Trains.com

Delays May Derail Stimulus Funding for Amtrak Railcars

3265 views
14 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Altadena, CA
  • 340 posts
Delays May Derail Stimulus Funding for Amtrak Railcars
Posted by 081552 on Sunday, April 10, 2016 1:32 PM
  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, April 10, 2016 7:05 PM

I would hold the Japanese company financially liable for the delay just as we would do if it was an American company that signed the contract........there should be no special treatment there.

Secondly, why are these firms being allowed to bid if they have no U.S. manufacturing plants or presence in place.

Third, note:   So far no problems with the Siemens order with All Aboard Florida.    Maybe the difference between a private company sourcing the railcars and a government agency sourcing the rail cars.    Also seems AAF could care less the rail car plant is in Sacremento, CA (ie: it didn't have to be in the Midwest, specifically, IL).

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, April 10, 2016 7:11 PM

The problems may be more complex.  It's odd that those other foreign companies (besides Siemens) seem to be able to build safe cars elsewhere.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • 422 posts
Posted by Dragoman on Sunday, April 10, 2016 7:31 PM
Could part of the difference be in how long the plants have been around? Siemens has been in Sacramento for some 10 or 15 years; the Illinois plant if fairly new, isn't it? Maybe actual hands-on in-place experience really does matter.
  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Monday, April 11, 2016 11:27 AM

CMStPnP

I would hold the Japanese company financially liable for the delay just as we would do if it was an American company that signed the contract........there should be no special treatment there.

Secondly, why are these firms being allowed to bid if they have no U.S. manufacturing plants or presence in place.

Third, note:   So far no problems with the Siemens order with All Aboard Florida.    Maybe the difference between a private company sourcing the railcars and a government agency sourcing the rail cars.    Also seems AAF could care less the rail car plant is in Sacremento, CA (ie: it didn't have to be in the Midwest, specifically, IL).

 

 

Of course it's not a new plant. It has successfully built cars for MERTA (locomotive hauled) METRA Electric, NICTD as well as the DMUs for Toronto and California. It didn't have to be in Illinois, it was already there!

its interesting that the article mentions 100% US content and states that shells are coming from Japan.

Given NS's success elsewhere this failure is a bit of a puzzlement.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Monday, April 11, 2016 6:02 PM

The N-S plant in Rochelle, IL was opened in June 2012.  It was expanded in 2013.  The company has been building commuter cars for the US since 1982.  I do not know where all the earlier orders were built, though some had final assembly in the US..

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:43 PM

Here's a guest editorial from Age that I find rather disappointing. I was hoping for more insight into what is actually going on out in Rochelle. He seems to blame the inexperienced procurement process for part of the problem. But California was heavily involved and the had pretty good luck with their previous orders. I wonder if he's pointing fingers at FRA that had overall responsibility for this program (not Amtrak).

 

BTW one odd item in connection with this procurement is that the idea of a joint state acquisition of passenger had a partial genesis with Angle Trains, one of the U.K. RSOCs.

 

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/william-vantuono/guest-blog-doomed-from-the-start.html

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:02 AM

My hunch is that there are too many parties involved in the process for it to really work well.

When a frt RR wants to buy a locomotive, it's the RR and the builder that get involved.  That's it. There really isn't a "bidding process", the RRs merely ask the builder for a price on a quantity of locomotives built to their spec.  That is, "how much for 100 SD40-2's with this list of options/features?"  The full specs and details follow after a deal is reached and adjustments are made as things change.

The same process is followed year after year, so the player all know each other and know what to expect and how to work.

On the public side, there is usually a consultant writing specs that go out to bid.  The specs are performance based, not a selection from a catalog, so there is often room for interpretation.  The FRA holds the purse strings, so they get a say.  The operating agency (Amtrak in this case) gets a say.  The host RR and/or state agencies also get a say.  The folks in the room for all of this might not have much experience with doing this kind of work and certainly don't have much experience working together.

Toss in some politics and I can imagine it can all add up to a bit of a mess - which is what we seem to have.

I don't really understand how, in the age of computer aided design and finite element analysis, how a carbody design could fail the compression test.  I wonder if the manufacturer didn't understand the details of the test, that is, where and how the load is applied and what constituted sucess or failure.

I wonder if they really did comply to what's stated in the specs, but the interpretation of the FRA and others differed....

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:18 AM

Buslist
BTW one odd item in connection with this procurement is that the idea of a joint state acquisition of passenger had a partial genesis with Angle Trains, one of the U.K. RSOCs.

It's Angel Trains, as in "the heavenly host."

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Friday, April 22, 2016 4:56 PM

Seems NS is not the only one in delivery schedule trouble.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/toronto/ttc-streetcar-delay-andy-byford-1.3548100

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Friday, April 22, 2016 4:58 PM

schlimm

 

 
Buslist
BTW one odd item in connection with this procurement is that the idea of a joint state acquisition of passenger had a partial genesis with Angle Trains, one of the U.K. RSOCs.

 

It's Angel Trains, as in "the heavenly host."

 

Was Angel Trains , then RBS, who are they now? Damn auto speller late at night!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, April 22, 2016 5:52 PM

Complicated financial dealings. Angel Trains (1994) was bought by RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland) in 1997, then spun off again in 2008. In 2009, it was split into Angel Trains Limited and Angel Trains International, the latter renamed Alpha Trains in 2010.  Enough? Bang Head

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 25 posts
Posted by josephr33 on Saturday, April 23, 2016 11:46 AM

Seems like unless there is a legislative solution this whole order will go up in smoke.  Almost would make sense to just have Nippon Sharyo build a whole bunch of gallery cars like it is for Metra and just put the best possible interior trim in.  Clearly not an ideal solution, but at least it would get some new cars for the Midwest, and something is better than nothing in this case.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, April 23, 2016 1:26 PM

josephr33

Seems like unless there is a legislative solution this whole order will go up in smoke.  Almost would make sense to just have Nippon Sharyo build a whole bunch of gallery cars like it is for Metra and just put the best possible interior trim in.  Clearly not an ideal solution, but at least it would get some new cars for the Midwest, and something is better than nothing in this case.

Interesting solution but.....    

The entire corridor has to have equipment that can regularly do 110 mph safely and is 120 mph capable.    Because that was the spec in return for all the Federal Dollars that Michigan and Illinois recieved.     And if they cannot meet the spec by a specified date (not sure when that is but it could be 2017 as well).     Both states have to repay the money the Feds gave with interest until it is paid off in full.

Governor Scott Walker is indeed looking smarter and smarter with his decision to turn down the money.    If I were a illinois taxpayer I would be squirming a little by now as well.......them state taxes are going to go up again quite dramatically if that grant becomes a loan.     Even more likely if the decision on this is deferred to the next President and the next President is hostile towards this program.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Sunday, April 24, 2016 8:30 AM

josephr33

Seems like unless there is a legislative solution this whole order will go up in smoke.  Almost would make sense to just have Nippon Sharyo build a whole bunch of gallery cars like it is for Metra and just put the best possible interior trim in.  Clearly not an ideal solution, but at least it would get some new cars for the Midwest, and something is better than nothing in this case.

 

 

Talgo! Talgo! Talgo!

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy