Wisconsin Hiawatha (Service Talgos Upgrades Maintenance)

OK, I'll be the first to acknowledge that the Talgo equipment in the Cascade Corridor has resulted in improved service. "Four a day" (plus the Starlight) in 3'30" Seattle-Portland beats the 1969 three running at 4'00". While "it's been a few years", I recall the line has its curves yet offers some nice en-route scenery,

Now consider Chi-Milw; straightaway "get 'er up to 79" and keep 'er there till the next stop. Scenery?, suburbia or cornfields "seen one seen 'em all". It's a ride Point A to B - and well received as it should be! It's what 21st century passenger railroading is all about.

In short, I have to wonder if WIDOT is acquiring the proper equipment for use on this route; bi-level cars (hopefully the California cars; the design work is done) would seem far more suitable...Talgo must have gotten in there is did a whale of a huckster job. Including their "hell on wheels" business model of build 'em in whatever jurisdiction is poppin' for 'em. The cars could well be a "loss leader"...the maintenance contract? that's the "sock it to 'em".

Just my thoughts.

In short, I have to wonder if WIDOT is acquiring the proper equipment for use on this route; bi-level cars (hopefully the California cars; the design work is done) would seem far more suitable...

Good point, but the Talgos, if they are indeed Series VIII cars, have at least one advantage over a California-type car - they can supposedly cruise at over 200mph. We all know that this doesn't matter right now. But let's say 15 years from now the line is upgraded to 150mph. The Talgo's could be put into high speed service. Not so true for a current generation California car.

korax wrote:

In short, I have to wonder if WIDOT is acquiring the proper equipment for use on this route; bi-level cars (hopefully the California cars; the design work is done) would seem far more suitable...

Good point, but the Talgos, if they are indeed Series VIII cars, have at least one advantage over a California-type car - they can supposedly cruise at over 200mph. We all know that this doesn't matter right now. But let's say 15 years from now the line is upgraded to 150mph. The Talgo's could be put into high speed service. Not so true for a current generation California car.

They do have another advantage as well - extreme light weight compared to the bilevels. Were someone industrious enough to look up the respective weights, I'd guess that Talgo's weight per passenger is lower.

As for speed restrictions, Talgo's Series VIII cars are most likely not Tier II compliant, which limits them to 125 mph. Still respectable, but not their full potential.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: In short, I have to wonder if WIDOT is acquiring the proper equipment for use on this route; bi-level cars (hopefully the California cars; the design work is done) would seem far more suitable...

Not really. The Talgo's big advantage here - right out of the box - is acceleration. By being lighter, it'll get to speed faster. That's where the savings can be made, especially with the laughably poor acceleration of Amtrak's fleet.

The second big advantage is lots of doors at low level. Combine this with minor platform improvements. and you can get folks on and off the train faster. i.e. shorter dwells. The average speed of a stopped train = 0.

Including their "hell on wheels" business model of build 'em in whatever jurisdiction is poppin' for 'em.

You think Rotem landing the SEPTA order had nothing to do with the location of their US assembly plant?

The cars could well be a "loss leader"...the maintenance contract? that's the "sock it to 'em".

Nothing different from anyone else. Heck, in the 60's and 70's, GE and Westinghouse sold nuke plants as loss leaders - Oyster Creek was the first one, and even back then everyone probably knew GE was selling it at a loss...

Or as my dad always says, Kodak should just give away cameras, they're making the money on film anyway...

(Actually, I think they did in fact do that years ago)

One of those news releases linked to above says the sets are 14 cars long. Seems about twice as long as I would expect. What gives?

Finch wrote:One of those news releases linked to above says the sets are 14 cars long. Seems about twice as long as I would expect. What gives?

Which is odd because Talgo says the max car length is 11 passenger cars.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:...

Now consider Chi-Milw; straightaway "get 'er up to 79" and keep 'er there till the next stop. Scenery?, suburbia or cornfields "seen one seen 'em all". It's a ride Point A to B - and well received as it should be! It's what 21st century passenger railroading is all about.

In short, I have to wonder if WIDOT is acquiring the proper equipment for use on this route; bi-level cars (hopefully the California cars; the design work is done) would seem far more suitable...Talgo must have gotten in there is did a whale of a huckster job. Including their "hell on wheels" business model of build 'em in whatever jurisdiction is poppin' for 'em. The cars could well be a "loss leader"...the maintenance contract? that's the "sock it to 'em".

Just my thoughts.

However, let's not forget that there's a plan for Milwaukee to Madison service which I don't believe is nearly as straight. The Talgos may have an advantage on that segment should it ever come to pass.

AgentSkelly wrote:

Finch wrote:One of those news releases linked to above says the sets are 14 cars long. Seems about twice as long as I would expect. What gives?

Which is odd because Talgo says the max car length is 11 passenger cars.

Talgo cars are only 43 feet long, about half of an Amfleet. I believe that the 11-car max length applies to service with Talgo-provided traction units, which might not be applicable for loco-hauled sets.

