. Current US orders are 676 between regional Amtrak and national Amtrak trains. However that order book is already larger by 169 units for Canadian railroads and it will likely get bigger as more Airo sets are ordered and more state and metro commuter rail services start looking at new equipment. Plus Brightline is still growing and they love their Venture coaches.
For a relatively small fleet (compared to most European countries) it wouldn't make sense for Amtrak to have multiple sources which then means multiple sets of parts and additional training to deal with the differences between car brands. It is bad enough now with Amfleet Horizon Talgo and Superliner, they need to have more commonality not less
Did you ever see these? Pretty clever and environmentally efficient. Uses incoming clean water to wash hands and fill toilet. May not be compatible with Amtrak's vacuum system.
And since bedrooms cost over $1000 usually, how popular are $2000-$3000 (?) bedroom suites? Is there a discount by combining two bedrooms? Would be interesting to see some sales numbers on these.
The long reach over the commode would make that unusable from the front for me, and I suspect for many other Americans with back or shoulder issues.
Amtrak isn't getting small fleets 500+ cars for the NEC, 500+ western LD cars and 250+ eastern LD cars is not some tiny fleet.
OBB owns ~2700 pax railcars but only 420 of those are Viaggio Comforts. in the UK mark 3 coaches even with 800 made up only a small part of their overall fleet.
Talgo has never been amtraks thing to maintain thats all on talgo.
Amfleet, horzion, Viewliner I/II, Superliner I/II, more than it should be given the lack of parts comminatiy sure but thats the result of ordering cars in batches over decades and not having a rolling upgrade program. ideally that goes down to 3. Viewliners for eastern LD, Superliner III, Airo
giving them LD would make them take over the entire market.
I don't have an issue with them dominating the loco segment because there are other markets outside of pax to keep competitors going, the F125 has major issues including parts supply currently.
