Is there any reason why only superliner equipment is used on AMTRAK routes west of Chicago?
greetings Kon
Kon
Modelling the BN 1970-1995
While most of the long distance trains west of Chicago are Superliners mostly because they are roomier and more comfortable, some of the shorter routes are Amfleet, such as the Hiawathas Chi - Milwaukee and the Illini through Illinois and some California Coast Services.
Superliners are use on the Capitol Limited and the Auto Train on the Eastern Route. The Superlines can't fit into the Tunnels into New York City to D.C. Superliners hold more people than the single level trains.
Clearances is a major reason...don't fit the bridges and tunnels of the east...but also marketing as it it thought the scenery is more worth the views plus the concept of long(er) distance train rides in the west. But I don't think a viewliner on the Hudson would increase the splendor!
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Visibility is certainly greater from the upper level and lower level gets right down to almost track level. However ther may be several advantages of bi-level equipment.
1. Single level corridor -/ 68 - 70 Bi-level 90 -- 96.
2. SL long dist 60 ; bi-level 74.
3. so corridor trains 4 bi-levels = ~ 5 single levels
4. LD trains 4 bi-levels = ~ 5 single level cars.
5. So to carry same number of passengers A 8 car bilevel ( ~ 640 ft) will not need as long a platform. In other reports the AMTRAK standard is a 600 ft platform so an 8 car train will be able to board revenue passengers without multiple stops since the rear car steps are usually closer to the engine. Would take a 10 car single level train to carry same number of passengers. Since many western LD trains are now running 10 -12 cars a second stop is still needed at some shorter platform stations .
6. I have never seen a report of each station's platform length -- just what posters in this forum have observed???
As noted in other posts, the primary reason Superliner equipment is not used on many of the eastern trains is because of the clearance problem getting into and out of New York. If it were not for the clearance problem, Amtrak would probably use Superliner equipment on all of its long distance trains or at least the ones that are on the road overnight.
Superliner equipment is more efficient than the single level equipment. It generates more bang for the buck. For example, a Superliner sleeper, as shown on Amtrak's webpage, has five bedrooms and ten roomettes up stairs. It also has four roomettes, one family bedroom, and one accessible bedroom down stairs. Assuming two people to a room, it can carry 42 passengers comfortably; it can carry 44 passengers if one assumes four people in the family bedroom. By comparison, a Viewliner sleeper has one accessible bedroom, two bedrooms, and 12 roomettes. It can carry 30 passengers comfortably.
The Superliner coaches are also more efficient than the single level coaches, although I don't have the numbers before me. I am sure someone else probably has them or can dig them out.
The Superliner roomettes are not very comfortable, especially if they are occupied by two people. In addition, if one has to go to the toilet in the middle of the night, he or she has to dress, at least partially, and paddle down the hallway to the toilet on the upper level or use one of the toilets on the lower level..
I find the seats in the Superliner coaches to be more comfortable than the seats in the roomettes, although I am long past the stage where I am going to sleep sitting up on an over night train. The risk of traveling coach class, especially on a long distance train, is that you find yourself next to a passenger like the woman who was thrown off the train for excessive use of a cell phone. It can make for a very unpleasant trip.
Sam1 I find the seats in the Superliner coaches to be more comfortable than the seats in the roomettes, although I am long past the stage where I am going to sleep sitting up on an over night train. The risk of traveling coach class, especially on a long distance train, is that you find yourself next to a passenger like the woman who was thrown off the train for excessive use of a cell phone. It can make for a very unpleasant trip.
Or Don Oltmann's proverbial fat person.
Seriously, now, there are a couple minor operational changes Amtrak could make so that overnight coach travel (Sam1, I am not saying you can't reserve your sleeper) more pleasant.
One is bathrooms. I don't know if this is a matter of bathroom technology or of staffing or of educating passengers to be less slovenly, but clean, dry restrooms for the entire journey, in my opinion, would make Amtrak more enticing to people who are trying it for the first time. I have heard all manners of accounts of how bathrooms on Amtrak become wet sloppy messes by the end of the journey -- maybe someone can correct me that these are isolated incidents -- but good restrooms are a cornerstone of a good rail experience.
