BaltACD Yep - Mom & Dad are control freaks. They bought sonny boy the Taurus, really didn't understand why he had to have such a high tech piece of machinery as the Tarus when a go-ped would have sufficed for getting from A to B. They interrupt him every time he gets a paying job, reinforce the apron strings every time sonny boy thinks about trying to get his life together...Mom & Dad are sorry they ever had sonny boy and do what they can to defeat his every dream and aspiration and are offended that sonny boy isn't thanking them profusely for the pittance they spend on him that keeps him moving at a subsistence level. Parents raise their children to succeed or fail. Those that raise their children to be dependent on the parents for their continuing existence have raised children that are failures. HSR is not for today's traffic levels - but we need to get moving today if we are going to be able to handle the transportation needs of 2020 - 2030 - 2040 and beyond.
Yep - Mom & Dad are control freaks. They bought sonny boy the Taurus, really didn't understand why he had to have such a high tech piece of machinery as the Tarus when a go-ped would have sufficed for getting from A to B. They interrupt him every time he gets a paying job, reinforce the apron strings every time sonny boy thinks about trying to get his life together...Mom & Dad are sorry they ever had sonny boy and do what they can to defeat his every dream and aspiration and are offended that sonny boy isn't thanking them profusely for the pittance they spend on him that keeps him moving at a subsistence level.
Parents raise their children to succeed or fail. Those that raise their children to be dependent on the parents for their continuing existence have raised children that are failures.
HSR is not for today's traffic levels - but we need to get moving today if we are going to be able to handle the transportation needs of 2020 - 2030 - 2040 and beyond.
In the words of "Dr. Phil" McGraws, the passenger trains advocacy community needs to ask itself, "How is that working out for you?" The community can make excuses for Amtrak, and yes, there are plenty of excuses, "Amtrak being underfunded since its inception", "Congress engages in too much interference", "passenger trains never made or can make a profit" are popular talking points, just as there are excuses made for people.
I am not quite parsing "that raise their children to be dependent on the parents." Are you saying that with enough initial funding, Amtrak could be no longer reliant on Federal subsidy? That is in contradiction with others who reason that passenger trains require permanent subsidy and it is foolish to believe otherwise?
Finally about needing to HSR today to be ready for transportation needs 10-20-30 years hence, people were talking back in the 1960s of a transportation crisis that required high-speed ground transportation modes. Transportation may be in crisis today what with the road congestion and state of airline travel people complain about. But just as I got called out for observing that our national priority is and will continue to be health care, maybe I will get called out again for observing that lack of an HSR network is not at the root for our social ills relating to income inequality, the legacy of mistreatment of people for their race, and disparity of outcome in our education system.
I believe there are ways that we could make society better by having better trains, jobs to build the trains, although those jobs will all probably requires skills, a better society for being able to get around a little easier in some markets and situation. But I hardly think that trains are a cure-all for all that ails us, and I probably part with the advocacy community in that I don't think that trains are an existential requirement, that if we don't build them, we are all doomed to failure.
This thread started with Don Oltmann suggesting that maybe Amtrak could follow the example of France in renovating some rolling stock rather than taking what little capital money they have to scrap the old stuff and buy new. But suggestions along those line are met with so much criticism.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul Milenkovic BaltACD: The facts remain that the TGV is going through it's 'mid-life crisis' rebuild and US efforts have yet the reach the sonogram stage of a pregnancy...in fact the parties involved are still arguing about who will buy the 1st round of drinks on the initial date, let alone what to do for dinner and how to end the evening. Following Dave "Phoebe Vet"'s reasoning, should you be called out for bringing the controversial new State of Virginia law into the discussion? Sonograms, excuse me? You are following the reasoning that if a man or a woman reaches middle age and haven't got married and had children that there is something "wrong" with them. Does every adult person need to get married and have kids? Does every industrial country need to have HSR? And if Amtrak is a single guy whom all the busy-bodies think should start dating if not already be settled down with three kids, I am not the person arguing about whether the man or the woman pays on the first date. I am the uncle saying that Amtrak drinks a little too much and is a little bit too loose with the little money he brings in, and that a lot of folks are making excuses for Amtrak that he is exploited at work and ought to be paid a whole lot more. I am the person saying that if Amtrak managed the money he had instead of sitting around wanting the world to be handed to him, maybe there would be more women interest in an offer of going out on a date. And the original topic of this thread is that the rich guy over there, prosperous and happily married whereas our guy is