And, please don't forget Bryan / College Station, Tyler, Sherman / Denison, Victoria, Arlington, or San Angelo. Amtrak cannot claim to have anything close to a national passenger rail system. And then there's always the service three times a week to the nation's fourth largest city. Would be funny if it weren't so utterly pathetic and so utterly correctable with a little non-political horse sense.
081552 There's a great Amtrak video that goes along with this blog post that shows the new cars under construction and complete. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHAGdl5J0uw&feature=player_embedded
There's a great Amtrak video that goes along with this blog post that shows the new cars under construction and complete.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHAGdl5J0uw&feature=player_embedded
There may be a problem with the new Viewliners. Rumors which are always very suspect abound on other sites that there are major problems. There has been no movement towards testing or more built. Maybe a frame problem ? IMHO it appears that maybe Amtrak should put out some kind of announcement about their status.
Maybe Trains should investigate ? ?
schlimm Not my question. Are forklifts being used on Amtrak baggage cars now? What is being transported that would require a forklift? Amtrak's mission does not include freight or express. You saw the inside of the baggage car on an LD train and there were not even a few suitcases (steamer trunks have been extinct for 50 years or so).
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
oltmannd D.Carleton schlimm Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary. When driving a forklift onto the baggage car, yes, the heavier floor is necessary. And I have had experience with all of the above. Sure, to distribute the load out over the cars's structure. What's under the floor is the same....
D.Carleton schlimm Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary. When driving a forklift onto the baggage car, yes, the heavier floor is necessary. And I have had experience with all of the above.
schlimm Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary.
Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary.
Sure, to distribute the load out over the cars's structure. What's under the floor is the same....
Not my question. Are forklifts being used on Amtrak baggage cars now? What is being transported that would require a forklift? Amtrak's mission does not include freight or express. You saw the inside of the baggage car on an LD train and there were not even a few suitcases (steamer trunks have been extinct for 50 years or so).
Amtrak carries LTL express shipments including palletized loads via the baggage car. Check out their rates they are pretty cheap compared to UPS or Fed Ex. They also carry human remains but to be honest most human remains are flown these days.
I think it is something like $50 for each 100 lbs. Each box is limited to 50 lbs and each shipment 500 lbs but you can have as many shipments as you want. Amtrak will palletize the load for you and shrink wrap it as well. They only hold the shipment for 48 hours at the destination but you can gain additional time by having the sending station delay the shipment not all stations will do this. I believe it is $3 a box (50 lbs) per day for storage if you exceed the deadline for pickup.
blue streak 1 oltmannd blue streak 1Amtrak and CAF certainly do not want another major problem like what happened to the Horizon cars in very cold winter weather freezing up. Likely not a design issue. Likely lack of maintenance and/or poor repair/mod work. Don: In this case it was a design issue. For several years after they were delivered the water systems all froze up. I believe one year many were sent to NOL to thaw out and rerote the ater lines. Anyone with more details ?
oltmannd blue streak 1Amtrak and CAF certainly do not want another major problem like what happened to the Horizon cars in very cold winter weather freezing up. Likely not a design issue. Likely lack of maintenance and/or poor repair/mod work.
blue streak 1Amtrak and CAF certainly do not want another major problem like what happened to the Horizon cars in very cold winter weather freezing up.
Likely not a design issue. Likely lack of maintenance and/or poor repair/mod work.
Don: In this case it was a design issue. For several years after they were delivered the water systems all froze up. I believe one year many were sent to NOL to thaw out and rerote the ater lines. Anyone with more details ?
That could be... I was remembering trouble in the past several years that was due to poor maintenance.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
blue streak 1The structre of these cars certainly apears to be more robust than any rebuild of present coaches would be..
Structure? They're basically Viewliners. Same as existing. The interiors and under car stuff can be different, though.
IMHO paint schemes, templates, stick on paint jobs are not what is important. Mechanical persons working for CAF need to de bug these new cars !. Amtrak and CAF certainly do not want another major problem like what happened to the Horizon cars in very cold winter weather freezing up.
The structre of these cars certainly apears to be more robust than any rebuild of present coaches would be.. Amtrak should build for any future use that may happen as retro fit is very expensive.. I can see the possibility that modular containers may be in the future for use in new baggage cars. One especially possible item might be for spare dinning car supplies and maybe even frozen foods be carried.in the new baggage cars.
Note: On some legs of my just coompleted trip I coould not believe the amount of checked baggage.
So, here's my speculation of why new baggage cars instead of conversion. It's equipment, so the Mechanical Department held sway.