I would imagine lightweight cars also means significantly lower fuel consumption, important if you expect $4/gal to come back.

TomNelligan wrote:The assembly plant and its accompanying jobs and taxes have to be the key to this deal. The Chicago-Milwaukee line is (mostly) about as straight as any route on the Amtrak system, so the Talgo's speed advantage on curves won't offer much of an advantage over conventional equipment on a line where good ol' Amfleet could do 100+ mph if the track conditions permitted.

The real benefits seem to be three-fold:
1. Psychological, or "new trains=better than old trains": Let's face it, the Amfleets and Horizons are old. Speaking from (very) recent experience on the Hiawatha today, a replacement is in DIRE need. Talgo trainsets will improve the Hiawatha performance. Improved passenger comfort, general cleanliness (the "shiny new..." factor), and publicity from the acquisition will create demand on their own.
2. Increased top-speed capability: For right now this won't matter since overhead electrification isn't likely to happen anytime soon, but the Talgo trainsets are designed to be adaptable for true HSR ops.
3. Improved service: I highly doubt that the old trainsets will be pulled from service outright. My guess is that they'll either purchase up some shiny new locomotives (less likely) or getting some of the p42s that Amtrak is currently repairing to pull/push the new trainsets. Since there are currently 7 daily round trips with two trains, having two new trainsets would (in theory) allow you to double service to 14 trips, with Talgo trains doing a lot of the work during peak hours.

I wouldn't be surprised though, to see Illinois do something similar. They don't want to look bad next to their (our) neighbors to the north, and some sort of equivalent deal would amount to a big statement. The recently passed Capital bill has $450 Million for HSR and some more $$$ for passenger rail in general; seeing some of this go into Talgo trains (or similar) wouldn't surprise me.

Finch wrote:One of those news releases linked to above says the sets are 14 cars long. Seems about twice as long as I would expect. What gives?

It MIGHT (and this is just a guess) be a misunderstanding, maybe they heard mention that there would be 14 cars and they assumed that meant each trainset would have 14 cars. I'm guessing they ordered 14 cars total (2 7-car sets), which seems much more likely given the price paid, capacity per car, etc.

My big question: Will this mean food service on Hiawatha trains?

Remember that the Talgo passenger cars are about half as big as the Amfleets. IIRC, each standard coach car in a Cascades trainsets seats 36 passengers. So a 14 car Talgo trainset is roughly equivalent to a 6 or 7 car Amfleet consist. If Washington State DOT gets ARRA funding for 4 new Talgo trainsets they will modify the existing 5 trainsets (@ 12 cars) and turn them into 4 trainsets @ 14 cars with 2 powered locomotives for each trainset.

This is exciting news. Maybe this will lead some of the other Midwest corridor routes to invest in new faster equipment as well. I wonder if the new Talgos will include food service cars, and if there will be Business Class cars like the Cascades.

If they plan to use existing locomotives, I'd expect P42s since I think that's what they already use and there aren't really any F59s to spare, but maybe they will assign some specifically to this route and give them their own paint scheme. A new version of the Milwaukee's orange and maroon would look sharp. The GE Genesis units are a slightly better match in height for the Talgos than the F59s, but they still tower over them. If they want the trains to look streamlined they'll need batfins again, just not quite as tall.

Finch wrote:One of those news releases linked to above says the sets are 14 cars long. Seems about twice as long as I would expect. What gives?

The Cascades Talgos are 12-13 cars long. This includes a power car at one end and a baggage car at the other, and a bistro car and a table car. But, the Talgo cars are much shorter than conventional cars, so it takes roughly 2 Talgo cars to equal a conventional passenger car. When the Talgos were out of service in the fall of 2007 for brake repair, the replacement trains had 5 amfleet/horizon cars: 4 coaches and a cafe. A 14 car Talgo is the equivalent of a 5-6 car train of conventional equipment.

California cars are fuel hogs to boot. wouldn't it make some sense for Hiawatha trains to run through to St. Louis, provided St. Louis trains are on time? Seems that woudl help defer the cost of providing a cafe car on such a short trip which would seem like overkill in services. I've always found the cart to be adequate.

Suburban Station wrote:California cars are fuel hogs to boot. wouldn't it make some sense for Hiawatha trains to run through to St. Louis, provided St. Louis trains are on time? Seems that woudl help defer the cost of providing a cafe car on such a short trip which would seem like overkill in services. I've always found the cart to be adequate.

You can't have anything going through Chicago until you have a through station in Chicago. Union station has a north facing terminal and a south facing terminal and only 2 or 3 through tracks. The through-tracks are currently really out of the way and I'm not sure about whether any of them even touch the current passenger platforms. I think that Milwaukee-Chicago-St. Louis (or Milwaukee-Chicago-other cities to the south of Chicago) would be a really good idea since you could have better equipment utilization, but you need to seriously renovate Union Station for that to happen.