still living in Mom and Dad's basement playing video game, that rich guy isn't trading a car in every few years but has figured out how to keep his car on the road. OK, the rich guy is driving an older Mercedes whereas our guy is driving a beater Taurus, but if our guy took care of his car, he could save up his money to buy a nicer one. What I am also saying is that our guy has a lot of friends making all manners of excuses for him, buying into his story of a cruel boss and having had bad breaks in life. If you really wanted to help the dude, you would listen to the some of the people who are telling you what they honestly think about him, and you would stop being a facilitator of his prolonged adolescence that he is now past 40 years old, single, and in a dead-end job. At least you would stop buying into his excuses regarding the breaks and advantages everyone else is getting. Yep - Mom & Dad are control freaks. They bought sonny boy the Taurus, really didn't understand why he had to have such a high tech piece of machinery as the Tarus when a go-ped would have sufficed for getting from A to B. They interrupt him every time he gets a paying job, reinforce the apron strings every time sonny boy thinks about trying to get his life together...Mom & Dad are sorry they ever had sonny boy and do what they can to defeat his every dream and aspiration and are offended that sonny boy isn't thanking them profusely for the pittance they spend on him that keeps him moving at a subsistence level. Parents raise their children to succeed or fail. Those that raise their children to be dependent on the parents for their continuing existence have raised children that are failures. HSR is not for today's traffic levels - but we need to get moving today if we are going to be able to handle the transportation needs of 2020 - 2030 - 2040 and beyond. Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply
Paul Milenkovic BaltACD: The facts remain that the TGV is going through it's 'mid-life crisis' rebuild and US efforts have yet the reach the sonogram stage of a pregnancy...in fact the parties involved are still arguing about who will buy the 1st round of drinks on the initial date, let alone what to do for dinner and how to end the evening. Following Dave "Phoebe Vet"'s reasoning, should you be called out for bringing the controversial new State of Virginia law into the discussion? Sonograms, excuse me? You are following the reasoning that if a man or a woman reaches middle age and haven't got married and had children that there is something "wrong" with them. Does every adult person need to get married and have kids? Does every industrial country need to have HSR? And if Amtrak is a single guy whom all the busy-bodies think should start dating if not already be settled down with three kids, I am not the person arguing about whether the man or the woman pays on the first date. I am the uncle saying that Amtrak drinks a little too much and is a little bit too loose with the little money he brings in, and that a lot of folks are making excuses for Amtrak that he is exploited at work and ought to be paid a whole lot more. I am the person saying that if Amtrak managed the money he had instead of sitting around wanting the world to be handed to him, maybe there would be more women interest in an offer of going out on a date. And the original topic of this thread is that the rich guy over there, prosperous and happily married whereas our guy is still living in Mom and Dad's basement playing video game, that rich guy isn't trading a car in every few years but has figured out how to keep his car on the road. OK, the rich guy is driving an older Mercedes whereas our guy is driving a beater Taurus, but if our guy took care of his car, he could save up his money to buy a nicer one. What I am also saying is that our guy has a lot of friends making all manners of excuses for him, buying into his story of a cruel boss and having had bad breaks in life. If you really wanted to help the dude, you would listen to the some of the people who are telling you what they honestly think about him, and you would stop being a facilitator of his prolonged adolescence that he is now past 40 years old, single, and in a dead-end job. At least you would stop buying into his excuses regarding the breaks and advantages everyone else is getting.
The facts remain that the TGV is going through it's 'mid-life crisis' rebuild and US efforts have yet the reach the sonogram stage of a pregnancy...in fact the parties involved are still arguing about who will buy the 1st round of drinks on the initial date, let alone what to do for dinner and how to end the evening.
Following Dave "Phoebe Vet"'s reasoning, should you be called out for bringing the controversial new State of Virginia law into the discussion? Sonograms, excuse me?
You are following the reasoning that if a man or a woman reaches middle age and haven't got married and had children that there is something "wrong" with them. Does every adult person need to get married and have kids? Does every industrial country need to have HSR?
And if Amtrak is a single guy whom all the busy-bodies think should start dating if not already be settled down with three kids, I am not the person arguing about whether the man or the woman pays on the first date. I am the uncle saying that Amtrak drinks a little too much and is a little bit too loose with the little money he brings in, and that a lot of folks are making excuses for Amtrak that he is exploited at work and ought to be paid a whole lot more. I am the person saying that if Amtrak managed the money he had instead of sitting around wanting the world to be handed to him, maybe there would be more women interest in an offer of going out on a date.
And the original topic of this thread is that the rich guy over there, prosperous and happily married whereas our guy is still living in Mom and Dad's basement playing video game, that rich guy isn't trading a car in every few years but has figured out how to keep his car on the road. OK, the rich guy is driving an older Mercedes whereas our guy is driving a beater Taurus, but if our guy took care of his car, he could save up his money to buy a nicer one.
What I am also saying is that our guy has a lot of friends making all manners of excuses for him, buying into his story of a cruel boss and having had bad breaks in life. If you really wanted to help the dude, you would listen to the some of the people who are telling you what they honestly think about him, and you would stop being a facilitator of his prolonged adolescence that he is now past 40 years old, single, and in a dead-end job. At least you would stop buying into his excuses regarding the breaks and advantages everyone else is getting.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD The facts remain that the TGV is going through it's 'mid-life crisis' rebuild and US efforts have yet the reach the sonogram stage of a pregnancy...in fact the parties involved are still arguing about who will buy the 1st round of drinks on the initial date, let alone what to do for dinner and how to end the evening.
Most airport construction, including the enhancement of existing facilities, is funded through the issuance of municipal or tax free bonds by the governing airport authority. In addition, the FAA's airport improvements program makes grants and loans to select airports to help improve their capabilities. In all cases the cost of the improvements are capitalized and paid for by user fees.
The ability to finance an airport with municipal bonds as opposed to fully taxable bonds results in a lower interest rate and, therefore, lower construction costs, which in turn means lower user fees. To this extent one can argue that the airports are subsidized by the federal and state governments, although the amount of the subsidy, depending on the spread between tax free and taxable bonds, is relatively small and is recaptured in part through higher income taxes paid by the airlines because of the lower airport user fees.
Equally important, the amount of the federal subsidy that flows through to the airlines is arguable. Airlines account for approximately 30 per cent of airport use and approximately 35 per cent of the air traffic control system, which means the bulk of the system is used by general aviation and military aviation operating in civilian airspace. I don't know what percentage of Miami International is used by the various modes of aviation, but it probably is fair to say that the airlines do not use 100 per cent of the existing or planned capacity.
Amtrak, which pays no taxes, gets a similar subsidy in that most of the stations that it uses are owned by cities or municipalities that used tax free financing to fund them. As is true for the airports, the municipal owners of Amtrak's stations pay no taxes. Moreover, the major terminals, i.e. Penn Station, 30th Street Station, etc., pay no taxes.
Another post notes that no passenger railroad in the world covers its fully allocated costs. This appears to be the case, although the French claim that the Paris to Marseilles TGV recovers its fully allocated costs through the fare box. And the Japanese make the same claim for the Tokyo to Osaka HSR. However, determining the veracity of these claim is difficult. The French and Japanese use the International Accounting Standards Board principles, whereas the U.S. uses General Accepted Accounting Principles. There are important differences between these accounting standards, and they make comparisons difficult.
It doesn't matter what they do in other countries. Saying that passenger railroads around the world lose money is akin to saying that a family should go bankrupt because the neighbors are going bankrupt. The United States should craft a solution that meets its needs and not the needs of other countries. Where does passenger rail make sense is the key question? In my mind it is in relatively short, high density corridors where the cost to expand the airways and highways is prohibitive.
Slightly off topic the Miami hearld had an article that on Jan 23 FLL airport broke ground for a $790 M runway. Ruway is going to be 8000 ft long and 60 feet above ground (approx 5 ft ). Also runway is going to span RR tracks. Did not say which RR but suspect it is FEC and not Tri-rail if new runway on south side of airport.. Financing appears to be airport fees however is ultimately backed by goveernment agencies (?). Once again a large government funds backing for airport.
How on earth did this thread segue into the Republican propaganda about the health care law? I thought it was about overhauling the TGV.
"but most government money is either going into healthcare are going to go into healthcare. So if you want to castigate the public at large about where the money is going instead of into trains, you know where that argument logically leads. You know, Grandma. Ice floes. Rationing health care."
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
BaltACD Paul Milenkovic: BaltACD: Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize. If 20 cents direct subsidy per passenger mile is at the poverty level, you are conceding the point made by rail critics that passenger trains are an inherently expensive mode of transportation. The argument that increased levels of funding would reduce the costs per passenger mile does not work, or at least the Vision Report that was lauded within the advocacy community reasons against there being any economy of scale. The advocacy community needs to retire the argument that Amtrak is underfunded in relation to its level of operations as it works against getting more money for Amtrak to expand levels of service. From everything I have read - no rail passenger service in the world is profitable when all expenses are compared to fare collections - why should we expect Amtrak to be profitable, when the best systems in the world aren't? Passenger rail transportation is a public service - nothing more and nothing less. The presently crumbling nature of the Interstate system would indicate that it is running on deferred maintenance just like the freight railroads were in the pre-Staggres era and thus is not 'profitable' as it would appear that the user fees (the multiplicity of use & gasoline taxes) aren't covering the expenses to keep maintenance current. Air Traffic Control and the inland waterway system make no pretense of being anything more than tax supported services to facilitate air travel and water way usage and the users of these services are not paying anything near the costs of these services and they are still swimming in red ink. All these things are public investment in the public service of enhancing transportation for the public. Amtrak is a public service and should be funded and treated as a public service, not a failed profit center to be starved into submission. The fact that Amtrak has exceeded 40 years in existence is a testament to dedication and political skills of it's leadership and employees.
Paul Milenkovic: BaltACD: Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize. If 20 cents direct subsidy per passenger mile is at the poverty level, you are conceding the point made by rail critics that passenger trains are an inherently expensive mode of transportation. The argument that increased levels of funding would reduce the costs per passenger mile does not work, or at least the Vision Report that was lauded within the advocacy community reasons against there being any economy of scale. The advocacy community needs to retire the argument that Amtrak is underfunded in relation to its level of operations as it works against getting more money for Amtrak to expand levels of service.
BaltACD: Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize.
Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize.
If 20 cents direct subsidy per passenger mile is at the poverty level, you are conceding the point made by rail critics that passenger trains are an inherently expensive mode of transportation. The argument that increased levels of funding would reduce the costs per passenger mile does not work, or at least the Vision Report that was lauded within the advocacy community reasons against there being any economy of scale.
The advocacy community needs to retire the argument that Amtrak is underfunded in relation to its level of operations as it works against getting more money for Amtrak to expand levels of service.
From everything I have read - no rail passenger service in the world is profitable when all expenses are compared to fare collections - why should we expect Amtrak to be profitable, when the best systems in the world aren't?
Passenger rail transportation is a public service - nothing more and nothing less.
The presently crumbling nature of the Interstate system would indicate that it is running on deferred maintenance just like the freight railroads were in the pre-Staggres era and thus is not 'profitable' as it would appear that the user fees (the multiplicity of use & gasoline taxes) aren't covering the expenses to keep maintenance current.
Air Traffic Control and the inland waterway system make no pretense of being anything more than tax supported services to facilitate air travel and water way usage and the users of these services are not paying anything near the costs of these services and they are still swimming in red ink. All these things are public investment in the public service of enhancing transportation for the public. Amtrak is a public service and should be funded and treated as a public service, not a failed profit center to be starved into submission.
The fact that Amtrak has exceeded 40 years in existence is a testament to dedication and political skills of it's leadership and employees.
If you are happy with the outcome of passenger train advocacy in the United States over the past 40 years, keep repeating the same mantra and hoping for a better outcome.
This statement about every passenger rail service in the world requiring subsidy is standard advocacy boilerplate, but it doesn't answer the question regarding subsidy rate. I never, ever, ever said that Amtrak should be profitable. Did you ever see me demand this, here or anywhere? I am just asking that the advocacy community be open to ideas where maybe Amtrak could give more return on the subsidy dollar. Have I ever reasoned or argued otherwise?
As to the crumbling infrastructure, some of the money is going into foreign expeditionary wars, but most government money is either going into healthcare are going to go into healthcare. So if you want to castigate the public at large about where the money is going instead of into trains, you know where that argument logically leads. You know, Grandma. Ice floes. Rationing health care.
As to user fees not paying anywhere the cost of ATC, please define for me the budget, the percentage not covered by user fees, and allocate the general revenue support on cents/passenger mile. And compare with Amtrak.
Paul Milenkovic BaltACD: Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize. If 20 cents direct subsidy per passenger mile is at the poverty level, you are conceding the point made by rail critics that passenger trains are an inherently expensive mode of transportation. The argument that increased levels of funding would reduce the costs per passenger mile does not work, or at least the Vision Report that was lauded within the advocacy community reasons against there being any economy of scale. The advocacy community needs to retire the argument that Amtrak is underfunded in relation to its level of operations as it works against getting more money for Amtrak to expand levels of service.
BaltACD Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize.
BaltACD Pictured is about the only gravy train Amtrak has been able latch onto... Amtrak has never had anything more than poverty level funding from it's inception...even poverty costs more than most of us realize. dakotafred: Granted what Sam1 says; but it is so easy to see Amtrak's gravy train running out. They're one "bad" election from being out of business, in my opinion, or cut back to just the corridors that many here would prefer. They already blew it so badly with that $300-million order for new equipment, most of which is going for baggage cars and baggage-dorms, squandering a one-time gift and opportunity to add capacity. No vision there at all -- or a death wish.
Pictured is about the only gravy train Amtrak has been able latch onto...
dakotafred: Granted what Sam1 says; but it is so easy to see Amtrak's gravy train running out. They're one "bad" election from being out of business, in my opinion, or cut back to just the corridors that many here would prefer. They already blew it so badly with that $300-million order for new equipment, most of which is going for baggage cars and baggage-dorms, squandering a one-time gift and opportunity to add capacity. No vision there at all -- or a death wish.
Granted what Sam1 says; but it is so easy to see Amtrak's gravy train running out. They're one "bad" election from being out of business, in my opinion, or cut back to just the corridors that many here would prefer. They already blew it so badly with that $300-million order for new equipment, most of which is going for baggage cars and baggage-dorms, squandering a one-time gift and opportunity to add capacity. No vision there at all -- or a death wish.
If only. Gravy Train is balanced nutrition.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
blue streak 1 Have any of you worked in MRO (maintenance, repair, overhaul ) ? I have. the MRO headaches in the aviation industry is very welll known. Nothing like waiting on an orphan part for a week.. Orphan equipmwet and one of a kind parts are nightmares. At times we would scrap a newer piece for a more available older part. This is why I support parking the heritage equipment. From what is being posted some cars are one of a kind for certain parts. Takes longer to repair as a new how to fix learning curve will be required. Amtrak is trying to get its operating expenses reduced so the higher per mile maintenance costs of heritage equipmet does not fit.
Have any of you worked in MRO (maintenance, repair, overhaul ) ? I have. the MRO headaches in the aviation industry is very welll known. Nothing like waiting on an orphan part for a week.. Orphan equipmwet and one of a kind parts are nightmares. At times we would scrap a newer piece for a more available older part.
This is why I support parking the heritage equipment. From what is being posted some cars are one of a kind for certain parts. Takes longer to repair as a new how to fix learning curve will be required.
Amtrak is trying to get its operating expenses reduced so the higher per mile maintenance costs of heritage equipmet does not fit.
Park the diners and baggage cars. They are orphans. Convert Amfleet and run the wheels off it for the next 30 years. AEM7 DCs are not orphans. The entire fleet of Rc units in Sweden, many of which are much older, are still going strong.
Save money for new equipment to accommodate growth.
dakotafred Granted what Sam1 says; but it is so easy to see Amtrak's gravy train running out. They're one "bad" election from being out of business, in my opinion, or cut back to just the corridors that many here would prefer. They already blew it so badly with that $300-million order for new equipment, most of which is going for baggage cars and baggage-dorms, squandering a one-time gift and opportunity to add capacity. No vision there at all -- or a death wish.
oltmannd ...... So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment?
...... So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment?
Whether replacement or refurbishment is the best option for Amtrak involves numerous variables and, at the end of the day, there probably are persuasive points for either choice, my previous post notwithstanding.
Having just completed a round trip from Taylor to Fort Worth on the Texas Eagle, it is clear that the equipment on the Eagle needs some serious attention. Paint was peeling from numerous spots in the lounge car, two of the seats were broken, and the lower level restroom was not working.
My coach needed some serious work. Some of the materials on the stairs had worked loose, thereby creating what appeared to be a situation in which a passenger could trip going down the stairs. The restrooms were relatively clean but the appearance was shabby. The occupied/vacant sign on the restroom doors has been wiped clean through use.
Not all of the first batch of TGVs will be rebuilt. The eight sets equipped with 15kV/16.7Hz capability will be retired, and three other sets will be retired based on their condition, along with 2 wrecked sets already retired.
