Amtrak Rolling Stock Shortages, their fault or Rail Roads?

When Amtrak was set up, they review their prospective requirements as
to equipment. Their position was to acquire the best available cars and as
a result, a lot of Budd build cars were taken as their stainless steel car
bodies were good for a lot more years to come.
A good size number of cars that Amtrak acquired from the railroads in
1971 were in excellent condition. Southern Pacific, Union Pacific,
Burlington Northern, Seaboard Coast Line and a few others took excellent
care of their passenger cars and Amtrak got a lot of good use out of these
particular cars.
Any theory that the cars that Amtrak inherited were all falling apart is pure
nonesense.
One example, the NEC inherited a large number of Seaboard Coast Line
coaches and they were light years ahead of the old Penn Central junk that
had been there. Some of the old New York Central 2900 class Budd built
coaches were also fixed up and ran for quite a while.
Amtrak also leased some cars that they did not want for at least a while
from the former passenger train operators.
Illinois Central had a superb fleet of passenger equipment and very well
maintained, Amtrak took very little of it but they did lease some of it for a
while.

Until the final collapse of the passenger market, some of the major roads maintained standby fleets of older equipment that could be used for seasonal and emergency demands, The major Western carriers were especially well-geared to this; the seasonal extra sections to Grand Canyon and Yellowstone, and the Boy Scout jamborees were the best-known, and some of the equipment could be leased out for Florida trade in the winter season. Troop movements also justified some of the overhead.

But those days are long behind us and the market would now be almost exclusively focused on leisure travel, which will demand better equipment. Plus the fact that the market as a whole expects a level of personal attention that much of the work force is often loath to provide.

While I believe a series of midwestern corridors could be developed over time, I feel the best way to proceed would be to get the two with the greatest density, CHI-MIL & CHI-STL, going first. Improvements in speeds could justify more schedules, which in turn might free up a little equipment for special moves and/or expansion.

Amtrak's future equipment needs should be viewed from the perspective of where are its future business opportunities.

To equip a long distance train would require 4 - 6 trainsets, depending upon trip length. Assume a "standard" consist of one baggage, one crew-dorm, two sleepers, one diner, one lounge and four coaches. That's 40 - 60 cars to add one line to the network. However, only a couple of long distance routes immediately come to mind as possibilities for expansion, should Uncle Sam ever open his pockets: Chicago - Florida, Denver - Texas.

Adding short-haul services requires less investment in rolling stock. A trainset of 4 - 6 coaches could handle a round trip in the 350 - 400 mile range. Only three trainsets are required for the Downeaster service, which makes four - soon to be five - rounds trips between Boston and Portland, ME.

In theory, additional short-haul services should increase network connectivity and feed traffic to the long-hauls. I'd bet that the western transcons - SW Chief, CZ, Empire Builder, Texas Eagle - have experienced a small ridership bump attributable to the Blue Water feeding passengers to/from Flint, Lansing and Port Huron that the International couldn't handle due to its poor schedule.

As to replacement of existing rolling stock, the need is approaching rapidly, with the first Amfleet I cars nearing 30. Now is the time to plan an orderly replacement cycle. If Amtrak can avoid having to run them into the ground, newly retired Amfleet and Superliner cars would still have some life left in them. They would form the backbone of a reserve fleet that could add capacity during peak periods and be used to market charters, special excursions, fantrips, etc.

I have nothing but praise for Via's Heritage equipment. It is well maintained and still rolling along, unlike Amtrak's Heritage equipment. The toilet problem could have been rectified for continued use by Amtrak, and yes, I agree that Amtrak was short sighted for sidelining the Heritage sleepers in the wake of receiving far less Viewliners than was anticipated. Don't even get me started with domes. Yes, old equipment required tender loving care and often spare parts are hard to come by - but how does Via do it?

I think Via's Heritage equipment will be around for many years to come - there was talk about sending the equipment in for another round of refurbishment - the last one was done in the early 1990s. I have no complaints with Via's Heritage equipment. My experience has been that it's Firt CLass cars (i.e. sleepers, domes, Park Cars) are more reliable and comfortable than any of Amtrak's long distance First Class cars - let alone te amenities Via pampers its passengers with. The domes are truly the highlight. I'll take a Via Canadian train set any day over Amtrak's long distance trains. Granted, Via only has to concentrate on a few long distance trains, unlike Amtrak, but Amtrak's long distance trains are dwindling......

