Sumitomo/Siemens contract for 137 Cars (former bi-levels)

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

Ryan

Court Jester
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
17,888
Location
Off looking for his sense of humor
The post you’re complaining about was also missing one in “there’s”, which they’d also allow to work.
default_tongue.png
 

Trogdor

BURNiNATOR
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
5,942
Location
Here
Must have been those missing apostrophes that caused the buff strength test to fail
default_tongue.png
Or maybe along those lines, perhaps someone read 800,000 lbs and thought the comma was a decimal point (in French, the comma and decimal point have opposite meanings, so it would be written as 800.000) and only build the cars to 800 pounds of strength.
 

randomguy65

Train Attendant
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
22
The cars are ADA compliant with a 2+2 setup... those seats are gonna be TINY.

As someone who rides the San Joaquins, I already hate them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sechs

Engineer
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
2,147
Location
ATL
The break-down of which California routes see the new single-level cars is one I have interest in seeing.

If, as I suspect, that the vast majority go:

  • to the very early/late Capitol Corridor runs
  • the San Luis Obispo - San Diego Surfliner run
  • all but a handful of San Joaquin trains.
I see that the manufacturer lies alongside the San Joaquin route as a very big benefit because it is only a matter of when, an not even slightly if, there is an incident where one of these new Siemens cab cars crashes into a farm truck or car in the central valley. Having the factory right there means repair will be much more expedient.
I think the single level cars should find a home on the San Joaquin trains, especially when they move to the new CAHSR line that is under construction. If I recall correctly, that was one of the stipulations of the federal funds for the high speed project, that Amtrak shift to the line until it is operating with true high speed trains.
This is an amazing bit of nonsense.

They are unlikely to split the cars up. I would guess that they'll all be in the northern fleet, because the Pacific Surfliner needs the capacity more, and, let's face it, is a higher-priority corridor.

Whether they stay limited to specific runs has to do with scheduling, but, with the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins sharing trainsets, I doubt that they'd tie their hands this way. Even with the overhead cat, they should be able to run bilevels with no problems on the CAHSR line.

And, as mentioned, Siemens won't be doing wreck repairs. The location of their plant won't have any bearing on anything.
 

Blackwolf

Conductor
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
1,517
Location
CIC
The break-down of which California routes see the new single-level cars is one I have interest in seeing.

If, as I suspect, that the vast majority go:

  • to the very early/late Capitol Corridor runs
  • the San Luis Obispo - San Diego Surfliner run
  • all but a handful of San Joaquin trains.
I see that the manufacturer lies alongside the San Joaquin route as a very big benefit because it is only a matter of when, an not even slightly if, there is an incident where one of these new Siemens cab cars crashes into a farm truck or car in the central valley. Having the factory right there means repair will be much more expedient.
I think the single level cars should find a home on the San Joaquin trains, especially when they move to the new CAHSR line that is under construction. If I recall correctly, that was one of the stipulations of the federal funds for the high speed project, that Amtrak shift to the line until it is operating with true high speed trains.
This is an amazing bit of nonsense.

They are unlikely to split the cars up. I would guess that they'll all be in the northern fleet, because the Pacific Surfliner needs the capacity more, and, let's face it, is a higher-priority corridor.

Whether they stay limited to specific runs has to do with scheduling, but, with the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins sharing trainsets, I doubt that they'd tie their hands this way. Even with the overhead cat, they should be able to run bilevels with no problems on the CAHSR line.

And, as mentioned, Siemens won't be doing wreck repairs. The location of their plant won't have any bearing on anything.
Most things on AU are utter nonsense. But I'll take amazing as a complement.
default_smile.png


We will find out in about a year how the first Siemens cars are allocated for routes. And I suspect we'll be at least to POTUS #47 before a single revenue train runs on the CAHSR alignment.

But I'm just a Government employee, they don't tell me nothin'!
default_mosking.gif
 

Ngotwalt

Train Attendant
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
59
Single level cars will go to Nor Cal routes, Nor Cal bilevels will go to Surfline. Why? CAHSR will have high or higher level platforms (40”) that likely won’t be compatible with bilevel cars. So technically yes, there will be no problem running bilevels on CAHSR, there will be problems getting people on and off them. There are several very good planning documents out there, and they are estimating CAHSR platforms at 40” or so. NEC is 48”. Basically unless California plans two have two sets of platforms at each station, I suspect single level cars go North.