No vision or common sense. $300 mil. largely wasted on out-of-date equipment for an archaic route structure.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Sam1 oltmannd: Check the RR news. France is remodeling the original TGV trainsets. They are 30 years old - just a hair younger than Amfleet, and the same age as the AEM7s. This is a remodeling, not a rebuilt. Basically, they are getting a new interior. So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment? How about politics, jobs, and a sympathetic administration? I suspect that there are more jobs (direct and indirect) involved in assembling new equipment and scrapping the old stuff than there is in refurbishing it. Given the nature of Amtrak, i.e. a political railroad that requires an operating subsidy of $1 for every $2 of revenue, where is the incentive to do things better, faster, cheaper?
oltmannd: Check the RR news. France is remodeling the original TGV trainsets. They are 30 years old - just a hair younger than Amfleet, and the same age as the AEM7s. This is a remodeling, not a rebuilt. Basically, they are getting a new interior. So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment?
Check the RR news. France is remodeling the original TGV trainsets. They are 30 years old - just a hair younger than Amfleet, and the same age as the AEM7s. This is a remodeling, not a rebuilt. Basically, they are getting a new interior.
So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment?
How about politics, jobs, and a sympathetic administration?
I suspect that there are more jobs (direct and indirect) involved in assembling new equipment and scrapping the old stuff than there is in refurbishing it. Given the nature of Amtrak, i.e. a political railroad that requires an operating subsidy of $1 for every $2 of revenue, where is the incentive to do things better, faster, cheaper?
oltmannd Check the RR news. France is remodeling the original TGV trainsets. They are 30 years old - just a hair younger than Amfleet, and the same age as the AEM7s. This is a remodeling, not a rebuilt. Basically, they are getting a new interior. So, why exactly does Amtrak need to replace their equipment?
BaltACD TGV is 30 and getting it's mid-life upgrade....and the only thing the US has attempting to be HS is Acela. The original TGV's wll be retired and the US will still be TALKING about HSR!
TGV is 30 and getting it's mid-life upgrade....and the only thing the US has attempting to be HS is Acela.
The original TGV's wll be retired and the US will still be TALKING about HSR!
Yup, though there will be a bit more 110 mph service by then.
CSSHEGEWISCH I'm sure that this is more than just an interior rebuild and a lot of mechanical upgrades are included in this project. To me, it sounds more like the mid-life upgrade that a lot of transit agencies have performed on their MU cars, locomotives, rapid transit equipment, etc.
I'm sure that this is more than just an interior rebuild and a lot of mechanical upgrades are included in this project. To me, it sounds more like the mid-life upgrade that a lot of transit agencies have performed on their MU cars, locomotives, rapid transit equipment, etc.
Sure. A capital rebuild, in US terms. You wind up with the same basic thing, plus a few upgrades, in like new condition when you are done.
Would be a good option for Amfleet and Superliners. There is no need for a replacement strategy that calls for the scrapping of perfectly good (and rebuildable) equipment. The French seem to have figured this out....
DMUinCT Passenger traffic is growing, Amtrak needs more cars, not just to replace old ones but to add capacity to meet the demand. Railroads need "extra" cars to let rolling stock rotate in for service. 1. Amtrak Heritage cars are 50 or more years old and are limited in track speed. They must go. Borrowing "Commuter Coaches" with 6 across seating from Commuter Railroads to meet peak demand days is not the answe.r 2. AEM7 locomotives that are not completely warn out are being rebuilt. On most Regional Trains, one HHP8 or two AEM7 are used. 3. Amfleet I and the newer Amfleet II coaches are the heart of Northeast Corridor Service and are subject to planned interior re-fitting. 4. The 10 year old "Acela" bullet train fleet (20 of them) has just been upgraded and had their interior re-fit with leather seats.
Passenger traffic is growing, Amtrak needs more cars, not just to replace old ones but to add capacity to meet the demand. Railroads need "extra" cars to let rolling stock rotate in for service.
1. Amtrak Heritage cars are 50 or more years old and are limited in track speed. They must go. Borrowing "Commuter Coaches" with 6 across seating from Commuter Railroads to meet peak demand days is not the answe.r
2. AEM7 locomotives that are not completely warn out are being rebuilt. On most Regional Trains, one HHP8 or two AEM7 are used.
3. Amfleet I and the newer Amfleet II coaches are the heart of Northeast Corridor Service and are subject to planned interior re-fitting.
4. The 10 year old "Acela" bullet train fleet (20 of them) has just been upgraded and had their interior re-fit with leather seats.
Amtrak's basic fleet plan has them retiring the old stuff and buying new - with no new capacity added. They have no plans to keep any around for peak seasons. Nor will they sell them off. They want them scrapped.
The new electric locos on order will retire the AEM7 DCs and HHP8s.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.