aegrotatio I think the Horizon cars were a minor tragedy. These cars should have been ViewLiners, but Bombardier had a relatively recent order for 125 MPH Comet II coaches and enough knowledge and tooling to build them efficiently, so Amtrak took financial (and logistical) advantage of that deal.
I think the Horizon cars were a minor tragedy. These cars should have been ViewLiners, but Bombardier had a relatively recent order for 125 MPH Comet II coaches and enough knowledge and tooling to build them efficiently, so Amtrak took financial (and logistical) advantage of that deal.
Ya we discussed that a couple of weeks ago.
There are so many variables for additional fleet cars that almost any statement appears to be just speculation.
1. The Amfleets have proved very robust and with rebuilding their life has exceeded expectations.
2. Amfleet-2s have almost twice as many miles as -1s but soldier on. They will probably be supplemented on LD routes and finally retired to surge fleet status.
3. Item #2 may be different if Horizon cars start showing their age ?
4. Any plan will be subject to the whims of congress and ridership demands. Who can predict ? Expansion of service , contracting service, providing enough cars on present trains ( trains still full on some legs this month ), This poster certainly cannot predict but just plan for the "best " outcome but be able to contract those plans.
5. One has to wonder if the Heritage coaches and sleepers could have been modified to remain in service how much would Amtrak be doing ? As well there might have been more new revenue cars now in service ?.
6. If all the proposals for service from various sources were to materialize then the needed revenue cars would probably double so any retirements of -1s & -2s could not happen.
There is a plan to replace the Amfleet I and IIs that was partially implemented decades ago. It's the innovative Viewliners with their interchangeable modules for sleeper, coach, and diner, designed and pretty much perfected way back in the 1980s. Unfortunately, the plan stalled badly until recently.
Amtrak intended to replace the entire single-level fleet with them, but they were stymied twice. The recent order of Viewliner II baggage cars rates as a minor miracle. Hopefully the modules can be redesigned to fit properly. I always thought that the relatively large Viewliner II baggage order was made not just to replace the ancient baggage cars but also to keep the builder alive for a new Viewliner order and be able to retrofit many of those baggage cars as coaches, sleepers, and diners. Possession is nine tenths of the law, so why not exploit an opportunity to convert them?
D.Carleton Paul Milenkovic D.Carleton Phoebe Vet GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes). ... or one was measured in feet and inches and the other in feet and tenths or in meters. Actually, they made the shells in HO but the modules in OO. Hey, there is no mismatch that the right grinding wheel on your Dremel tool won't correct. In 12"-to-the-foot scale, there is no mismatch that cannot be corrected with a reciprocating saw (with the carbide blade, of course) Back in the day we would install new valve seats by first freezing them with liquid nitrogen or leaving them overnight in a subzero freezer. How much dry ice can CAF USA get their hands on? Or just wait until winter which, in Elmira, should be starting any minute now.
Paul Milenkovic D.Carleton Phoebe Vet GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes). ... or one was measured in feet and inches and the other in feet and tenths or in meters. Actually, they made the shells in HO but the modules in OO. Hey, there is no mismatch that the right grinding wheel on your Dremel tool won't correct. In 12"-to-the-foot scale, there is no mismatch that cannot be corrected with a reciprocating saw (with the carbide blade, of course)
D.Carleton Phoebe Vet GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes). ... or one was measured in feet and inches and the other in feet and tenths or in meters. Actually, they made the shells in HO but the modules in OO.
Phoebe Vet GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes). ... or one was measured in feet and inches and the other in feet and tenths or in meters.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes).
Based on that, then either one of two things happened along the way from the prototype to production. Either the shells got smaller or the modules got bigger, that is if the initial prototype sleeper cars module fit(which it would seem to have since it made out of the plant for testing purposes).
... or one was measured in feet and inches and the other in feet and tenths or in meters.
Actually, they made the shells in HO but the modules in OO.
Hey, there is no mismatch that the right grinding wheel on your Dremel tool won't correct.
