Anyone have any idea of what these new layouts are?
A truly better layout will include space for the carry-on baggage that cannot be stowed in a room.
Johnny
From what I understand, the electrical panel needs and is getting a complete redesign. The advancement of a couple decades of electrical thinking are hopefully being applied. The broken televisions are coming out. The lighted switches that immediately burnt out were an odd failure.
Oh, and they mentioned working on the Viewliner Diner prototype, but I'm not sure if that means the one car or if they're also building more.
aegrotatioFrom what I understand, the electrical panel needs and is getting a complete redesign. The advancement of a couple decades of electrical thinking are hopefully being applied
Now days everything possible is done to home run electrical runs as well as telephone and TV.
I just read that toilets in individual roomettes will be eliminated. That's good, but additional bathrooms will take up revenue space. Attendants use of new baggage/dorms will free up one space, but shower and two new bathrooms will result in the net loss of at least one room I would guess.
Will someone explain why the possible elimination (pardon the pun) of toilets in roomettes is "a good thing"? It's a great mistake! The privacy of one's own room & bathroom is a major factor for many people in deciding to take the train and get a room.
One friend of mine was all set to take the Capitol Limited to DC until learning there was no toilet in the downstairs family bedroom (only bedroom left). So now she's flying instead. I think men fail to realize this is a very important issue to female passengers
As the population ages there will be more demand, not less, for in-room toilets. Cripes, even in 1950 we had them! Now we won't? Didn't we learn from the Superliner roomettes?
Which do you think will matter more to passengers who are considering riding long distance trains? In-room toilets or re-designed wall switches?
The in-room toilets that I saw provide no privacy unless you make everyone leave the roomette and pull every corner of the curtains to get some privacy (also true on Superliners).
Perhaps it's also a maintenance problem.
Common restrooms are horrid at the halfway point on any trip. Yuck. Blame the railroad unions.
Even though the toilets in the room are very convenient for single travelers, my last Viewliner roomette experience was traveling with my daughter, and it was not something we wanted to use. So it meant a long walk to the coaches to find an unoccuppied and clean toilet.
Also, sleeping with your head next to a toilet is not exactly the most desirable situation in my opinion.
BostonTrainGuy Even though the toilets in the room are very convenient for single travelers, my last Viewliner roomette experience was traveling with my daughter, and it was not something we wanted to use. So it meant a long walk to the coaches to find an unoccuppied and clean toilet. Also, sleeping with your head next to a toilet is not exactly the most desirable situation in my opinion.
As to in-room toilets, they are convenient. On our trip this spring, we had two day-time legs: New Orleans-Memphis and Denver-Salt Lake City. Because of personal needs, we reserved a bedroom (Superliner) for each leg. Previously, we had used roomettes (a roomette cost less than a lower-level coach seat), but felt we needed something closer this year. Since a roomette normally holds only two people comfortably, it can be convenient for one to leave the room at times.
As to odors at night, I did not notice any either night that I spent in a Viewliner roomette. It is not necessary that you sleep with your head by the head; the berth can be made up with your feet by the head.
Currently, each Viewliner sleeper has a shower for the use of roomette passengers.
The in-room lavatories need to go. Sitting and sleeping in the same confined space where one urinates and defecates is disgusting, particularly when two people are sharing a room. The additional plumbing must also be expensive. Far better to have common toilets down the hall, provided they are cleaned to a higher standard than Amtrak usually attains.
Do your thing in Bathrooms and get out.
What is really needed is a return to the old hopper toilets. Which is more unhealthful and disgusting, a little mess on the ROW for section men and trespassers to watch out for or dozens of cramped, filthy, odorous chemical toilets on the train for the enjoyment of the paying customers?
dakotafredWhat is really needed is a return to the old hopper toilets
dakotafredWhat is really needed is a return to the old hopper toilets. Which is more unhealthful and disgusting, a little mess on the ROW for section men and trespassers to watch out for or dozens of cramped, filthy, odorous chemical toilets on the train for the enjoyment of the paying customers?
CG9602Someone please refresh my memory: Why did Amtrak do away with the older Hopper toilets to begin with ?
It's been a long time, but I doubt it was Amtrak's call, running as they did mostly on host roads. It has, rather, the whiff of something federal regulators would do.
Someone please refresh my memory: Why did Amtrak do away with the older Hopper toilets to begin with ?
Actually had to do something whith the EPA. However certain cities and National parks did not allow there use as well?
The present vacuum type toilets that are used in aircraft made after the 1980s seem to have migrated to AMTRAK as well. Flush hopper types were used before that time and some airplanes had all sink water go into the hopper but not any more.. It all comes down to how much useage and how often serviced. From my airline experience it is about 12 Hrs for a passenger useage of about 100 persons. However that may be different for long range Aircraft. Usually airlines service at main hubs after about 6 - 8 Hrs flying time. We have all heard of the problems of airplanes held too long on the tarmac.
I believe they wanted to match their plumbing to the much more widely available aircraft and watercraft vacuum systems which the hoppers weren't well suited to since they weren't really designed to accept the back-pressure of a vacuum system. I'm assuming that by "hopper toilet" you're referring to the old toilets that dump by gravity into holding tanks, whether by retrofit from a "dump on the tracks" system or a newer design that uses holding tanks which I think this industry refers to as "retention tanks."
I'm too out-of-sorts to look it up, but a tour bus was recently fined several thousand dollars for dumping their tank on a metal grate bridge that just happened to have a boat under it. It involved someone famous.
aegrotatioI'm assuming that by "hopper toilet" you're referring to the old toilets that dump by gravity into holding tanks, whether by retrofit from a "dump on the tracks" system or a newer design that uses holding tanks which I think this industry refers to as "retention tanks."
