Trains.com

New Viewliners to have "...modern interiors with better layouts..."

14296 views
63 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, September 17, 2010 10:37 PM

Ed, I'm with you on the matter of "securing" the curtains. It seems that curtains in almost every room we have occupied had been replaced--and there was no effort made to make certain that the two sides of the velcro strips matched. Also, the system of holding the curtains open needs to be reviewed.

I have also had some difficulty in securing shower curtains so they would keep water in the shower room;the snaps do not always match as one would expect them to come together.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 6 posts
Posted by elocklin on Friday, September 17, 2010 5:08 PM

I'm sure it's futile but my hopes for these new cars are that they don't include inside windows facing the aisle.  The old shades broke to the point of no repair and the curtains hanging from either the door or the door jamb were almost ineffectual.  It would help if the velcro strips would match correctly to hold the curtain closed but many times they were incorrectly placed to no avail.  The old 10-6's never had windows facing the aisles.  Why install them on the Viewliners?

 

Ed Locklin at mp367.

 

 

 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 9:33 PM

Hah! the Return to Thread button still leads into a circle that posts again--despite the message that duplicate posts are not allowed.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 9:31 PM

BostonTrainGuy

I have to disagree here.  Nothing is better than a private room.  The snoring alone is enough to ruin an overnight train trip.  Give me my own personal space.

And there is the tale of the man who kept everyone else in the car awake for a few hours--until he suddenly snorted and then was silent. whereupon one of the other passengers said, "Thank God, He's dead."

However, the walls between private rooms, especially those that can be moved aside to make a suite, are not absolutely soundproof.

And, when I slept in an open section, I was not disturbed by other passengers.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 9:30 PM

BostonTrainGuy

I have to disagree here.  Nothing is better than a private room.  The snoring alone is enough to ruin an overnight train trip.  Give me my own personal space.

And there is the tale of the man who kept everyone else in the car awake for a few hours--until he suddenly snorted and then was silent. whereupon one of the other passengers said, "Thank God, He's dead."

However, the walls between private rooms, especially those that can be moved aside to make a suite, are not absolutely soundproof.

And, when I slept in an open section, I was not disturbed by other passengers.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 78 posts
Posted by BostonTrainGuy on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:48 PM

I have to disagree here.  Nothing is better than a private room.  The snoring alone is enough to ruin an overnight train trip.  Give me my own personal space.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 4:36 PM

Maglev

By the way, I should mention that the upper berth in deluxe bedrooms and "F" rooms is easier to access.

Yes, a ladder, having more rungs to reach the same height, is much safer than the "steps," which are too few for the height to be reached.

Quoting Maglev again: "Open sections have a bed even wider than the lower in Amtrak's deluxe bedrooms, and the daytime table is also spacious.They are better than the finest airliner accommodations.  I believe that modern materials and design copuld come up with some type of movable wall that offers more privacy than a curtain."

Yes, even the Superliner "roomette" berths, with no sanitary facilities, are narrower than the berths in an open section. The Pullman roomette berth was almost as wide as a section berth, but not quite wide enough for two adults. When used for military transport, a section would have two men in the lower berth and one in the upper (it's difficult enough for the inside man in a lower to climb over the outside man; imagine the situation of two in an upper). Also, a Pullman table is Magnificent when you compare it with an Amtrak table (whether in a bedroom or "roomette").

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 4:27 PM

Quoting CSSHEGEWISCH: " It was mentioned in another thread that since Amtrak is stuck with long-distance trains, it should consider sleeping car arrangements similar to those for first-class passengers on trans-Pacific flights.  It's a concept that most travelers are familiar with and may be more in tune with the current travel market than a lot of the passenger train advocates care to admit.

Can you, for the benifit of someone who has not flown overnight in 34 years, describe the sleeping arrangements for first-class Passengers on trans-Pacific flights? I am utterly unfamiliar with such. Thanks.

Johnny

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Near Burlington, WA
  • 380 posts
Posted by Maglev on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:36 AM

By the way, I should mention that the upper berth in deluxe bedrooms and "F" rooms is easier to access.

"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Near Burlington, WA
  • 380 posts
Posted by Maglev on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:32 AM

Open sections have a bed even wider than the lower in Amtrak's deluxe bedrooms, and the daytime table is also spacious.They are better than the finest airliner accommodations.  I believe that modern materials and design copuld come up with some type of movable wall that offers more privacy than a curtain.

