Amtrak orders Amfleet replacement order with Siemens.

[D.Carleton]

CMStPnP

conrailman

What about a fresh order of Superliners Cars too.

Amtrak management stated the RFP for Superliners and Western Long Distance Train equipment will be put out in 2024 or 2025.

So, the RFP is released in 2025. There will be a list of qualifications from the purchaser. Bids will be submitted and rated on how they match the list. The number of bids will be triaged down to (usually) two. Eventually comes the best-and-final-offer and the contract is awarded. Then starts the procurement phase of the manufacturer and, if no supply delays, the first vehicle is released in 18 months. With this process we won't see a new bilevel until sometime after 2030. Wonder if the Superliners will hold up until then?

[aegrotatio]

SD70Dude

An expanded dual mode fleet will be best used on trains that run longer distances on electrified territory AND travel farther afield, like the Virginia regionals and the Vermonter.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/amtrak-siemens-finalize-deal-for-new-equipment-to-replace-amfleet-i-equipment/

 

There are *lots* of Virginia regionals that are part of the Northeast Corridor and there will be plenty more. These will still require engine changes, right?  Or will they use the dual-mode/hybrid Venture trainsets?

 

[CMStPnP]

conrailman

What about a fresh order of Superliners Cars too.

Amtrak management stated the RFP for Superliners and Western Long Distance Train equipment will be put out in 2024 or 2025.

[D.Carleton]

Overmod

D.Carleton

Thanks to N-S' bilevel belly flop a Superliner successor is at least a decade away.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Nippon-Sharyo shell failed its buff test by something like 800lb which is under 0.1% of an arbitrary number already incorporating a generous implicit factor of safety, so 'belly flop' would really be no more appropriate here than for EMD missing the Tier 4 final NOx standards in the ways they did.

I think we should look more carefully into the reasons N-S chose not to revise and retest the design -- reasons I suspect you probably know better than anyone else posting here.  And why no one else's bilevel design seems to be coming up in discussions even though actual LD Superliner replacement discussions come up in no more than about 3 years IIRC.

The failed buff resistance tests were just the final act of a misbegotten journey. Out of professional courtesy I'll leave it at that but add that all of us in the business were very disappointed in the outcome.

conrailman

Bombardier have the Superliner 2 plans from the mid 90s, just build the cars and up date car little for 2021. That not that hard too do??

Yes but Bomber did not get the contract otherwise that is what would have happened. If Alstom had gotten the contract we would have seen an update of the Surfliner. Instead the bid went to an outfit who had not built a 238 compliant split-center sill car before. Just like how the Viewliner II project went to a company that had never built a 238 compliant shot welded stainless steel car before. Just like how the original Acela set were built by an out fit that had never built a high-speed train before. Do you see a trend?

This is why Acela 2 went to Alstom and a design modified from something extant. This is why the Amfleet replacement (back on topic) went to the Venture series. It will be a while before we see things in motion for a Superliner replacement.

[conrailman]

Bombardier have the Superliner 2 plans from the mid 90s, just build the cars and up date car little for 2021. That not that hard too do??

[Overmod]

D.Carleton

Thanks to N-S' bilevel belly flop a Superliner successor is at least a decade away.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Nippon-Sharyo shell failed its buff test by something like 800lb which is under 0.1% of an arbitrary number already incorporating a generous implicit factor of safety, so 'belly flop' would really be no more appropriate here than for EMD missing the Tier 4 final NOx standards in the ways they did.

I think we should look more carefully into the reasons N-S chose not to revise and retest the design -- reasons I suspect you probably know better than anyone else posting here.  And why no one else's bilevel design seems to be coming up in discussions even though actual LD Superliner replacement discussions come up in no more than about 3 years IIRC.

[D.Carleton]

conrailman

What about a fresh order of Superliners Cars too.

Gonna need more than two cents to make that happen. Thanks to N-S' bilevel belly flop a Superliner successor is at least a decade away.

[SD70Dude]

aegrotatio

A recent blurb in Trains Magazine says the Siemens Venture dual-modes and hybrids will eliminate engine changes on the Northeast Corridor.

Does this mean these semi-permanent trainsets make the ACS-64 superfluous? What am I missing?

There will still be a lot of regional and keystone trains that do not go off electrified territory.