Cheers,

Nick
 

TiBike

OBS Chief
Joined
Apr 18, 2015
Messages
709
Location
Alta California
From the latest draft/update of the Capitol Corridor's business plan (posted yesterday):

During the procurement and production of the Charger locomotives, Caltrans was also managing a multi- state contract for the procurement and production of new bi-level passenger rail cars in late 2012. At least twenty (20) of these bi-level cars would be added to the NorCal IPR Fleet. The funding is comprised of the federal ARRA program and Prop 1B funds. Unfortunately, the subcontractor for these new passenger rail cars was unable to meet the performance specifications and requirements as stipulated in the design plans, thereby incurring a significant delay to this project. However, recent procurement actions by Caltrans have been able to salvage the project whereby a rail car manufacturing facility has been retained to produce single-level passenger rail cars, rather than bi-level cars. As of this writing, the managers of the three CA IPR routes (including the CCJPA) are meeting with Caltrans to determine the requirements and costs associated with the operation of these single-level passenger rail cars on each of these 3 CA IPR routes, including, but not limited to, maintenance expenses, upgrades station platforms and facilities, onboard bike/luggage storage, and wheelchair access.

The eventual arrival of added rolling stock is currently unknown, yet expansion to/from Roseville associated with a completed phase one Sacramento to Roseville 3rd Track project will require the infusion of new rolling stock. Unfortunately, there is doubt at this time that new rolling stock will arrive by 2020.

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CCJPABizPlanFY1819_publicdraft_01-19-2018.pdf
 

WoodyinNYC

Conductor
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
1,515
Location
NYC
From the latest draft/update of the Capitol Corridor's business plan (posted yesterday):


During the procurement and production of the Charger locomotives, Caltrans was also managing a multi- state contract for the procurement and production of new bi-level passenger rail cars in late 2012. At least twenty (20) of these bi-level cars would be added to the NorCal IPR Fleet. The funding is comprised of the federal ARRA program and Prop 1B funds. Unfortunately, the subcontractor for these new passenger rail cars was unable to meet the performance specifications and requirements as stipulated in the design plans, thereby incurring a significant delay to this project. However, recent procurement actions by Caltrans have been able to salvage the project whereby a rail car manufacturing facility has been retained to produce single-level passenger rail cars, rather than bi-level cars. As of this writing, the managers of the three CA IPR routes (including the CCJPA) are meeting with Caltrans to determine the requirements and costs associated with the operation of these single-level passenger rail cars on each of these 3 CA IPR routes, including, but not limited to, maintenance expenses, upgrades station platforms and facilities, onboard bike/luggage storage, and wheelchair access.

The eventual arrival of added rolling stock is currently unknown, yet expansion to/from Roseville associated with a completed phase one Sacramento to Roseville 3rd Track project will require the infusion of new rolling stock. Unfortunately, there is doubt at this time that new rolling stock will arrive by 2020.

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CCJPABizPlanFY1819_publicdraft_01-19-2018.pdf
Phrased in a very diplomatic way, with no naming and no blaming. LOL. But informative.
 

Blackwolf

Conductor
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
1,517
Location
CIC
From the latest draft/update of the Capitol Corridor's business plan (posted yesterday):


During the procurement and production of the Charger locomotives, Caltrans was also managing a multi- state contract for the procurement and production of new bi-level passenger rail cars in late 2012. At least twenty (20) of these bi-level cars would be added to the NorCal IPR Fleet. The funding is comprised of the federal ARRA program and Prop 1B funds. Unfortunately, the subcontractor for these new passenger rail cars was unable to meet the performance specifications and requirements as stipulated in the design plans, thereby incurring a significant delay to this project. However, recent procurement actions by Caltrans have been able to salvage the project whereby a rail car manufacturing facility has been retained to produce single-level passenger rail cars, rather than bi-level cars. As of this writing, the managers of the three CA IPR routes (including the CCJPA) are meeting with Caltrans to determine the requirements and costs associated with the operation of these single-level passenger rail cars on each of these 3 CA IPR routes, including, but not limited to, maintenance expenses, upgrades station platforms and facilities, onboard bike/luggage storage, and wheelchair access.

The eventual arrival of added rolling stock is currently unknown, yet expansion to/from Roseville associated with a completed phase one Sacramento to Roseville 3rd Track project will require the infusion of new rolling stock. Unfortunately, there is doubt at this time that new rolling stock will arrive by 2020.

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CCJPABizPlanFY1819_publicdraft_01-19-2018.pdf
Phrased in a very diplomatic way, with no naming and no blaming. LOL. But informative.
Indeed, extremely informative. And not just about the cars, but projects such as the complete shift (and closure of two stations as a result, with the addition of a single replacement for both) of all passenger trains off the Niles Subdivision and onto the Coast Subdivision between Newark and Oakland (the same route the Coast Starlight takes.) It won't be a true "passenger main" but darn close to it, with UP moving all of their through freight traffic to Niles and leaving the Coast as local-only freight territory. Pretty big step, and one that makes the illusive Dumbarton Railbridge plan more plausible in the far future.
 