 

"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:22 AM

I would think that Amtrak is wasting its money on sleeping cars.  It was mentioned in another thread that since Amtrak is stuck with long-distance trains, it should consider sleeping car arrangements similar to those for first-class passengers on trans-Pacific flights.  It's a concept that most travelers are familiar with and may be more in tune with the current travel market than a lot of the passenger train advocates care to admit.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 4:49 PM

Quoting Maglev: "Who has ever slept in the top berth of either a Viewliner or Superliner?  I am agile, 5'10" and weigh 145 pounds.  I find access to the Superliner upper difficult and the Viewliner downright life-threatening.  I prefer open sections.  Anyway, I am glad to hear the illuminated warning signs will be civilized a bit."

I have, but not often or of late. My only night in an upper in a Viewliner roomette was three years ago, and my wife and I decided that we are too old to try a roomette again. We rode Washington to Jacksonville in one, and we tried to get a bedroom for the return, but ended up in two roomettes (one in each sleeper). My last night in a Superliner upper was in 1989; since then every time we have had a bedroom we have shared the lower berth (a bit crowded, perhaps, but much safer. On VIA, (except for the Renaissance cars), the upper in a bedroom or compartment (when we had a drawing room, we both slept in lowers) is not really bad, since they were built by people who knew what they were doing. The bedrooms in Renaissance cars come short of Amtrak bedrooms.

As to sections, I spent several nights in uppers, when they were available--always in lightweight cars, and each upper had its own ladder so it was not necessary to call the porter when you had to get up in the night. I never felt insecure in a Pullman- or old Budd-built upper. Of course, the old berths (even the lowers) had real mattresses, which were much more comfortable than the pads that Amtrak provides.

Johnny

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 12:00 PM

blue streak 1

 

 BostonTrainGuy:

 

More reading of the design specs brought this to my attention:

"All passenger revenue seating locations in the Coach car, Cab car and Business Class car shall use a fixed (non-rotating) reclining passenger seat, which is appropriate for Amtrak Intercity service and arranged as paired seats."

 

 

 

You will find in the seating diagrams of both the single level and bi-level car diagrams that the seating will be to have all seats face the center of the car (appproximately 9 rows facing each way). Isn't that the way seating is generally done in Europe?

I suppose that means that all seating will not have you facing the car end bulkhead or the restroom and the row closest to the bulkhead will not have vision cut off? Both types of cars will have an energy absorbing table at the location where the facing seats meet.The table will actually not be at the car center but slightly off set due to the restroom at one end.

I wouldn't place much credence on those plan view drawings....

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

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Near Burlington, WA
  • 380 posts
Posted by Maglev on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:51 AM

Wow!  I actually read the whole thread,  and as a rail fan and waste treatment technologist, I can't help but diving in!!

Who has ever slept in the top berth of either a Viewliner or Superliner?  I am agile, 5'10" and weigh 145 pounds.  I find access to the Superliner upper difficult and the Viewliner downright life-threatening.  I prefer open sections.  Anyway, I am glad to hear the illuminated warning signs will be civilized a bit.

Any chance of an all-bedroom model with a little first-class lounge?  remember having caviar once on an Amtrak train to Florida around 1976. (We may have wandered into a private car??) How about a smoking coach / baggage combine?  Probably even more legal barriers than pooping on the ballast... 

Me thinks a jake under the bed is gross.  But I am one of those rare beings who wears a jacket when traveling and cleans the toilet room when I'm done.

"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 8, 2010 6:04 PM

Deggesty

 dakotafred:

 aegrotatio:
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 intended the toilets that flushed directly onto the ROW. Perhaps "hopper toilet" is the wrong designation for these.

Or, perhaps, hoppers that needed to be cleaned out manually? Such facilities were in existence on some commuter equipment, as I recall. Though, when one says, "hopper toilets," I do think of dumping directly on the real estate.

Now for the official word on "hopper toilets." In looking through the 1966 edition of The Official Register of Passenger Train Equipment (I was referring to it for a thread on another forum), I discovered that "hopper toilets" are not flushable. One railroad (there were others with the two types of toilet), the CNJ, for example, described the equipment of several coaches as "Electric generator, 1 dry hopper toilet, no washing facilities," the equipment of another group as "Electric generator, 2 flush toilets, 2 wash basins," and there were variations, such as "Head end lighted," and varying numbers of toilets and of wash basins. Of course, back then, a "flush toilet" exhausted directly to the real estate.

Johnny

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, September 7, 2010 9:50 AM

BostonTrainGuy

More reading of the design specs brought this to my attention:

"All passenger revenue seating locations in the Coach car, Cab car and Business Class car shall use a fixed (non-rotating) reclining passenger seat, which is appropriate for Amtrak Intercity service and arranged as paired seats."