The eastern railroads were in a far better situation when it came to a busy
holiday weekend or heavy traffic period.
The New Haven Railroad for example, could draw from a big commuter
pool in Boston, Providence, New Haven, Stamford and New York. They
could put together a train of a dozen cars in Boston or New Haven and
use them anywhere on anything and still get them back where they were
needed for the morning rush following the holiday. If worse came to
worse, they could even draw on the big MU pool for more New Haven and
New York service and replace more standard cars for through trains.
The Pennsylvania also had big pools of commuter service cars that could
go out on through trains under similar conditions to the New Haven.
Even today, in the northeast corridor Amtrak can borrow cars from the
commuter agencies in Boston, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia and
Maryland and still get them back for their regular runs after the rush.
I am not saying that Amtrak could get an agreement from any of the
above agencies to use their cars but at least it could be done. CDOT and
MARC often make cars available for Amtrak use during holiday periods.
It could be another interesting Tanksgiving weekend in the northeast.
Noel Weaver

and THREE fingers pointing back at you.

If you want the Ampenny to become public policy...

http://www.house.gov/writerep

http://www.senate.gov

Only a man or woman passionate for public policy change is going to bring a new (or dusted off) legislative proposal forward.

John Perkowski

railfanofewu wrote:Claytor had been asking up until his death for at least one cent of the Federal Gas Tax to be dedicated to Passenger Rail, and said if he had it, Amtrak as we knew it would be far different in a few years. Somebody in Congress should dust it off, and bring it up in Congress, and keep up the pressure until it finally passes.

Mr Weaver,

Source: Wayner, Robert J. Amtrak Car Spotter, 2d Ed. New York: By the Author, 1973.

With the initial procurement from the railroads complete (including 2d round buys), the Amtrak fleet in 1973 included the following from the New York, New Haven, and Hartford:

14 RDCs

4 County class Baggage-Parlor (converted to lounge parlor) cars

4 State class 6 DBR, cafe-lounge cars

2 City named Parlor cars, rebuilt to coaches, rebuilt (by Amtrak in 1973) to coach-lounge cars.

7 City named Parlor cars, rebuilt to 72 seat coaches

31 cars total. ... Didn't the initial buy for Amtrak run to 1262 cars. 31 is what ... LESS THAN THREE PERCENT of the initial fleet??? Of that, one percent are RDCs ...

Contrast this to the Santa Fe, which had 36 10-6 sleepers (Budd PINE class, ACF PALM class), and a production run of 42 coaches (Budd 48 seaters) go to Amtrak (without mentioning the Hi-Level fleet, diners, lounges (to include a 1940 car), other sleepers, baggage, and other coaches. ... IIRC ATSF contributed on the order of 25% + of the initial fleet.

Contrast this to the UP, which after the 1967 RPO contract termination rebuilt the bulk of its heavyweight M&E fleet to 76' container flats ... and you can find at least one of them still supporting the UP business and excursion fleet at Heritage Park, Council Bluffs.

I submit most of the NH fleet failed to pass muster during Amtrak's procurement inspections. I will let others, who actually rode that equipment in the late 60s and early 70s, weigh in on its mechanical and passenger comfort conditions.

John Perkowski

Mr jp1822,

IF a corporation resources maintenance and capital repair/rebuild outlays,

THEN older equipment can stay on the books longer.

Two questions ...

How does VIA handle human waste these days? US EPA rules (no "dump to track") and cost of microphor retrofits are one of the condemning factors for Heritage Fleet revenue cars.

How much does VIA allocate to maintenance and capital repair per car per annum? How much does Amtrak?

John Perkowski

jp1822 wrote:(snippage)
Yes, old equipment required tender loving care and often spare parts are hard to come by - but how does Via do it?

I think Via's Heritage equipment will be around for many years to come - there was talk about sending the equipment in for another round of refurbishment - the last one was done in the early 1990s. (snippage)

John_Perkowski wrote:Mr Weaver,

Source: Wayner, Robert J. Amtrak Car Spotter, 2d Ed. New York: By the Author, 1973.

With the initial procurement from the railroads complete (including 2d round buys), the Amtrak fleet in 1973 included the following from the New York, New Haven, and Hartford:

14 RDCs

4 County class Baggage-Parlor (converted to lounge parlor) cars

4 State class 6 DBR, cafe-lounge cars

2 City named Parlor cars, rebuilt to coaches, rebuilt (by Amtrak in 1973) to coach-lounge cars.

7 City named Parlor cars, rebuilt to 72 seat coaches

31 cars total. ... Didn't the initial buy for Amtrak run to 1262 cars. 31 is what ... LESS THAN THREE PERCENT of the initial fleet??? Of that, one percent are RDCs ...