The second is how conductors manage seats. I have heard accounts that a long-distance consist may have 4 coaches, but 3 coaches are "closed" and the remaining coach is used with every seat occupied.
Yes, during peak travel times one should expect to ride the distance with a seat mate, but during the off-peak times, why not spread the passengers around, especially since consists tend to be fixed and it costs more to switch the coaches in and out than the minor savings in fuel -- again, a much more comfortable travel experience.
I don't know who makes the operational decision, whether it is the conductors or Amtrak HQ, and to trail a bunch of coaches that are "closed" and cram the overnight passengers into one coach may save on cleaning and other operational costs, but again, at the expense of making it harder to sleep on the overnight train. On the other hand, this business of a crowded overnight coach and coaches closed off is something people have reported -- if people know differently they can speak up.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
blue streak 1 5. So to carry same number of passengers A 8 car bilevel ( ~ 640 ft) will not need as long a platform. In other reports the AMTRAK standard is a 600 ft platform so an 8 car train will be able to board revenue passengers without multiple stops since the rear car steps are usually closer to the engine. Would take a 10 car single level train to carry same number of passengers. Since many western LD trains are now running 10 -12 cars a second stop is still needed at some shorter platform stations .
Some trains (in the Midwest, at least) seem to only board and exit from one coach, even if the train is 4-5 cars and the platform is long enough to handle an 8 car train. I fail to understand such a method since it means the dwell time at any stop is much longer than needed.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Amtrak broke in the Superliners in 1979 between Chicago and Quincy Illinois ( Illinois Zephyr) and placed them on the Empire Builder in 1980. They were sorely needed. By 1979 the Heritage Fleet needed replacing or refurbishing. I recall the air conditioning on the North Coast Hiawatha broke down on a trip I took. The food was excellent; but it was over 90 in the diner. Amtrak did place long distance Amfleet coaches on some trains such as the Desert Wind but they lacked a diner. They were comfortable but the Desert Wind was a much better train with Superliners. The Desert Wind used an ex- Santa Fe Hi-level coach as a crew dormitory. The Superliners may have saved Amtrak.
On my recent trip from WV to LA Ca I had a roomette from Chicago to LA. The trip out was great....everything worked well, food was great...just a good trip. On the return trip my Superliner car was one that had been wrecked and rebuilt. The A/C worked at the very minimum, (good thing it was still cool outside) the PA system was out, not a huge thing but made everything difficult, and the toilets failed for about 6 hours. Amtrak needs funding to repair, replace and upgrade its fleet. I still loved my trip, police, delays and all.
6000 miles on Amtrak in words and pictures www.currtail.com
In my opinion, the Superliners are much more comfortable than whatever they use on the Northeast Corridor on the regional trains. They are not bad, but the Superliner coach seats are quite comfortable (at least for a relatively short trip (e.g. Galesburg to Chicago).
The Roomettes are really not comfortable at all - at least it assured relatively clean bathrooms - and really, during most of the daylight hours on the trip we took, we were in the lounge or the diner anyway.
Some Superliners are over 30 years old. No wonder!
I know those are long distances and you want comfort, but can they remake things to exchange some comfort for more speed and more safety?
The priority should be safe transit on a dedicated guideway away from grade crossings and freight trains. Then the trains could be run faster, like commuter trains, so people can use Amtrak like a commuter service, everywhere, not just the Northwest corridor.
Andrew
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did. I have ridden the Canadian when it was originally CP and went via Calgary and have ridden under Via on three trips and have to report that this train beats anything we have here and that includes the Superliner equipped trains and I have traveled on every Superliner route.