You will find in the seating diagrams of both the single level and bi-level car diagrams that the seating will be to have all seats face the center of the car (appproximately 9 rows facing each way). Isn't that the way seating is generally done in Europe?

I suppose that means that all seating will not have you facing the car end bulkhead or the restroom and the row closest to the bulkhead will not have vision cut off? Both types of cars will have an energy absorbing table at the location where the facing seats meet.The table will actually not be at the car center but slightly off set due to the restroom at one end.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, September 7, 2010 8:52 AM

BostonTrainGuy

More reading of the design specs brought this to my attention:

"All passenger revenue seating locations in the Coach car, Cab car and Business Class car shall use a fixed (non-rotating) reclining passenger seat, which is appropriate for Amtrak Intercity service and arranged as paired seats."

 

Does that mean the can't be turned or just that the customer can't rotate them?  I think this means seats come in pairs (window + aisle) and the occupant can recline them.  What the spec precludes, I think,  is old parlor car seating - single, rotating seats.  

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

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 78 posts
Say it ain't so, Joe! New Amtrak cars to have backward seating!
Posted by BostonTrainGuy on Monday, September 6, 2010 8:55 PM

More reading of the design specs brought this to my attention:

"All passenger revenue seating locations in the Coach car, Cab car and Business Class car shall use a fixed (non-rotating) reclining passenger seat, which is appropriate for Amtrak Intercity service and arranged as paired seats."

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • 6 posts
Posted by Jay Wes on Friday, September 3, 2010 3:46 PM

Yeah Baby, You don't know the Half of itnow the two side aisle seats are 3 and 4 middle seats are 5. Lets ses set in thmiddle of 5passengers, who to disture to get up. Locked intoseats for an hour during takoff and then landing.

Ticket agents on roller skates running around from selling tickets to loading airplanes. My last airline flight was a trip through travelers (uNOWHAT).

Mt two trips to NewYork and one trip to boston were crowded at times but pleasent sightseeing tours.

I was happy with Roomettes used in superliners and hertige coarches.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:41 PM

For the benefit of anyone who is wondering, I posted each of my replies once--the system multiplied each one when I attempted to go back to the thread; it kept me in a circle. Thumbs Down

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 5:08 PM

oltmannd
 travelingengineer:

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.

The roomettes in the 10-6 sleepers were designed so that you could get changed standing on the bed. There was over 6' of space from the top of the mattress to the ceiling and the luggage shelve was easily reachable from that position.

Of course, if you are the only passenger in an Amtrak "roomette," you can stand on the lower bert (unless you like to have the upper berth down) to dress.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 5:03 PM

oltmannd
 travelingengineer:

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.

The roomettes in the 10-6 sleepers were designed so that you could get changed standing on the bed. There was over 6' of space from the top of the mattress to the ceiling and the luggage shelve was easily reachable from that position.

Of course, if you are the only passenger in an Amtrak "roomette," you can stand on the lower bert (unless you like to have the upper berth down) to dress.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 5:02 PM

oltmannd
 travelingengineer:

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.

The roomettes in the 10-6 sleepers were designed so that you could get changed standing on the bed. There was over 6' of space from the top of the mattress to the ceiling and the luggage shelve was easily reachable from that position.

Of course, if you are the only passenger in an Amtrak "roomette," you can stand on the lower bert (unless you like to have the upper berth down) to dress.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 5:01 PM

dakotafred

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.

I blocked an excerpt from dakotafred's, post, but the system thought I should put the whole post in.Thumbs Down

Yes, if you can find them, look at the advertisements railroads had back in the sixties, showing people on their trains. We have a framed UP advertisement on our bedroom wall--it shows people in a dome dining room and people in a first class dome--all dressed in what was considered decent attire at the time, and beneath the two pictures is this: "People like you...and people you like travel Domeliner...to and from the West." We have that on the wall because we met in a UP dome.

Also, from the same time period, another UP ad showed both a first class dome and a coach class dome. All in the first class dome were well-dressed, and those in the coach dome were dressed informally but neatly.

In an article on NY-Florida travel in a fifties issue of Trains, Dave Morgan commented that many coach passengers were dressed informally--but they were neatly dressed.

Now, you can see people--even in sleepers--dressed as though they were spending the day at home, well away from the public. I will not attempt to describe the various attires we saw, even in first class waiting rooms, on our trip this past spring; I do not really want to remember them.

As to belonging on buses, perhaps they really belong at home--or out camping, away from "civilization."

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 2:58 PM

dakotafred

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.

