What will happen to Acela trainsets when Acela II comes online?

[Amfleeter]

Since the announcement of Acela II bids is probably in the near future, it begs the question - what will happen to the Acela sets? They'll likely still have life in them, if Acela II arrives on schedule, but where could they be run? Where should they be put in service? Perhaps the Northeast Regional?

 

[afigg]

First of all, the current fleet strategy plan - updated in the FY15 budget and FY15-FY19 Five Year financial plan - calls for the acquisition of the last 6 of the 28 new HSR trainsets in FY2021. So, the Acela Is will be in service through at least 2020 and, almost certainly, 2021. The Acelas will be around for at least another 5 to 6 years. By then, they will be over 20 years old.

The Acelas are expensive to operate and maintain. The price tag for an overhaul of a single Acela trainset is over $10 million. While there have been many posts about using the Acelas for the Keystone service, setting aside the issue of when all the eastern Keystone stops will have high level platforms, it makes little economic sense to convert the Acelas to the Keystone service. Why would PennDOT pay anything for Acelas?

No, the fate of the Acelas is that they will have served their purpose, introducing more modern (sort of) HSR trainsets to the NEC. In all likelihood they be retired as new HSR trainsets enter revenue service and then scrapped a few years later, once all the leases have been closed out.

 

[Triley]

I don't see the Acelas replacing the Regionals, because there obviously would be no way they could run to Virginia or Springfield, or stop at some of the stations that only have low level platforms that are actually on the corridor. There would be just way too much money involved to add high level platforms, and wire the different Virginia branches for a few runs a day.

I would say maybe replace the Regionals that don't run to Virginia or Springfield with the Acela sets, but many of the Regionals run with consists that hold 60% more passengers than an Acela consist, and there's a reason for that. So, I don't see how that could work either. So with nothing short of upping the capacity of the NEC to handle more trains, and running two variants of an Acela, in addition to the Regionals..? No clue what could be done.

 

[StriderGDM]

As much as I'd love to see catenary strung to Albany and the Acelas run there, I hold out no hope for that.

I concur, they'll have served their purpose and be scrapped.

 

[fairviewroad]

Wonder if a commuter agency would be interested. I'll grant you there's only a handful of places

where an electric, high-level, relatively low-capacity trainset would work. And of course there'd

be the matter of the FC car and the cafe car, which would be out-of-place on commuter operations.

So in all likelihood, scratch that idea.

 

[user 1215]

They don't carry enough people to work as regionals.

$10/mil for a full overhaul for the trainset isn't that horrible. Cost per car & loco is probably pretty similar to a Superliner at around $1.2M

I'm not really believing that Acela II will be awarded, designed, built and final delivery in the next 6 years. Maybe by then there will be a contract.

 

[AlexandriaVATraveler]

What happened to Metroliners? Aren't some still in existence in the form of cab cars?

Don't underestimate the ability of a cash-strapped agency (Amtrak) to squeeze as much juice as possible out of the fruit.

Reserve fleet for California's HSR network perhaps.

Also, could they be modified to be diesel loco-hauled? If so, are there any midwest routes which would warrant First Class/Business Class and need rolling stock?

 

[jis]

I think the the Acela Is will continue to be used as third or fourth hourly lower fare Regional-like service on the NEC spine. Only a small fraction of Regionals go off the spine anyway, and there is demand at least in some parts of the day for additional hourly service specially in NEC South, possibly with more stops. The Acela sets with their superior acceleration/deceleration performance would be good fit, until the cost of maintenance becomes too big to handle. It will all depend on how much revenue they remain capable of bringing in.

 

[Metra Electric Guest]

Wonder if a commuter agency would be interested. I'll grant you there's only a handful of places

where an electric, high-level, relatively low-capacity trainset would work. And of course there'd

be the matter of the FC car and the cafe car, which would be out-of-place on commuter operations.

So in all likelihood, scratch that idea.

