posted
It seems fitting that our ever vigilant GBN broke this news (and we all know he is a lover of LD), but this is good news and 'about time'. I'm surprised they can have them ready to roll by 2012. Now, where should those new cars go...
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
It would appear that there will be suficient cars to retire any "Heritage' car presently in revenue service as well as to add one Sleeper line to each of the Single level trains - maybe enough to restore the BOS-WAS line to 66/67.
The Bagg Dorms of course translate into additional revenue space - lest we forget the Dining Car crew has rooms assigned in line space at present.
Now regarding configuration of the 25 new Sleepers; my vote is for 8BR-4RM-Shower (including 'emergency" potty) and Attendant. Since they do not have a Special Room, they would have to be used on runs where there is already an existing 1-2-12 assigned.
There is no ADA requirement that each car have a Special Room; only that the train have one of such.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is great news, but too bad they didn't include sightseer/lounge cars like the ones on the Canadian (from the Skeena/BC Rail). They'd be of good use on some of the Eastern routes. Maybe next time?
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad they are getting new cars. But I have a love affair with the heritage cars. I find it interesting that they are getting more baggage cars then sleepers. But I guess that is for the western long distance. I agree they need 8br-4rm, or better yet an all bedroom car.
Posts: 465 | From: elgin (s-line) | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The 55 new Baggage Cars should see your parts, Frank.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It should be interesting to see what the baggage cars will look like.
Yes there are other heritage baggage cars out there, but I've always enjoyed seeing former Santa Fe bagg cars on the Southwest Chief. Kind of a last vestige of the Super Chief and kin. Will be sad to see them go.
It amazes me the mileage these old baggage cars have racked up over their long service lives.
-------------------- Matt Visit gallery for photos of our train layouts Posts: 579 | From: San Bernardino Subdivison | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious in what order the new cars will show up.... ie: will we see all 25 diners roll out before the first sleeper appears or will we get one of these, one of those, a couple of the other things etc, etc.?
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do hope that some of Amtrak's critics in Washington don't start fussing about spending money on 130 cars with only 25 of them generating revenue.
If the Cardinal doesn't go Superliner, this should insure that it operates daily with the new Viewliners.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems like bilevel/Superliners would have more potential to generate the most revenue relative to the expenditure. I have had trouble finding any western trains that do not have sold out sleepers this summer on dates I could travel, especially the Empire Builder. When you sell out rooms at $600-$1400 for 2 days and sell some overpriced beer and wine you should build more rooms. I think they could fill 2-3 times what they have now.
But I will take whatever we can get.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
We shouldn't have to take "whatever we can get"....that's one of my problems with AmManagement. But anyway, I digress.....
I, too, wish that there were some bi-level Superliner orders in there. The Cardinal could sure use Superliners, and other trains could easily use an extra sleeper. The Coast Starlight used to run an 1133/1433 sleeper during peak periods, but I haven't seen a 33 car in at least two years now. Probably not enough cars to do that. Or wait, do I have that wrong? How many sleepers is Amtrak running right now on 11/14---3? (not including the trans/dorm).
Posts: 2355 | From: Pleasanton, CA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarilles, of all companies.
Irish Rail dealt with CAF for their "Mark 4" cars, whose ride quality is quite disastrous compared to the predecessor Mark 3s (built by BREL and at Inchicore Works); didn't stop IE from prematurely retiring the Mark 3s (after a mere 23 years of service), or bringing the Mark 3s back out of retirement in order to find out how to make the Mark 4s ride like the Mark 3s.
CAF also built IE's 29000-class commuter rail DMUs, which apparently are holding up OK (they're less than a decade old), but we'll see in a couple of years whether or not they fare as well as the Tokyu and GEC-Alstom units that precede them.
Posts: 566 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: I'm curious in what order the new cars will show up.... ie: will we see all 25 diners roll out before the first sleeper appears or will we get one of these, one of those, a couple of the other things etc, etc.?
I'd guess the sleepers will be the first out since it probably would be easier and faster to build along the existing sleeper plans than to design baggage/dorms. Diners next.
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One must wonder what reaction, if any, occurred at 3 Commercial Place, 500 Water, 1400 Douglas, and 2650 Lou Menk Drive, when the noted Press Release was circulated?
My guess is not much; "those 130 cars, if they ever get 'em all, will just replace some of the stuff we once sold them; they won't be knocking at our door to put on any new trains".
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I cannot locate any National media (Times or Journal staff reportage) coverage beyond the AP and an equally "short and sweet" Bloomberg piece filed yesterday.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: From an Amtrak Press Release:
25 Sleepers 25 Diners 25 Baggage/Dorms 55 Baggage
It would appear that there will be suficient cars to retire any "Heritage' car presently in revenue service as well as to add one Sleeper line to each of the Single level trains - maybe enough to restore the BOS-WAS line to 66/67.