The existing baggage cars and diners had to go or go through a top-to-bottom rebuilding. The trucks are a good design, but ancient. Parts are tough, but not impossible. Steel castings last forever. They are the odd-balls of the fleet. There's probably some fatigue and other structural issues rearing their heads with greater frequency. Lots of custom repair work. They are a huge pain in the neck. All could be addressed with a solid, capital rebuilding, though.
Amfleet, Heritage and Superliner are just fine as is. No big issues with parts or structure. We like them.
So, I COULD convert existing equipment to baggage service and get new coaches, except....
This means a program I have to schedule - using manpower and facilities I really don't have. Bear and Beech Grove don't have a lot of slack - particularly man-power. So, hiring, training, putting work space, tooling in place.
AND, I have to take coaches out of service to do the conversion, which means I can't even get started until the new stuff starts to show up. That means two more years of duct tape and bailing wire.
I could contract the work out....perhaps.... but still have the time lag and now union headaches on "who owns the work" and the added headache of contract administration.
So, that's my guess. That it would have been hard for Mechanical still doesn't justify it in my opinion...
And, considering that no baggage is to weigh more than fifty pounds (years ago, 250 pounds was the weight limit; Amtrak employs weaklings), what reason is there for such a heavy floor?
Johnny
oltmannd D.Carleton schlimm D.CarletonThe baggage car floor is five inches thick throughout the length and width of the car. This is to compensate for the beating they would take from baggage, express, coffins, freight and whatever else the railroads would throw at them. Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary. When driving a forklift onto the baggage car, yes, the heavier floor is necessary. And I have had experience with all of the above. Sure, to distribute the load out over the cars's structure. What's under the floor is the same....
D.Carleton schlimm D.CarletonThe baggage car floor is five inches thick throughout the length and width of the car. This is to compensate for the beating they would take from baggage, express, coffins, freight and whatever else the railroads would throw at them. Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary. When driving a forklift onto the baggage car, yes, the heavier floor is necessary. And I have had experience with all of the above.
schlimm D.CarletonThe baggage car floor is five inches thick throughout the length and width of the car. This is to compensate for the beating they would take from baggage, express, coffins, freight and whatever else the railroads would throw at them. Is Amtrak transporting express, coffins, freight along with suitcases? So the heavier floor is unnecessary.
D.CarletonThe baggage car floor is five inches thick throughout the length and width of the car. This is to compensate for the beating they would take from baggage, express, coffins, freight and whatever else the railroads would throw at them.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
D.CarletonOur local FRA inspector was around today and I asked him about such a conversion and he said it would need approval and a waiver from the FRA prior to implementation. Again, I don't know what Amtrak did prior to their rebuilding. Going through such engineering and approval process would negate any savings rather than build anew.
Not a huge deal either. Pretty much show them the results of the finite element analysis you did for the design. I'm pretty sure we did this with the GP40s we stretched into GP40PHs for NJT a couple of decades ago. We did it for the anti-climber we added to the rear, at the least.
D.CarletonAll of them have the standard three inch thick floor... with one exception: The baggage car floor is five inches thick throughout the length and width of the car. This is to compensate for the beating they would take from baggage, express, coffins, freight and whatever else the railroads would throw at them. Furthermore, perpendicular to the doors are extra heavy bracing on the walls and roof to compensate for the larger opening. (I didn't climb up there to measure, too busy.) I don't recall seeing such on a converted coach.
Makes sense. Floor isn't really structural. It sits on the cross-bearers. The walls on both sides of the doors and where the walls attach to the roof members would need beefing up. Neither are a huge deal after the interior is out of the car.
oltmannd Structurally? Nope. It's a passenger car. Same center sill, same crossbearers, same roof and wall structure, same draft pocket/draft gear. Very slight mods to support racks, carry load around larger doors, etc., but basically a passenger car. Not similar to any kind of freight car. MHCs are too short for 125 mph. Controlling hunting would be almost impossible. Gotta have 85 foot cars for 125 mph. It's why the 60 footers are only good for 90 mph.
Structurally? Nope. It's a passenger car. Same center sill, same crossbearers, same roof and wall structure, same draft pocket/draft gear. Very slight mods to support racks, carry load around larger doors, etc., but basically a passenger car. Not similar to any kind of freight car.