The South Shore could buy a couple sets for their express South Bend-Chicago service and for weekend trains. It'd force them to finish getting all high-level platforms too. For their weekend service a cafe would be a boost, it's a long enough trip for a snack. Total pipe dream of course. Maybe Metra could electrify to Kankakee and buy a couple - if they Peotone airport ever became a reality they could use Acela's (but by that time they would be antiques and transferred to the IRM....).

 

[jis]

Either they will have to change the electrification system or they will have to replace the HV side of the electrical power equipment completely in Acelas before they'll be able to run on the CSS&SB. Acelas cannot handle DC at all at any voltage. Chicago area electrification is 1,500v DC AFAIR. So cost-wise, this is a completely impractical idea.

 

[MikefromCrete]

They're headed for the scrap yard.

 

[Metra Electric Guest]

Either they will have to change the electrification system or they will have to replace the HV side of the electrical power equipment completely in Acelas before they'll be able to run on the CSS7SB. Acelas cannot handle DC at all at any voltage. Chicago area electrification is 1,500v DC AFAIR. So cost-wise, this is a completely impractical idea.

By the time they got here, they'd probably be rebuilt. Somehow, not having a national standard for electrification seems like a stupid idea.

Of course, I know the Acela's would never make it here.

 

[battalion51]

The sets could be re-worked to be higher capacity by recoupling sets to make them have more coaches (obviously "stranding" power cars). I don't think this is likely to happen, but it is possible.

 

[MattW]

Either they will have to change the electrification system or they will have to replace the HV side of the electrical power equipment completely in Acelas before they'll be able to run on the CSS7SB. Acelas cannot handle DC at all at any voltage. Chicago area electrification is 1,500v DC AFAIR. So cost-wise, this is a completely impractical idea.

By the time they got here, they'd probably be rebuilt. Somehow, not having a national standard for electrification seems like a stupid idea.

Of course, I know the Acela's would never make it here.

We do have a national standard, all new electrification is/will be 25kV at 60Hz. The Shoreline (NHV-BOS) electrification is that, NJT's newest electrification is that, Denver is electrifying at that, and Caltrains will electrify at that. everything else is over or approaching 100 years old, or transit (light rail, heavy rail) and thus not applicable here.

 

[afigg]

What happened to Metroliners? Aren't some still in existence in the form of cab cars?

Don't underestimate the ability of a cash-strapped agency (Amtrak) to squeeze as much juice as possible out of the fruit.

Reserve fleet for California's HSR network perhaps.

Also, could they be modified to be diesel loco-hauled? If so, are there any midwest routes which would warrant First Class/Business Class and need rolling stock?

Metroliner cars are used as cab cars on the Keystone service trains. However, the Metroliners as standard 85' long coach cars are far more flexible for re-purposing than the coupled tilt Acela trainsets. Can't mix the Acela coach cars with other equipment.

As for re-use off of the NEC, the Midwest will be well set for rolling stock after the option order of corridor bi-level cars are delivered. CA will be ordering new 220 mph capable HSR trainsets with 400 to 450 seat capacity. Why would they want expensive, obsolete, heavy 160 mph trainsets with 303 seats? Ok, could swap in coach cars from other stripped Acela trainsets, but then there is the question of the cost of starting up a maintenance facility in CA. If CA wants to run interim electrified service on their initial operational service route, they will have a fleet of 125 mph bi-level cars available and could always lease a few spare ACS-64s from Amtrak for a time. Or buy a few ACS-64s from the plant which just happens to be located in Sacramento.

The Acelas were built specifically for operation on the NEC and as customized trainsets. I don't see 20 year old Acelas getting re-purposed or used elsewhere. Once enough new HSR trainsets are in revenue service, they will start to follow the HHP-8s to dead storage.

 

[west point]

The removing of some Acela - 1 train set coaches to place them on other sets has much merit. A 10 - 12 car Acela set can be a very high capacity train. That would allow power cars more time for overhauls. Especially during the transition from Acela-1s & -2s will give Amtrak its desired 28 sets in service much faster. So first Amtrak can get 28 + sets in service and then more higher capacity trains in service quicker.