In 12"-to-the-foot scale, there is no mismatch that cannot be corrected with a reciprocating saw (with the carbide blade, of course)
Back in the day we would install new valve seats by first freezing them with liquid nitrogen or leaving them overnight in a subzero freezer. How much dry ice can CAF USA get their hands on? Or just wait until winter which, in Elmira, should be starting any minute now.
Johnny
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Buslist One source "suggested" that there was confusion about the inside width and the outside width of the shell, I assume that would have been on the shell manufacturer's part but I have no definitive information. Maybe soon.
One source "suggested" that there was confusion about the inside width and the outside width of the shell, I assume that would have been on the shell manufacturer's part but I have no definitive information. Maybe soon.
oops think it would be on the module manufactur's part.
Buslist D.Carleton schlimm I don't think many people would expect that. However, the problem is the Viewliner II sleeper modules don't fit the Viewliner II shells. Whoa! That would be a problem. Glad that's cleared up. Sorta think that's what I said way back when and my more recent posts! Some things just take a bit to sink in.
D.Carleton schlimm I don't think many people would expect that. However, the problem is the Viewliner II sleeper modules don't fit the Viewliner II shells. Whoa! That would be a problem. Glad that's cleared up.
schlimm I don't think many people would expect that. However, the problem is the Viewliner II sleeper modules don't fit the Viewliner II shells.
Whoa! That would be a problem. Glad that's cleared up.
Sorta think that's what I said way back when and my more recent posts! Some things just take a bit to sink in.
Or you ran into defensiveness about competence. We know the modules do not fit. But my question remains unanswered: Amtrak's faulty design specs or the builder's error(s)? Any ideas on that?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Buslist schlimm The Viewliner II order should have included coaches, but did not. Maybe just as well, as they cannot seem to manage the sleepers to to some error in design, such as measurements? The Brightline design would probably be a good choice. I have been told by folks that should know that the sleeper modules are too big to fit in the car shell. Unbelievable yes, and I have no first hand knowledge only "informed sources"
schlimm The Viewliner II order should have included coaches, but did not. Maybe just as well, as they cannot seem to manage the sleepers to to some error in design, such as measurements? The Brightline design would probably be a good choice.
The Viewliner II order should have included coaches, but did not. Maybe just as well, as they cannot seem to manage the sleepers to to some error in design, such as measurements? The Brightline design would probably be a good choice.
I have been told by folks that should know that the sleeper modules are too big to fit in the car shell. Unbelievable yes, and I have no first hand knowledge only "informed sources"
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
D.Carleton Buslist I have to confess that I don't understand the point of your post. Is it that modules built for other car types won't fit in a Viewliner II? I would hope that no one in the design process would have thought that they would! Just to be perfectly clear the "informed sources" say that the modules specifically designed for the Viewliner II equipment are too big to fit in the shells. Just a clarification for the uninformed that there are different modules in the Amtrak fleet. There should be no expectation that an interior module designed for a Viewliner should fit in anything other than a Viewliner.
Buslist I have to confess that I don't understand the point of your post. Is it that modules built for other car types won't fit in a Viewliner II? I would hope that no one in the design process would have thought that they would! Just to be perfectly clear the "informed sources" say that the modules specifically designed for the Viewliner II equipment are too big to fit in the shells.
Just to be perfectly clear the "informed sources" say that the modules specifically designed for the Viewliner II equipment are too big to fit in the shells.
Just a clarification for the uninformed that there are different modules in the Amtrak fleet. There should be no expectation that an interior module designed for a Viewliner should fit in anything other than a Viewliner.
I don't think many people would expect that. However, the problem is the Viewliner II sleeper modules don't fit the Viewliner II shells.
BuslistI have to confess that I don't understand the point of your post. Is it that modules built for other car types won't fit in a Viewliner II? I would hope that no one in the design process would have thought that they would! Just to be perfectly clear the "informed sources" say that the modules specifically designed for the Viewliner II equipment are too big to fit in the shells.