Contrast this to the Santa Fe, which had 36 10-6 sleepers (Budd PINE class, ACF PALM class), and a production run of 42 coaches (Budd 48 seaters) go to Amtrak (without mentioning the Hi-Level fleet, diners, lounges (to include a 1940 car), other sleepers, baggage, and other coaches. ... IIRC ATSF contributed on the order of 25% + of the initial fleet.

Contrast this to the UP, which after the 1967 RPO contract termination rebuilt the bulk of its heavyweight M&E fleet to 76' container flats ... and you can find at least one of them still supporting the UP business and excursion fleet at Heritage Park, Council Bluffs.

I submit most of the NH fleet failed to pass muster during Amtrak's procurement inspections. I will let others, who actually rode that equipment in the late 60s and early 70s, weigh in on its mechanical and passenger comfort conditions.

John Perkowski

I totally agree with you, the New Haven fleet indeed did not pass muster
but much of it remained for several years in commuter service.
The only Budd built equipment on the NHRR was the RDC's and the Roger
Williams train set.
My point was that the New Haven was well prepared for holiday rush periods. They also had reserve cars, plenty of them for camp specials,
fantrips, flower show specials and other passenger extras.
If a car was bad ordered, generally, one could be found to replace it as
necessary.
The cars in question may not have been very pleasant to ride in but they
did accomodate passengers and had seats in them.
While I agree with you, I stand by what I put on here regarding extra and
stand-by equipment.
Noel Weaver

Mr John_Perkowski:

VIA's Heritage cars dump the human waste the old fashioned way - no retention basins. But:

1. The old Superliner I's were retrofitted to deal with the toilet dumping issue. Probably easier to deal retrofit, but it was done.

2. How do the current Heritage Dorm bathrooms work? Were they retrofitted, sealed off? If sealed off - how does the crew handle this situation?

3. Although an inconvenience, but perhaps worth a bed in a sleeping than overnight in coach, why not put an Amfleet II, with the EPA required toilets for trains, adjacent to a Heritage sleeper, for use by sleeping car passengers. Throw in a shower too for that matter on the Amfleet II! All requires $$, but perhaps a temporary solution in the wake of receiving less Viewliners than originally envisioned. But one can't go backwards now, especially since most Heritage sleeping cars were sold or scrapped by Amtrak.

As for costs to maintain Via's Heritage equipment - I have no do idea. But it would appear they dedicate resources to the fleet, as it is kept in fairly good shape.

Here we go again..."why didn't Amtrak keep the Heritage fleet?".....

The points were very well made above....the cars were mostly 50+ years old, parts were not just 'hard to come by', but non-existant! If one wants a part, it has to be custom made! Very costly! And then, don't forget the cost of carrying inventory of parts! Not just storage fees, but the capital (eg: $$$) sitting on the shelf waiting to be used. Consider, too, how much inventory of parts to carry and where? Should spare seats be in Seattle? Chicago? Miami? Etc, etc, etc.

The point about current state-of-the-art for passenger travel is also well founded. Yes, there are still DC-3s out there, flying somewhere...50+ years old and more! But would you rather fly in a refurb DC-3 or a nice new 757??? The same is true with trains. I just returned from an overnight trip on the Lakeshore Limited to Chicago and back. I found the Amfleet II equipment very comfortable and 'modern'. I recall the Heritage fleet coaches that were on the train 5-6 years ago, and they were looking 'rough', both inside and out, even with comparable seats. Even the 50 year old refurb'd diners can't be made to look 'present day'. FWIW, the diner on 48(6) was AWOL! They put on a Horizon Dinette in its' place! Reliability of 50 year old equipment is also an issue here!

As for Via Rail still having heritage fleet, one must consider that they had NO new long-distance equipment, repeat, NO NEW LD EQUIPMENT since startup until the Renaissance Fleet from England arrived! VIA has had no choice but to maintain their "heritage fleet". Amtrak got Superliner Is & IIs, Amfleet II, and Viewliners. VIA got zilch in the same period!