It would have saved the taxpayers millions of dollars to rebuild the old Budd equipment and be using that today on some of the Superliner routes. The California Zephyr would be a perfect train for passengers today with five or six Budd domes for the passengers. I rode many of the pre Amtrak trains Empire Builder, North Coast Limited, City of San Francisco, Super Chief, Sunset Ltd. Cascade, California Zephyr and others and except for the Sunset most had domes and the lounges on the Superliners can't compare as they are lacking that forward view. If Canada was able to rebuild the Budd cars we could have done the same here and saved the American taxpayer millions. But Amtrak was to anxious to retire the Heritage cars and put Superliners in service as replacements and I can remember all of the problems with plumbing etc. that plaqued the Superliner ones, it wasn't until they were rebuilt to superliner two standards that they finally became decent pieces of equipment.
It would do every Superliner fan a good lesson to take one trip on the Canadian and compare the two and I would almost bet that 90% of the passengers would prefer the Budd cars.
I also believe that if the accident in Nevada had occurred with Budd cars instead of the Superliners damage to the train would have been less. This accident destroyed two Superliners and heavily damaged a third. I think the old Budd cars were of heavier construction than the Superliers as far as the Stainless steel car sides and I doubt the truck would have penetrated the Budd cars.
Al - in - Stockton
"Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did. "
Two words.
Retention. Toilets.
And retention toilets couldn't have been a part of refurbishment/rebuild of the Budd (and other similar) heritage cars? And still have provided an as-good or better product at less cost, for at least part of the fleet (which is what I gather would be the case, from those who have ridden both Superliners and the Canadian)?
Decsions on that were based on marketing research and investment accounting. It may in fact have been cheaper to buy new based on investment accounting. And I believe I read somewhere in the pasat that Superliners were preferred by passengers over regular coach. As for operation, one man one car instead of two and two; one car two carloads; I am sure there is a lot of thought and research into these decsions before being made. LIke the time I told the plumber his guys should use bigger shovels and he pointed out that they got more done, were less tired, and took fewer breaks with the standard spade than with the larger shovel I suggested. I have found out that those that do usually know what they are doing and why.
henry6 ... I have found out that those that do usually know what they are doing and why.
... I have found out that those that do usually know what they are doing and why.
You are so right, Henry -- at least, most of the time.
The problem is, so many seem to believe that those who set up & first ran Amtrak really did not know what they were doing (or did, but had alterior motives other than actually preserving and expanding US passenger rail), so that trying to second-guess their early decisions, with the gift of hindsight, feels so easy and justified!
I don't know how much those who began Amtrak didn't know about what they were doing but they were handed a bunch of engines, and cars and old schedules and maps and told to figure it out without help. It was a big job to swallow overnight especially when some put in charge were not railroaders but business executives and managers. There is a feeling in this country that a salesman can sell anythng he's given even if he knows nothing about the product and anybody who has managed anyone can manage everyone; experience in a given field is not considerd
passengerfan Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did.
Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did.
Perhaps they should have. But the difference was that Amtrak had to have cars for several (more than 4) western train routes, while VIA only had to equip one. Amtrak would still have had to buy new equipment.
[quote user="passengerfan"]
[/quote
I only suspect that the decision to not rebuild the domes was rooted in several issues.
1. To carry the same number of passengers would have required a train length of 18 - 22 single level cars depending on season and route.
2. When AMTRAK decided on HEP and later the rebuilding of the Heritage cars they used the commmuter RR standards (probably C&NW and BN).
3. This was 480V 3 phase AC with current capability of about 200 amps through the cables. This limited AMTRAK to about 14 -16 (?) cars.
4. VIA on the other hand decided to use 575V and 300 Amps (?). This gave VIA capability to run their 24 car trains today.
5. The SDP-40s and first F-40s (how many ?) also had a HEP capability of 500KW (?).
6. When AMTRAK decided to re equip AUTO Train. The Superliner was chosen as single level rebuilt passenger cars would limit # of cars for AT.
7. The AT Superliners rapidly reached their limit and all indications are that at all phase 3 rebuilds of all cars (SL & BL) have higher capacity cabling (?). That has allowed Auto Train to go to 18 passenger cars including 3 diners.
