• New Midwest/California Bi-Level Discussion

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  by bostontrainguy
 
Some interested reading here:

http://ccrail.com/about/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These are the guys who have "over 50" Sante Fe High-Level cars.

Excerpt:
"While Siemens has performed almost flawlessly in developing and building the new NGEC 125-mph diesel-electric Tier IV locomotives, Nippon Sharyo has failed to develop and produce a car design for bi-level coaches that complies with federal safety regulations for crashworthiness. Actual information regarding this procurement failure has been difficult to come by, even for professional members of the Next Generation Equipment Subcommittee and members of Congress, for the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) seems to have imposed a news blackout on the entire episode."
  by MisterUptempo
 
Yeah. They've been pimping those same cars for years and no takers thus far. Makes one wonder why. I also wonder, if the bi-level DOTs were to consider the hi-levels, whether they'd have to issue a new RFP, as the rebuilt hi-levels may not comply with the original RFP specs that N-S signed onto.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Uptempo makes a cogent point regarding the "Costcars" as to their present roadworthiness (beyond normal deficiencies such as a good COTS date), I really think it's time for passenger agencies to accept that there is equipment, such as Coston's Hi-Levels and the WI Talgos, out there that could be pressed into interim (say, 3-5 years) service so that the "consultant merry go round" can continue (need it really?) and might eventually result in cars upon which the Agencies and USDOT will reach agreement e.g. doubtful if the Hi-Levels are presently ADA compliant.
  by Tadman
 
Mackensen wrote:

Sumitomo doesn't own Nippon Sharyo; JR Central does. I have no idea what PTC has to do with any of this.
PTC is supposedly going to deliver us from the evils of train-on-train accidents. (The ones that have killed less people in 25 years than bear strikes). Energy management is supposed to absorb train-on-train accident forces. Why have both? If PTC will stop train-on-train accidents, what energy are we absorbing? It's a belt-and-suspenders approach. If you've done any government contracting, you know that the gov't is really good at spending other peoples' money this way. They write a spec and cram anything under the sun into the spec because they don't have any need for fiscal responsibility.

You can't make this crap up. The show just keeps getting better. I'm going out in my backyard and lighting a $20 on fire to encourage them to waste more of our tax dollars.
  by bostontrainguy
 
RE: Why have both?

Good question I guess but then again how about PTC coupled with cars that have 798,000 lbs strength? Sounds fine to me.
  by mtuandrew
 
Tadman wrote:PTC is supposedly going to deliver us from the evils of train-on-train accidents. (The ones that have killed less people in 25 years than bear strikes). Energy management is supposed to absorb train-on-train accident forces. Why have both?
Crash avoidance is supposedly going to deliver us from the evils of car-on-car accidents. Crumple zones are supposed to absorb car-on-car accident forces. Why have both? :P

Is PTC ready for prime time off the NEC? Probably not. Is it worthy of a government mandate at this time? Perhaps, perhaps not, and this mandate does seem ill-considered in hindsight. But, eventually it has the potential of increasing capacity on both freight and passenger lines throughout the country while improving safety.
  by scoostraw
 
MisterUptempo wrote:Yeah. They've been pimping those same cars for years and no takers thus far. Makes one wonder why.
I can't remember. Were all of these cars rebuilt for HEP?
  by MisterUptempo
 
scoostraw wrote:I can't remember. Were all of these cars rebuilt for HEP?
I found a discussion thread on trainorders.com from December, 2000, that discusses that question.
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/ ... p?4,488945

From forum member "Goatboat" comes the following-
Okay, here is some information about the hi-level cars:

According to my copy of "All Aboard Amtrak," Mike Schafer's book about Amtrak's 20th anniversary in 1991, as of 1/1/91 there were 69 of the original 73 ATSF hi-level cars still in service, consisting of 36 coach - dorm cars, 21 coaches, the six lounges, and the six diners. All had head end power, and were renumbered by adding a "3" to the front of the number. IIRC, Amtrak started converting these cars to HEP in 1979, and most were done by 1981.

As far as I know, the two prototype hi-level cars built in 1954 - AMTK 9900 and 9901 - were never converted to HEP, and would account for two of the four cars out of service. It seems like the 9900 was parked at LAUPT in the mid to late 80's.

The coach-dorms were converted from hi-levels that had a hi-level doorway at one end of the car, and had steps down to a conventional height door at the other end so the cars could be coupled to existing conventional equipment. They had dormitory sleeping space for the onboard service crew in the of the upper level of the car with the steps, and 40 coach seats in the other half. According to the roster in "AAA," these cars fell in the number series 39900-39938. When the Superliner dormitory cars were delivered in 1995, these cars ceased to operate.

The coaches were numbered in the series 39940-39964, and the lounges and diners were in the number series they have now. Around 1985 the diners were converted to diner-lounges for use on the Desert Wind. When the hi-level coaches were operating, they were much better for overnight trips than the Superliners, because their seats were much more comfortable.

- gb -
mtuandrew wrote:At one point the Santa Fe coaches were good for 90 mph... are they good for 110 mph as equipped now?
According to Corridor Capital's website, http://ccrail.com/hi-level-trains/, the hi-levels are-
Designed to run at speeds as high as 117 miles per hour
Their literature http://ccrail.com/wp-content/uploads/Co ... s-2017.pdf claims that the refurbished cars will do 110MPH.

I have questions about the company's ability to deliver railcars that meet their promises. Back in 2014, Corridor Capital won, then lost, the INDOT contract for the Hoosier State, which Iowa Interstate eventually won. If I recall correctly, it had to do, in part, with Corridor promoting their shiny refurbed hi-levels, but then found themselves unable to deliver any of those cars for the start of the Hoosier State contract.

To date, I don't believe they have done any refurbishing of any type to any hi-level. I know they switched their rehabbing partner from Great Lakes Central to MidAmerica Rail Car at some point. It might be helpful to Corridor Capital's cause if they invested a little capital and reconditioned one of the hi-levels on spec as a rolling proof-of-concept. A whole lot easier to sell a product that people can sit in and ride; slick brochures and even slicker promises can only get them so far.

ETA - Thank you to the kind soul who mentioned that the Hoosier State contract went to Iowa Pacific, not Iowa Interstate. I am constantly getting the two mixed up. Forgive any confusion that may have caused.
Last edited by MisterUptempo on Sun Aug 27, 2017 7:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
  by electricron
 
MisterUptempo wrote:To date, I don't believe they have done any refurbishing of any type to any hi-level. I know they switched their rehabbing partner from Great Lakes Central to MidAmerica Rail Car at some point. It might be helpful to Capital Corridor's cause if they invest a little capital and reconditioned one of the hi-levels on spec as a rolling proof-of-concept. A whole lot easier to sell a product that people can sit in and ride; slick brochures and even slicker promises can only get them so far.
Well, Talgo has two train sets finished and ready for immediate operations and AllEarth Rail has 10 RDCs in great shape which can be placed into operations quickly, all sitting around idle. I'm not so sure having a prototype refurbishment car around will help sell them.
I think Maine and it's Downeaster would make a great target customer for the HiLevels - depending if they ever decided to use another vendor besides Amtrak to run their trains. These cars aren't that much taller than the super dome that runs on these trains seasonally, so I'm thinking they will fit on this corridor.
  by bostontrainguy
 
You forgot that the Downeaster is all high-level platforms I think. North Station is for sure.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
Last I knew only North Station, Anderson RTC, Wells, and Portland are high level. Any more?
  by F-line to Dudley via Park
 
The PDF file's properties page says it was created 5/30/2017.
  • 1
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 41