And lastly, the toilets. The real 'doom' of the Heritage fleet was the toilets. By law, dumping on the tracks had to be stopped. Canada does not have this law (blame some congressman that got dumped on while fishing under a bridge in Florida 15 years ago!). I thought the Superliner Is had the right solution...grind & dump only at speed. But now it's pay for a honey wagon to take it away. The cost of putting in new toilets into a car outweighs the value of the car! And all you end up with is still an 'old car'. In a previous thread some months ago, it was suggested that the 10-6 sleepers have the toilets removed and a community toilet installed down the hall. Already, they sacrificed room 9 for the shower, and 10 for the handicap room, and another for the attendant, so now what? Take number 7 & 8 for the toilets (attendant in 6)? That would make it a 6-6. That means a maximum of 17 paying passengers per car. With so few saleable rooms, it would be the biggest money loser on the train!

Yes, the Heritage equipment was nice...in it's day. But it's time to say goodbye, once and for all!

Mr Atkinson,

Well spoken indeed.

Mr Telesha,

I refer you to Ms Bly's post. I submit the following:

We agree that Cor-Ten(tm), in railroad service, isn't an optimum product (witness the rebuild program of the SP in the early 60s).

The NH cars, at the time period October 1970-May 1971, failed to meet NRPC/Railpax Amtrak inspection criteria, specifically, time remaining until a major overhaul.

P-S cars DID make it into Amtrak service. The Santa Fe fleet comes to mind. Blue, Palm, and part of the Regal series of sleepers are specific examples, as are some of the 44 seat coaches.

BTW, as I was scrubbing the Amtrak Car Spotter last night, AT LEAST TWO ATSF cars built for the 1937 streamlining of the Chief made it to Amtrak ... and one of them was a Club car. Equipment, well maintained, did have a 35+year service life.

But that last sentence leads us to funding for capital maintenance, and we've seen the results of the Warrington dis-investment!

John Perkowski

NellieBly wrote:A few points to remember:

<snippage of an excellent post>
2) Amtrak's main criterion was that any cars it acquired had to go ten years without needing a major overhaul. They also had a fixation on stainless steel, plus they were only offering scrap prices. Thus, a lot of good equipment "got away". But 35 years later, that's a moot point.

<again, snippage of an excellent passenger procurement and maintenance policy post>

Mr Weaver,

Per the March 1971 Official Register, UP, at the 11th Hour, still had 4 heavyweight coaches (all betterment rebuilds) and 3 diner-lounge cars (converted from 36 seat heavyweight diners) (again, all betterment rebuilds) on the roster.

BTW, UP total fleet in March 71 was:

82 sleepers
31 diners
104 coaches
7 clubs
15 dome coaches
13 dome lounges
67 Head-end cars of all configurations

(Dome diners are already out of service; iirc UP pulled them to storage accounts in 1969)

What was the remaining NH fleet in the OR at that point????

John Perkowski

To be clear - I certainly agree that replacing Heritage coaches with Amfleets/Superliners was the way to go - efficiency of standardization. However, in the absent of not receiving the 100 Viewliners Amtrak was hoping for, I am not convinched retiring the Heritage sleepers were a good idea. And we still have the Hertiage Diners and Hertiage Dorms roaming the sytem to maintain. No doubt parts are hard to come by - yet our Northern neighbor maintains a plenty of Hertiage sleepers and diners. I don't argue with the toilet issue - it's an issue. Could something creative been instituted? I just look at the current system being stripped of single level sleepers even in current times (2000 - 2004) and continuous maintenance issues even with the Heritage sleeper replacements - the Viewliners. I even have issues with the utilization of the Viewliners.

I respect Mr. Perkowski and bratkinson comments on the issue, and yes, we've debated the Heritage equipment retirement long enough - so I'll sign off on it.

PS - There's still a Lake Shore Limited trainset (if not more) operating with a dinette and absent a full service diner. The dinette and food offered caused quite an uproar with the sleeping car passengers. Food was terrible. I would have hoped Amtrak could have outfitted the dinette with the same food it outfits the Cardinal and Three Rivers - similar to selections on Acela Express - but nope! Soggy sandwiches, pizza, hot dogs and hamburgers. I guess Beach Grove must have a bunch of bad-ordered Heritage diners since earlier this year - I count at least 4: three that were pulled from the Cardinal and one now from the Lake Shore Limited. The sleeping car attendant seemed to think there were a bunch of Heritage Diners in for refurbishment - only time will tell.

What were the Roger Williams RDC that went to Amtrak and what were their Issues?

AmtrakFan