WoodyinNYC

Conductor
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
1,515
Location
NYC
From the latest draft/update of the Capitol Corridor's business plan (posted yesterday):


During the procurement and production of the Charger locomotives, Caltrans was also managing a multi- state contract for the procurement and production of new bi-level passenger rail cars in late 2012. At least twenty (20) of these bi-level cars would be added to the NorCal IPR Fleet. The funding is comprised of the federal ARRA program and Prop 1B funds. Unfortunately, the subcontractor for these new passenger rail cars was unable to meet the performance specifications and requirements as stipulated in the design plans, thereby incurring a significant delay to this project. However, recent procurement actions by Caltrans have been able to salvage the project whereby a rail car manufacturing facility has been retained to produce single-level passenger rail cars, rather than bi-level cars. As of this writing, the managers of the three CA IPR routes (including the CCJPA) are meeting with Caltrans to determine the requirements and costs associated with the operation of these single-level passenger rail cars on each of these 3 CA IPR routes, including, but not limited to, maintenance expenses, upgrades station platforms and facilities, onboard bike/luggage storage, and wheelchair access.

The eventual arrival of added rolling stock is currently unknown, yet expansion to/from Roseville associated with a completed phase one Sacramento to Roseville 3rd Track project will require the infusion of new rolling stock. Unfortunately, there is doubt at this time that new rolling stock will arrive by 2020.

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CCJPABizPlanFY1819_publicdraft_01-19-2018.pdf
Phrased in a very diplomatic way, with no naming and no blaming. LOL. But informative.
... projects such as the complete shift ... of all passenger trains off the Niles Subdivision and onto the Coast Subdivision ... (the same route the Coast Starlight takes.) It won't be a true "passenger main" but darn close to it, with UP moving all of their through freight traffic to Niles and leaving the Coast as local-only freight territory. Pretty big step ...
Realligning the Capitol Corridor service route from its existing Niles Subdivision to the Coast Subdivision will reduce travel time between Oakland to San Jose by 13 minutes.
That's a big step ahead for the Capitol Corridor trains. About $300 million ahead. So when they get the funding in place ...

(I'm sorry to see you say the Coast Starlight already uses the shorter route. I'd been planning an earlier arrival in L.A. until I saw that. LOL.)
 

keelhauled

OBS Chief
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
875
Location
Camorr
Is the Niles Sub the route over Tehachapi Pass?
It is a short inland section of track near the south end of the bay. Hayward and Fremont stations are on it. The Coast Starlight stops at neither and takes the roughly parallel and slightly shorter Coast Sub closer to the bay.
 

Trogdor

BURNiNATOR
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
5,942
Location
Here
https://goo.gl/maps/VZeF7B2x5aP2

https://goo.gl/maps/QmFMhMbP9dv

These links should show where the Coast and Niles subs split. In the top link, both lines come from the northwest, with Capitol Corridor trains heading straight through while the Starlight curves a bit to the southwest before heading southeast again. In the second link, the Starlight comes from the northwest while the Capitol Corridor comes from the northeast, and both merge to go southeast.
 

Blackwolf

Conductor
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
1,517
Location
CIC
Realligning the Capitol Corridor service route from its existing Niles Subdivision to the Coast Subdivision will reduce travel time between Oakland to San Jose by 13 minutes.
That's a big step ahead for the Capitol Corridor trains. About $300 million ahead. So when they get the funding in place ...

(I'm sorry to see you say the Coast Starlight already uses the shorter route. I'd been planning an earlier arrival in L.A. until I saw that. LOL.)
I believe the vast majority of that cost is the new inter-modal station in Newark, and not the actual rerouting. The way the phrasing of the project is written, Union Pacific may be the biggest proponent of the move since it simplifies their operations in for dispatching. No more fast passenger trains to schedule around slow moving freights coming and going through Niles (except for ACE of course.)
 

brianpmcdonnell17

Conductor
Joined
Mar 5, 2016
Messages
1,557
Location
Chicago, Illinois
The Station in Newark is quite old and is a horde of the Iron bound district.
Newark CA, not Newark NJ, is the one relevant to this thread I think.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Yes, just as I was about to comment on how confusing it may be for some people that there will soon be 4 Newark stations (NJ-Penn, NJ-Airport, DE, and CA).
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2015
Messages
6,280
Location
NYC/Queens
Enough horror stories of passengers ending up in Las Vegas NM to go around. A few weeks ago a passenger in London booked San Jose CA instead of San Jose Costa Rica for their dream vacation. They were at Heathrow when their friends called from Gatwick asking where they were. Ouch.
 
Top