8. The limit now appears that most (?) locos do not have the power capacity for the higher HEP load (?).
9. The new electrics on order do have that capability but exactly what?.
10. Does anyone have the load capability of the various cars, locos, and motors not only as built but rebuilt? Suspect AEM-7 DCs have less capacity the AEM-ACs.
I've been on the warpath about Amtrak boarding practices at stations and resulting unacceptable dwell time for a long while. That, and the problem of packing passengers in as few cars as needed, can be resolved with computer-distributed car and seat assignment. Airlines do it; so how hard would it be to modify software for Amtrak use?
Here's the real deal: hep limits train size to 11 cars without getting into the complication of a second auxiliary power car (or locomotive) at the end or middle of the train. And more passengers can be carried on bi-levels than on a single-level train of a fixed length.
I also suspect that total train resistance for Superliners is less per seat; and this equates to an energy savings.
All the empty windows with packing passengers in as few cars as possible isn't very reassuring to a public that is skeptical about whether Amtrak is needed. Within reason, I also can understand the savings from turning off the lights and hvac and the decision to deadhead cars instead of switching them in and out.
Using all of that available computer-distributed car and seat assignment software, can't all of the passengers boarding or disembarking at a particular intermediate station be assigned to one or two particuilar cars, and spot those cars at the shorter platforms? I have seen this technique used in Europe.
Paul Milenkovic "Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did. " Two words. Retention. Toilets.
Two more words, Asbestos Insulation
Don U. TCA 73-5735
That may be possible. I suppose blocks of space could be held throughout the train for such small stops with fewer than about five boardings. That number needs some evaluation with respect to dwell time which should be kept under a minute, even using a lift.
DMUinCT Paul Milenkovic: "Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did. " Two words. Retention. Toilets. Two more words, Asbestos Insulation
Paul Milenkovic: "Amtraks biggest mistake was not keeping the domes and many of the other Budd cars and giving them rebuilds like Via Rail did. " Two words. Retention. Toilets.
With all respect, toilets and asbestos issues were not insurmountable as Canada has shown. I believe the priorities for capacity and hep were the decision-drivers, especially for the Everywhere Zephyr, Empire Builder, and to some extent the Sunset/Eagle.
If Superliner bedrooms can have toilets, so can economy rooms. This might allow more revenue space on the lower level. I think it's important for the future to have an entrance door in the center of the car. More on that some other time.
It seems the Zephyr sections with limited capacity west of Salt Lake City were especially uneconomical and couldn't meet demand, and running separate trains would be a burden on capacity of the mostly single-tracked Denver - Salt Lake City route. Amtrak chose to focus on Chicago - Oakland with alternatives from Chicago to Southern California and the Pacific Northwest. The Desert Wind would restore much-needed service to Las Vegas and provide inter-regional connectivity; but this would add another train through Cajon. While the Pioneer also would provide inter-regional connectivity, there only are a few small intermediate markets of opportunity. It seems the missing link would be Denver - Fort Worth/Dallas - Houston - New Orleans.
Via Rails Budd cars have had all Abestos Insulation removed during there rebuilds and all have retention toilets.
The Canadian is certainly a very fine train, but it is a very limited service compared to Amtrak long distance trains. It carries only a few coaches and the sleeping accommodations are priced so high that only upscale foreign tourists are likely to use them. It's very good for what it is, an upscale tourist experience, but is not actually useful as transportation.
RvW, Iowa
Bjorn88 The Canadian is certainly a very fine train, but it is a very limited service compared to Amtrak long distance trains. It carries only a few coaches and the sleeping accommodations are priced so high that only upscale foreign tourists are likely to use them. It's very good for what it is, an upscale tourist experience, but is not actually useful as transportation. RvW, Iowa
As an adjunct to the tourist market, the Canadian still affords transportation opportunities along it's route however narrow its reach may be.
VIA also uses rebuilt Budd coaches extensively on their primary "Corridor" (Windsor-Toronto-Montreal) routes, not just on the Canadian.
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.