Amtrak's current small fleet of dual mode units (18 GE P32AC-DMs) do not have pantographs, only third rail shoes, and only operate in electric mode in the New York City area.  Because there are so few of them they are sometimes switched out at Albany on trains like the Maple Leaf and Adirondack, instead of running through to the train's destination.  

An expanded dual mode fleet will be best used on trains that run longer distances on electrified territory AND travel farther afield, like the Virginia regionals and the Vermonter.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/amtrak-siemens-finalize-deal-for-new-equipment-to-replace-amfleet-i-equipment/

[conrailman]

What about a fresh order of Superliners Cars too.

[aegrotatio]

A recent blurb in Trains Magazine says the Siemens Venture dual-modes and hybrids will eliminate engine changes on the Northeast Corridor.

Does this mean these semi-permanent trainsets make the ACS-64 superfluous? What am I missing?

[Overmod]

blue streak 1

Wonder if the lacks of parts are having an effect on reliability of the SC-44s now in service ?  Could that even extend to the ACS-64s ?

You could always ask Betty Cho:

[e-mail]

[blue streak 1]

Dated May 2020 article but Siemens still having parts problems.  One of the Siemens PR announcements i noticed that the 301 loco was in a very crowded section of the plant. 

Siemens seeks to store trains on residential parcels - Sacramento Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

EDIT  Wonder if the lacks of parts are having an effect on reliability of the SC-44s now in service ?  Could that even extend to the ACS-64s ?

[CMStPnP]

BEAUSABRE

As long as they pay off the equipment trust with revenues, I'm all for it

That should be left up to management to figure out given the interest rates of the time and what their plans are for the cars.    They can resell the cars and transfer the equipment trust with them as was done with the Milwaukee Road Super Domes when they were sold to VIA Rail Canada.   The trust certificates could also expire prior to the new cars comming online as they are usually tied to the accounting "useful life" of the car vs running indefinitely because the car is treated as collateral, if the car has zero value then the trust is zero value as well for the same asset.   They can rebuild the cars and create new trust certificates to the new term of "useful life" to cover the rebuilding costs (Milwaukee Road abused this practice as it got into the financially lean years).   So tieing their hands by saying the trusts have to be paid out of revenues is rather shortsighted and reflects a general lack of understanding of the financing options.

As I understand Equipment Trusts they are a 3rd party financial grouping of the collateral for the debt and not the debt or loan itself.    Their purpose is to lower the interest rate on the loans as the thinking is that with collateral the creditor will be further up the line in a bankruptcy and can sell the equipment in the trust to reimburse the principal still owed on the loan.

I've read the Milwaukee Road massively abused this practice using the Milwaukee Shops in that it would rebuild a box car 2-3 times before scrapping vs buying a new one as it was more financially advantageous to use the loan to finance the rebuilding program vs buying new.    It would issue new trust certificates each rebuild and revalue the car.    Which pushed up the average age of the Milwaukee's Frieght car fleet and to a point where the repairs on the older fleet was sucking a lot of capital from the budget.

[CMStPnP]

conrailman

Amtrak needs to put in fresh order of Superliners cars too.

And so they will in the next two years states their plan and their CEO.    They are going to do one more refresh first (they are working on now).    Superliner I RFP will go out in 2024 or 2025.   Is what their plan states.   Though they are also attempting to get direction from Congress on Long Distance Train financial support as well.   I am not sure if there is an RFP dependency on the determination from Congress or not.   This has not been elaborated clearly only hinted at.

[BEAUSABRE]

conrailman

Amtrak needs to put in fresh order of Superliners cars too. Add Quote to your Post

As long as they pay off the equipment trust with revenues, I'm all for it

 

[conrailman]

Amtrak needs to put in fresh order of Superliners cars too.

[CMStPnP]

So they are doing this for the Corridors Initiative I take it which is fine.   Though, I do not believe this is an abandonment of bi-level cars.    I think predominantly these train sets will be in height clearence restricted areas.    We'll see though.

[aegrotatio]

Aww, I was hoping for Viewliner II to replace the Amfleets.

 

[longhorn1969]

Kind of anticlimatic, but the at the least the equipment has been proven in the field.

https://media.amtrak.com/2021/07/amtrak-to-transform-rail-travel-with-7-3-billion-investment-in-state-of-the-art-equipment/