I blocked an excerpt from dakotafred's, post, but the system thought I should put the whole post in.Thumbs Down

Yes, if you can find them, look at the advertisements railroads had back in the sixties, showing people on their trains. We have a framed UP advertisement on our bedroom wall--it shows people in a dome dining room and people in a first class dome--all dressed in what was considered decent attire at the time, and beneath the two pictures is this: "People like you...and people you like travel Domeliner...to and from the West." We have that on the wall because we met in a UP dome.

Also, from the same time period, another UP ad showed both a first class dome and a coach class dome. All in the first class dome were well-dressed, and those in the coach dome were dressed informally but neatly.

In an article on NY-Florida travel in a fifties issue of Trains, Dave Morgan commented that many coach passengers were dressed informally--but they were neatly dressed.

Now, you can see people--even in sleepers--dressed as though they were spending the day at home, well away from the public. I will not attempt to describe the various attires we saw, even in first class waiting rooms, on our trip this past spring; I do not really want to remember them.

As to belonging on buses, perhaps they really belong at home--or out camping, away from "civilization."

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 2:41 PM

oltmannd
 travelingengineer:

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.

The roomettes in the 10-6 sleepers were designed so that you could get changed standing on the bed. There was over 6' of space from the top of the mattress to the ceiling and the luggage shelve was easily reachable from that position.

Of course, if you are the only passenger in an Amtrak "roomette," you can stand on the lower bert (unless you like to have the upper berth down) to dress.

Johnny

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 2:30 PM

blue streak 1

 

 oltmannd:

 

 

 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. 

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/DocsSpecs.aspx

 

 

Wow.  .  Lots of interesting things in the specs.

First thing I noticed was that the trucks were to be exact - down to interchangeable parts - duplicates of the Viewliner trucks.  But, they are to be qualified for 125 mph whereas the existing cars are only good for 110 mph.

Well at least one less set of parts to have on hand. That is interesting on the present 110MPH Viewliners. Wonder if AMTRAK will try to retro qualify them to 125??

  Hmmm.    And, the ride quality test specs (carbody acceleration over the trucks) are only for speeds up to 90 mph on class 5 track.

Guess it will rock and roll at higher speeds?

Second thing is that these cars are being built like tanks with repair-ability in mind.

RE YOU Speaking about the 40 Yr life required?

Third thing is that they are to have the general shape of Acela and prohibited from having the shape of Amfleet.

This is interesting as I completely understand about not wanting the shape of Amfleets. Another poster asks about window spacing. The problem with placing windows for one seating configuration is if the seat pitch is changed for going to/from NEC 89 seats, business class, LD seating makes window placement almost impossible to serve all 3 configurations.  

 

 

Can't imagine what the retrofit would be?  There was some mention of better vertical damping in the spec.  Might be a simple thing.

I would think you'd do window placing around LD seating, since those folk would be most inconvenienced by a lousy view.  Let the short haul people get what they get....  It's good to have the seats on a track so pitch is adjustable

The ride quality stuff is mostly about the safety of the ride - what max lateral and vertical accel you'll allow.  The Amtrak spec is very tight.  I've never tested a freight loco that can meet it - at 60 mph.  Amtrak also specs out an ISO spec on human tolerance of ride which is good.  

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

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 1:11 PM

oltmannd

 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. 

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/DocsSpecs.aspx

 

Wow.  .  Lots of interesting things in the specs.

First thing I noticed was that the trucks were to be exact - down to interchangeable parts - duplicates of the Viewliner trucks.  But, they are to be qualified for 125 mph whereas the existing cars are only good for 110 mph.

Well at least one less set of parts to have on hand. That is interesting on the present 110MPH Viewliners. Wonder if AMTRAK will try to retro qualify them to 125??

  Hmmm.    And, the ride quality test specs (carbody acceleration over the trucks) are only for speeds up to 90 mph on class 5 track.

Guess it will rock and roll at higher speeds?

Second thing is that these cars are being built like tanks with repair-ability in mind.

RE YOU Speaking about the 40 Yr life required?

Third thing is that they are to have the general shape of Acela and prohibited from having the shape of Amfleet.

This is interesting as I completely understand about not wanting the shape of Amfleets. Another poster asks about window spacing. The problem with placing windows for one seating configuration is if the seat pitch is changed for going to/from NEC 89 seats, business class, LD seating makes window placement almost impossible to serve all 3 configurations.  

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, September 1, 2010 11:17 AM

BostonTrainGuy

The cab cars look like the original Metroliners to me . . . though not as round I assume.  Also the double deckers are 10' 6" wide which would be slightly wider than the existing Amtrak Superliners.

 Those drawing were examples.  I believe the specs say the builder has to submit drawings.  There is some qualitative guidance in the spec - should have shape and windows like Acela.  Should not have shape like Amfleet, for example.

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

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