D.Carleton Buslist I have been told by folks that should know that the sleeper modules are too big to fit in the car shell. To be clear, the module follows the vehicle, i.e., a Viewliner roomette is different than a Superliner roomette and vise versa. Also, remember years ago Amtrak installed some sleeping accommodations (I cannot remember the exact configuration) in Amfleet coaches as an experiment; those modules were unique. If you wish to outfit a Brightline coach as something other than a coach you will need to design a new module.
Buslist I have been told by folks that should know that the sleeper modules are too big to fit in the car shell.
To be clear, the module follows the vehicle, i.e., a Viewliner roomette is different than a Superliner roomette and vise versa. Also, remember years ago Amtrak installed some sleeping accommodations (I cannot remember the exact configuration) in Amfleet coaches as an experiment; those modules were unique. If you wish to outfit a Brightline coach as something other than a coach you will need to design a new module.
I have to confess that I don't understand the point of your post. Is it that modules built for other car types won't fit in a Viewliner II? I would hope that no one in the design process would have thought that they would!
Amtrak needs a Fresh order of Superliners cars and more Viewliners cars too.
Oltmannd is correct. The Amfleet -1 & 2 shells will probably last as long or longer than the Heritage Budds. Once a new order of single level LD coaches come into service first on LD trains the displaced Amfleet-2s can be refurbished and reassigned to NEC trains that need more cars.
The big question will be how many of 1st 1 - 3 hundred new cars will displace the Amfleet-2s for reassignment and refurbishing. Only congressional finances and ridership at that time will determine what that division will be.
Granted, I have ridden in a Viewliner roomette only about ten times, but I have seen no reason to make geat changes in the modules; will the old modules not fit in the Viewliner II shells?
Yep, and that's what others have reported. The multi-million dollar question is this: Were the dimension of the car shell and modules Amtrak's in-shop specs or the contractor's? If the former, perhaps letting Amtrak design anything in the future is a disaster waiting to happen?
I can't think of a single reason Amfleet shouldn't last as long as Streamline vintage Budds - that are still running everyday on VIA.
But, should Amtrak ever get serious about upping capacity on the NEC and elsewhere by lengthening trains and adding frequency, then they need to start buying something. Why not just tag onto the Brighline order? Oh, yeah, "buy American". Your tax dollars at work.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
daveklepper They seem to be holding up pretty well, so they are not junk. But I agree that stainless is better, and undoubtadly they would be a more advanced design, possibly having much in common with new Acela-II.
They seem to be holding up pretty well, so they are not junk. But I agree that stainless is better, and undoubtadly they would be a more advanced design, possibly having much in common with new Acela-II.
The last time I rode an Amfleet was late 2014 and the stainless steel in the vestibules was looking almost brand new. The electrical gear and overall structure seemed to be holding up. OTOH, the interiors were looking a bit worn and the restrooms were having all sorts of problems.
IIRC, the interior width of the Amfleets are couple inches wider than a standard straight sided passenger car - the "narrow" feeling of the car is likely from the slit like windows.
We who know the ins and outs of Amtrak accept that it will not be " new " Amfleets BUT !!!
1. The general public when it hears "NEW" Amfleets thinks of the narrow airplane type fuselauge, the small windows of -1s and not much bigger windows of -2s.
2. So there will be some reluctance of general public support for new single level LD and SD coaches. Not much but still new coach suport needs every ounce it can get from general public and as well Congress criters who do not know the difference.
3. At one time thought it was a fore gone conclusion that new coaches would be V-2s but now ? ? ? Siemens certainly could build Brightline or maybe even the V-3 design ?
4. Once the Acela-2 contract and specs are somewhat finalized ( realize there will be change orders ) then maybe Amtrak engineering forces can concentrate on V-2s and new coaches with orders for 1st cars in 2019 ( per latest fleet plan ).
So for once and forever lets bury the term " new " Amfleets/ Original poster why don't you edit your title and original post ?
I just hope whatever new passenger cars Amtrak buys that they have large windows to allow travelers to better enjoy the scenery. The present Amfleet and Horizon cars both have windows the size of slits, such as one would see on WW2 pillboxes with machine gun emplacements.
Being able to enjoy the scenery is why many of us are riding the train in the first place.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.