The Bagg Dorms of course translate into additional revenue space - lest we forget the Dining Car crew has rooms assigned in line space at present.
Now regarding configuration of the 25 new Sleepers; my vote is for 8BR-4RM-Shower (including 'emergency" potty) and Attendant. Since they do not have a Special Room, they would have to be used on runs where there is already an existing 1-2-12 assigned.
There is no ADA requirement that each car have a Special Room; only that the train have one of such.
Your vote Mr. Norman may come true, as it has been reported on another forum that the roomettes may NOT have individual toilets and sinks, but rather have communal bathrooms. If that is the case, I would think Amtrak would look to expand the "bedroom" space and reduce the number of roomettes considering the space and "potty issue." Amrak could keep bedrooms with private toilets and shower, with communal toilets and shower for the roomettes. Amtrak would likely need two bathrooms and one communal shower (or one bathroom and one shower with toilet) for the Viewliner in the configuration you mention. And as mentioned, hopefully Amtrak would be able to get around any ADA isse by having the newer Viewliners "hooked up" to the older Viewliners that offer an ADA handicap bedroom.
If the current configuration is kept, 2 roomettes would be lost to communal toilets and it would seem that two toilets for approximately 10 roomettes may not be enough; consider that the Superliner Sleepers have 3 communal bathrooms for 14 roomettes and one shower. There may even be another bathroom on the lower level - or shower - I forget....
If the handicap room is eliminated, this certainly gives Amtrak some space. However, with just 25 sleepers, can Amtrak afford to have what in effect would be lower capacity with 8 bedrooms as opposed to the equivalent of approximately 16 roomettes instead (one bedroom being equivalent to the space of two roomettes)?
Posts: 337 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: One must wonder what reaction, if any, occurred at 3 Commercial Place, 500 Water, 1400 Douglas, and 2650 Lou Menk Drive, when the noted Press Release was circulated?
In English: Those are the addresses of the headquarters of various railroad companies.
quote:Originally posted by jp1822: consider that the Superliner Sleepers have 3 communal bathrooms for 14 roomettes and one shower. There may even be another bathroom on the lower level - or shower - I forget....
"Standard" Superliner sleeping cars have 1 communal bathroom on the upper deck, 3 on the lower deck, and one shower room. Not just the 14 roomettes but also the family room share these facilities.
Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
One must wonder if the new cars will have a design compatible enough with the existing Viewliners, and, with a production line of interior fittings and running gear being established, that the two prototype Viewliner cars could be returned to revenue service.
Secondly Mr. Mayo, allow me to confirm that those are the respective corporate addresses of Norfolk Southern Corp, CSX Transportation Corp, Union Pacific Corp, and BNSF Ry LLC. I think all here are adequately grounded in railroad industry affairs to have recognized such.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: One must wonder if the new cars will have a design compatible enough with the existing Viewliners, and, with a production line of interior fittings and running gear being established, that the two prototype Viewliner cars could be returned to revenue service.
Secondly Mr. Mayo, allow me to confirm that those are the respective corporate addresses of Norfols Southern Corp, CSX Transportation Corp, Union Pacific Corp, and BNSF Ry LLC. I think all here are adequately grounded in railroad industry affairs to have recognized such.
That is an interesting thought to see if the prototype Viewliners could be put back into service by "gutting them out" and basically starting over since this may appear to be what the new Viewliner order is partially doing. With such few Viewliners as it is now, the fact that they are regularly get sold out as it is in current configuration, and an order of just 25 cars, I am hesitant to see "viewliner variations" come about. Amtrak just got the Amfleet (I and II) cafe cars down to a standardization of just 4 types of cars (out of an origional 8 or so). They also sort of did this with other Amfleet and Horizon cars. If the handicap room has to be in every new Viewliner sleeper and there is a variation between the old and new Viewliners, one has to wonder if Amtrak will keep the 25 Viewliners captive to a specific service (i.e. Silver Service trains) like they do with the Superliners on the Auto Train!
Posts: 337 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Secondly Mr. Mayo, allow me to confirm that those are the respective corporate addresses of Norfols Southern Corp, CSX Transportation Corp, Union Pacific Corp, and BNSF Ry LLC. I think all here are adequately grounded in railroad industry affairs to have recognized such.
Regardless of how "grounded" anyone is in industry affairs, I doubt even employees of said companies would necessarily know their company's HQ address to recognise them in such a cryptic post. Hence my clarification for readers who either could not be bothered to, or were not able to, understand your comment.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say the baggage cars would come first, as it is basically a shell. With some lights, a large door, and maybe a luggage rack or two. The luggage rack could be made in less then a day. The car itself wouldn't take as long as a sleeper or diner, as there is nothing to put in them.
Posts: 465 | From: elgin (s-line) | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that doesn't make sense. But maybe they need to find the material. Or design the other car. I have no clue.
Posts: 465 | From: elgin (s-line) | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Presumably the two would be "Columbus" and "Concord".
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