I intended the toilets that flushed directly onto the ROW. Perhaps "hopper toilet" is the wrong designation for these.
dakotafred aegrotatioI'm assuming that by "hopper toilet" you're referring to the old toilets that dump by gravity into holding tanks, whether by retrofit from a "dump on the tracks" system or a newer design that uses holding tanks which I think this industry refers to as "retention tanks." I intended the toilets that flushed directly onto the ROW. Perhaps "hopper toilet" is the wrong designation for these.
In my view, and in that of others here, the small roomettes with an enclosed toilet is too ghastly to consider, yet this type of accommodation is common on the Viewliners which apparently are mostly on the East Coast routes. Roomettes are cramped as it is.
The roomettes on the Superliner sleeping cars are also terribly cramped, often requiring dressing in the aisles until the beds are finally taken up. For those that can only afford the roomette accommodation (instead of the full bedroom), it seems better to provide some actual floor space for standing, dressing, etc. when the beds are down.
travelingengineerIn my view, and in that of others here, the small roomettes with an enclosed toilet is too ghastly to consider, yet this type of accommodation is common on the Viewliners which apparently are mostly on the East Coast routes. Roomettes are cramped as it is.
Most of us were happy to put up with the various inconveniences noted just to have a very comfortable bed to sleep in. Even the hard mattresses of the slumber/sleeper-coaches were not so bad as to discourage the extra cost over a reclining coach seat. I never had any complaints about any Amtrak sleeping accomodations, assuming things were working properly. To me, some of the complaints noted above seem to come from people who have never spent more than five hours in the center seat of coach class three abrest seating on a jet or other commercial air line.
travelingengineerIn my view, and in that of others here, the small roomettes with an enclosed toilet is too ghastly to consider, yet this type of accommodation is common on the Viewliners which apparently are mostly on the East Coast routes. Roomettes are cramped as it is. The roomettes on the Superliner sleeping cars are also terribly cramped, often requiring dressing in the aisles until the beds are finally taken up. For those that can only afford the roomette accommodation (instead of the full bedroom), it seems better to provide some actual floor space for standing, dressing, etc. when the beds are down.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
aegrotatio I believe they wanted to match their plumbing to the much more widely available aircraft and watercraft vacuum systems which the hoppers weren't well suited to since they weren't really designed to accept the back-pressure of a vacuum system. I'm assuming that by "hopper toilet" you're referring to the old toilets that dump by gravity into holding tanks, whether by retrofit from a "dump on the tracks" system or a newer design that uses holding tanks which I think this industry refers to as "retention tanks." I'm too out-of-sorts to look it up, but a tour bus was recently fined several thousand dollars for dumping their tank on a metal grate bridge that just happened to have a boat under it. It involved someone famous.
This? http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcrights/5davematt2.html
Good comments, "daveklepper." Yes, Amtrak sleeping car accommodations absolutely offer a more pleasant and certainly more comfortable place to sit and sleep, along with the other amenities (free meals, newspapers, personal service, beverages, etc.). If affordable and time is not a constraint, this is the only way to travel.
As for as myself, I have traveled thousands of miles on airplanes and have finally given up totally on that kind of travel, regardless of purpose. Air travel is inhumane, though does get you to your destination quick.
Amtrak coach seats are fairly inexpensive, but (again as you say) you never know who is going to be located next to you for perhaps days at a time: cell phones, unsupervised children, computer keyboard clickety-clack, "excuse me, can I get past you to the aisle, please," disagreeable seatmates, various smells, rest rooms and even showers that leave much to be desired especially after a few days.
travelingengineer said: "Amtrak coach seats are fairly inexpensive,but again... you never know who is going to be located next to you ..."
Yes. Unfortunately, too many people have become such slobs, in their lack of consideration for others and in their personal dress, that coach travel by any mode is *** near intolerable. Older folks will remember when men wore sports jackets or suits to ride coach on the trains. Today, many coach passengers, whether air or rail, look like they belong on the bus. For me, if I can't afford or don't want to go first class, I drive. Period.
An aside: Is anybody else having trouble using the QUOTE function on the new forum? Just now I was unable to mechanically excerpt just the single line I wanted from travelingengineer.
travelingengineer Good comments, "daveklepper." Yes, Amtrak sleeping car accommodations absolutely offer a more pleasant and certainly more comfortable place to sit and sleep, along with the other amenities (free meals, newspapers, personal service, beverages, etc.). If affordable and time is not a constraint, this is the only way to travel. As for as myself, I have traveled thousands of miles on airplanes and have finally given up totally on that kind of travel, regardless of purpose. Air travel is inhumane, though does get you to your destination quick. Amtrak coach seats are fairly inexpensive, but (again as you say) you never know who is going to be located next to you for perhaps days at a time: cell phones, unsupervised children, computer keyboard clickety-clack, "excuse me, can I get past you to the aisle, please," disagreeable seatmates, various smells, rest rooms and even showers that leave much to be desired especially after a few days.
Worst one is snoring!
It seems that most every coach passenger these days boards with their own pillow(s) and blankets (and maybe teddy bears). Then in coach section, it looks like a high school "sleep-over." On the Southwest Chief last year, I noted that the Observation Car at night was populated by those who could not, or chose not to, sleep in their own chair - Is this "legal?" In the Observation Car, there are some multi-seats that can at least let you lie prone. But, if you can only afford coach, then you gotta do what you can.
BostonTrainGuy Anyone have any idea of what these new layouts are?
http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/DocsSpecs.aspx
The news wire of Aug 31 referring to Superliner layouts also has the proposed layout of the new "Viewliner" layout. Coach 70 seats, Business - 60, Cab car 68 seats as a NEC coach. Will be tested to 135MPH with operation speed of 125 MPH.
This layout does not give any reference to the present order of 130 cars announced earlier.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.