 

[MattW]

What about hacking off the power cars and using them as cab cars? Would that be too expensive to be worth doing? I fully realize it's more than uncoupling them and hooking them up to the back end of a Keystone set given the lack of conventional coupler, and probably lack of conventional HEP and MU connection. I doubt we'll see a single-level cab car anytime soon and those Metroliners aren't getting any younger.

 

[neroden]

First of all, the current fleet strategy plan - updated in the FY15 budget and FY15-FY19 Five Year financial plan - calls for the acquisition of the last 6 of the 28 new HSR trainsets in FY2021. So, the Acela Is will be in service through at least 2020 and, almost certainly, 2021. The Acelas will be around for at least another 5 to 6 years. By then, they will be over 20 years old.

The Acelas are expensive to operate and maintain. The price tag for an overhaul of a single Acela trainset is over $10 million. While there have been many posts about using the Acelas for the Keystone service, setting aside the issue of when all the eastern Keystone stops will have high level platforms, it makes little economic sense to convert the Acelas to the Keystone service.

....unless there's a shortage of Amfleets, Horizons, Metroliners and other single-level cars at that point. Which there will be. So the Acelas will probably be pressed into service on the Keystone -- possibly simply converted to unpowered coaches. The high level platform projects will be done well before 2020; despite delays, the funding has mostly been secured and released now. It's not efficient, but it's better than undersupplying capacity.

I know that a number of Horizons and a few Amfleets are being released from the Midwest and California when the new bilevels show up, but they are just going to sink into the endless demand for increased service and lengthened consists on routes into New York. And meanwhile, they're all getting old and occasionally dying in crashes. The Metroliner cab cars are on their last legs already.

If Amtrak manages to get a large appropriation for new single-level cars, then the Acelas will be disposed of ASAP, of course. But I'm not expecting that to happen.

If you disagree, please convince me that the existing single-level coach fleet, with expected losses over the next 5 years, is sufficient for projected service levels to accomodate 2020 demand.

 

[Amfleeter]

First of all, the current fleet strategy plan - updated in the FY15 budget and FY15-FY19 Five Year financial plan - calls for the acquisition of the last 6 of the 28 new HSR trainsets in FY2021. So, the Acela Is will be in service through at least 2020 and, almost certainly, 2021. The Acelas will be around for at least another 5 to 6 years. By then, they will be over 20 years old.

The Acelas are expensive to operate and maintain. The price tag for an overhaul of a single Acela trainset is over $10 million. While there have been many posts about using the Acelas for the Keystone service, setting aside the issue of when all the eastern Keystone stops will have high level platforms, it makes little economic sense to convert the Acelas to the Keystone service.

....unless there's a shortage of Amfleets, Horizons, Metroliners and other single-level cars at that point. Which there will be. So the Acelas will probably be pressed into service on the Keystone -- possibly simply converted to unpowered coaches. The high level platform projects will be done well before 2020; despite delays, the funding has mostly been secured and released now. It's not efficient, but it's better than undersupplying capacity.

I know that a number of Horizons and a few Amfleets are being released from the Midwest and California when the new bilevels show up, but they are just going to sink into the endless demand for increased service and lengthened consists on routes into New York. And meanwhile, they're all getting old and occasionally dying in crashes. The Metroliner cab cars are on their last legs already.

If Amtrak manages to get a large appropriation for new single-level cars, then the Acelas will be disposed of ASAP, of course. But I'm not expecting that to happen.

If you disagree, please convince me that the existing single-level coach fleet, with expected losses over the next 5 years, is sufficient for projected service levels to accomodate 2020 demand.

If I'm correct, converting Acelas to coaches presents a problem - Acela cars use a semi-permanent coupler instead of a normal coupler, and it's not at standard coupler height - and since the diaphragm would not work with a standard-height AAR coupler if you tried to put one in, you'd need to rebuild the vestibule. It's either too short a diaphragm, or the diaphragm gets in the way of the where an AAR coupler would be put. I forget.

This may make turning Acela cars into coaches a non-starter because of cost. Other than this problem, they're practically good to go if you can work it out and get AAR couplers in. You might want to try putting traps in, though. Shouldn't be too hard to make that modification, though.