MHCs are too short for 125 mph. Controlling hunting would be almost impossible. Gotta have 85 foot cars for 125 mph. It's why the 60 footers are only good for 90 mph.
oltmannd D.Carleton oltmannd Okay - convert Horizon cars. Point is, new equipment should be for passengers. A baggage car is just a passenger car with no widows fitted for baggage. Totally agree, "new equipment should be for passengers." Given my druthers, the 1600 series MHC's would have been rebuilt with end doors and the plug side doors exchanged for something that could be opened from the inside. However, Amtrak Mail & Express burned their bridges and the MHC's went along with it. The Horizon/Comet car platform is even less suitable for baggage conversion than an Amfleet. A baggage car is a freight car on a passenger train and (should be) designed as such. Structurally? Nope. It's a passenger car. Same center sill, same crossbearers, same roof and wall structure, same draft pocket/draft gear. Very slight mods to support racks, carry load around larger doors, etc., but basically a passenger car. Not similar to any kind of freight car. MHCs are too short for 125 mph. Controlling hunting would be almost impossible. Gotta have 85 foot cars for 125 mph. It's why the 60 footers are only good for 90 mph.
D.Carleton oltmannd Okay - convert Horizon cars. Point is, new equipment should be for passengers. A baggage car is just a passenger car with no widows fitted for baggage. Totally agree, "new equipment should be for passengers." Given my druthers, the 1600 series MHC's would have been rebuilt with end doors and the plug side doors exchanged for something that could be opened from the inside. However, Amtrak Mail & Express burned their bridges and the MHC's went along with it. The Horizon/Comet car platform is even less suitable for baggage conversion than an Amfleet. A baggage car is a freight car on a passenger train and (should be) designed as such.
oltmannd Okay - convert Horizon cars. Point is, new equipment should be for passengers. A baggage car is just a passenger car with no widows fitted for baggage.
Okay - convert Horizon cars. Point is, new equipment should be for passengers. A baggage car is just a passenger car with no widows fitted for baggage.
Not a huge deal to convert either a Horizon or Amfleet car to a baggage car. Would have to be creative about door in Amfleet.
And many RPO, RWExp, and Mail Storage cars.
D.Carletonypically baggage cars are not 85' long. Historically a baggage car was 60' to 75' long. It's hard to tell from the pictures but it seems the new Viewliner 2 baggage cars are shorter than 85' but we shall see when they hit the road.
Certainly true in the standard heavyweight era but many streamline baggage and combination cars were 82-85'.
Typically baggage cars are not 85' long. Historically a baggage car was 60' to 75' long. It's hard to tell from the pictures but it seems the new Viewliner 2 baggage cars are shorter than 85' but we shall see when they hit the road.
That said, I am not qualified to speak to the day-to-day baggage count on a long distance train. Earlier this year I was tasked with brining a private car east from Chicago. Separating my car from the rest of the Lake Shore Limited was one of the baggage cars converted from a coach. Walking through there was the new firearms locker and few overhead light fixtures. Other than that there was... nothing, not even a box of matches. What was in the forward baggage of the Boston section? Was this typical? Was this car going to be set out in ALB? I have no idea but that is what I saw.
Does anybody actually know what the Amtrak baggage cars are used for today? Strictly checked suitcases? or is there some express business? If so, why? And how much of the interior space is typically used in an 85' car?
D.CarletonAgain, a baggage car is more than just a passenger car shell with no windows and big doors. This is a lesson Amtrak learned (the hard way) with their 1700 series cars rebuilt from coaches. (Hopefully CAF USA learned this lesson too or this is going to get real ugly real quick.) The Metroliner/Amfleet shell is especially unfit for true baggage (freight) service. The cost of reengineering the car plus the modifications would bring the cost close to what they are paying for new cars.
schlimm2. Checked baggage and baggage cars cause long dwell times in stations. Consequently, the use of checked baggage in separate cars was largely discontinued in most passenger services in the world.
It could be, but it would have to be re-designed. Roll on roll off racks?
oltmannd They would have been better off to buy 50 new coaches and convert 50 Amfleet II to baggage cars.
They would have been better off to buy 50 new coaches and convert 50 Amfleet II to baggage cars.
Again, a baggage car is more than just a passenger car shell with no windows and big doors. This is a lesson Amtrak learned (the hard way) with their 1700 series cars rebuilt from coaches. (Hopefully CAF USA learned this lesson too or this is going to get real ugly real quick.) The Metroliner/Amfleet shell is especially unfit for true baggage (freight) service. The cost of reengineering the car plus the modifications would bring the cost close to what they are paying for new cars.
As an aside I had suggested a while back converting some idled Amfleet cars into baggage coaches where the forward third of the car would be blanked off and used solely for "baggage," that is, suitcases and bags not palletized freight loaded with a forklift. Even keep the small door on the end to lower costs of the conversion and dissuade anyone from trying to drive a forklift through it. I was told that they have very creative forklift operators and that was the end of it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.