 

[AlexandriaVATraveler]

I can't imagine any export possibilities...too much American Exceptionalism engineered into the trainset.

It's unfortunate how purpose built the trainset seems to be. Epsecially since it's a loco-hauled set, that you couldn't just slap a diesel-electric in front of it and continue operations elsewhere. But I forgot also that we don't do high-level platforms in most of the country (I'm certainly clouded by an Eastern bias)...

 

[Ryan]

If I'm correct, converting Acelas to coaches presents a problem - Acela cars use a semi-permanent coupler instead of a normal coupler, and it's not at standard coupler height - and since the diaphragm would not work with a standard-height AAR coupler if you tried to put one in, you'd need to rebuild the vestibule. It's either too short a diaphragm, or the diaphragm gets in the way of the where an AAR coupler would be put. I forget.

This may make turning Acela cars into coaches a non-starter because of cost. Other than this problem, they're practically good to go if you can work it out and get AAR couplers in. You might want to try putting traps in, though. Shouldn't be too hard to make that modification, though.

That's only a problem if you intend to mix them with other coaches. If you simply close off the vestibule on one end of some of the cars, do what you need to put a standard AAR coupler in place, you can use an ACS-64 to pull a string of Acela coaches.

That said, there's no good reason to do that. Just keep using the sets as they are, or recombine them into longer sets and keep using the still-good power cars.

 

[Amfleeter]

I can't imagine any export possibilities...too much American Exceptionalism engineered into the trainset.

It's unfortunate how purpose built the trainset seems to be. Epsecially since it's a loco-hauled set, that you couldn't just slap a diesel-electric in front of it and continue operations elsewhere. But I forgot also that we don't do high-level platforms in most of the country (I'm certainly clouded by an Eastern bias)...

I have to agree with the high platforms comment - the lack of traps on the Acela is a serious fault in the design - I see no real reason that you couldn't put traps on an Acela. It seems like it was another fault of Bombardier design, I guess. It's limited the flexibility of Acela sets and honestly, I don't see Amtrak making the same mistake again. No matter what Acela II is, it's probably going to have provisions for low level platforms - it's not really that big a modification in all honesty. Traps are fairly compact when the stairs are stowed. Look at the traps on Amfleets.

 

[user 1215]

The removing of some Acela - 1 train set coaches to place them on other sets has much merit. A 10 - 12 car Acela set can be a very high capacity train. That would allow power cars more time for overhauls. Especially during the transition from Acela-1s & -2s will give Amtrak its desired 28 sets in service much faster. So first Amtrak can get 28 + sets in service and then more higher capacity trains in service quicker.

I have advocated that in the past. However, my understanding is that the ONLY Acela maintenance building can accommodate the current trainset length and not an inch more, nor the capacity to increase the length of the facility.

Brilliant foresight.

 

[Ryan]

There are 3 maintenance buildings, WAS, NYP and BOS. When Amtrak was planning on buying more Acela coaches, the plan was to lengthen the buildings. They'll probably still get lengthened to support the Acela II or whatever they end up being called.

So a non-issue, really.

 

[AlexandriaVATraveler]

I know in Germany on the ICE and other long-distance single level trains, the coaches have fold-out steps. Note the photo in this link. You can see the gap and the fold-out stairs (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1Dl1uH1Ui28/TVGJEiWQdxI/AAAAAAAAMWE/5nqWL2LfUWU/s400/DeutscheBahnIceTrain.jpg) Not sure what station this is, FYI. Compare to high-level platforms at major stations like Frankfurt which are flush (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Hauptbahnhof_Frankfurt_ICE3-NL_251-dLuh.jpg/1280px-Hauptbahnhof_Frankfurt_ICE3-NL_251-dLuh.jpg).

I know that the allowable tolerances in platform height are different in Germany and the US, but it doesn't seem like the fold-out stairs are something which would have been terribly difficult to incorporate into the design. Nor does it apparently screw up with operations, as they're successfully used on high-speed rail ops.