Amtrak Long Distance Fleet Replacement - Superliner Replacement - Bilevel or Single Level

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 6:26 pm Yeah, I'm getting a bit tired of the assumption that going single-level nationally would suddenly be a problem or issue for ground accessibility. If it's not a problem to run Amfleets, Horizons or Venture cars where 80% of the ridership is, then it shouldn't be a problem for the other 20% of the stations.

There are already portable wheelchair lifts (e.g. the crank-o-matics) available to get customers on/off a standard car height level.

There are also car-mounted lifts available commercially, similar to what Metra and other agencies use on their fleets.

Bi-levels are great for commuter service where you can do high density for short distances. It's been a 40 year experiment that never really proved necessary for long distance travel.

I'm not going to dispute that it can be overcome. There's existing designs that have said lift built-in. Lets put the accessibility of single-level on a national scale aside.

The real question is, does the demand on LD services require bi-level LD services?

Lets take a prepandemic consist. I'm assuming two coaches, a lounge, a diner, four sleepers, and a baggage car. Assuming a "minimum" of each room having one person, and a maximum being at capacity rating, and a full coach...

Min/max for Superliner consist: 169-344
Min/max for Viewliner consist: 76-157

Um, that's more than double the capacity there. That's... well, if you go single for LD flat out, you're leaving money on the table. Add that you have half a diner in seating capacity VS a full floor... the business side of me says "Why cut ourselves down? We make more money going bi-level!"

Sure, we can design a bi-level train consist that you can go end-to-end in a wheelchair. I got two versions already that I'm tweaking, one for the sequel novel I'm writing (link below in signature). Will such rough plans work in real life? Will I get a call from Amtrak or a manufacturer to license the design? Or will it be so close I could sue and then settle for a small undisclosed amount plus getting into the writers-on-rail program? Who knows?!?

The point here is that it's early. Amtrak has to rebuild it's mechanical repair workforce and get through inspections of the Superliner equipment to get things back to full force. By that time it'll have some data to help it decide to go bi-level or single-level... or to do both on the 2-day LD trips with a full-fledge "dorm sleeper" car (1 accessible, rest roomettes).

That “different perspective” thread will cut up and merged here if I carve out enough time at a computer to do it correctly.

“Last month, a Request for Information was sent to potential suppliers defining and describing the scope of Amtrak’s overnight train fleet—including Superliner I & II, Viewliner I & II and Amfleet II railcars—and solicited input from manufacturers regarding the replacement of this equipment.”

Why replace the Viewliner II’s? Didn’t they just get those?

Bracdude181 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 7:41 pm Why replace the Viewliner II’s? Didn’t they just get those?

Don't get too far ahead of the process here...

A RFI (Request for Information) is just a starting point to give supplier a chance to highlight their capabilities, for Amtrak to put out a non-binding straw-man for the possible scope of a RFP (Request for Proposal), and gauge the overall interest in responding to the RFP once it's issued.

Lots of projects I've been involved with skip the RFI process altogether unless you need to get more details on a business case justification. The flipside of that is that the RFI process usually helps guide what ultimately goes into the specs that RFP responses would be based on.

Continuing with the rabbit hole I like to keep going down, it could be a matter of looking outside Amtrak's internal discussions and soliciting the suppliers to make a strong case for single-level vs. bi-level equipment...

It's no secret that suppliers would rather sell an existing design than take the risk of a new design like Nippon-Sharyo did, and most of the long-distance designs the existing suppliers have to offer are single level.

STrRedWolf wrote:
The real question is, does the demand on LD services require bi-level LD services?

The data over ten years pre-pandemic has said categorically "no" at the macro level. Autotrain is the outlier. Everything else runs 60% or less, so all that extra complexity on 100% of the West fleet is wasted space most of the time.

Airlines stopped flying larger & more complex A380/747/A340/MD11 and replaced them with lower capacity B777/A350/B787s. The bigger airframes really only filled up some of the time. During the times they do fill up, prices are higher, and yields are higher.

Its time Amtrak plan their fleet around the 45 weeks a year they're empty vs the 7 weeks they might be full.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Even with that plan for 45 weeks of not full, given no other constraints (like platform height or max car height), it's the weight per passenger that really matters in a passenger rail car in terms of its operating costs, and the Superliners designs have any single level car beat hands down on that for any possible seating arrangement.

Regarding the View II's, they run primarily in the Northeast. I think their inclusion is probably superfluous as these routes are not Silver, Palm, or LSL.

Of the named routes, the Cresent uses Viewliner II and Amfleet II equipment.

eolesen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:50 am Airlines stopped flying larger & more complex A380/747/A340/MD11 and replaced them with lower capacity B777/A350/B787s. The bigger airframes really only filled up some of the time. During the times they do fill up, prices are higher, and yields are higher.

Off topic, and will fully understand if killed.

I did a little "airviewing" yesterday at MIA. I allowed three hours before flight time to get from Downtown to MIA. While the elapsed journey time on Metromover, Metrorail, and People Mover, was 55min. I had been told that TSA there was some kind of "clown act", which it was. So there I was waiting at a gate at end of a concourse with good airviewing (well, until some guy stood in front of the window just looking at his phone )

But I observed many a 747 take off roll; only difference was they were flying under foreign flags (some without any visible markings on the hull) or for airlines that "only the Defense Department knows".

nomis wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 7:37 pm That “different perspective” thread will cut up and merged here if I carve out enough time at a computer to do it correctly.

Thanks brother.

Will set a reminder for 2033 to check in and see why these train sets haven't been delivered yet.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:10 am But I observed many a 747 take off roll; only difference was they were flying under foreign flags (some without any visible markings on the hull) or for airlines that "only the Defense Department knows".

DoD commercial flights are out of Jacksonville, not Miami. Those minimally marked 747s were most likely air freighters (the last few orders for new 747s were air freight firms) as air freight firms rarely benefit from advertising at airports.

OK; back to the rails.

Now that any airline I've heard of has decided on a livery that turns the fuselage on an aircraft into a billboard, will Amtrak follow suit with the new equipment that is either on order or planned to be?

Even the railroads won't advertise on their owned/leased boxcars or hoppers anymore. Can't see Amtrak doing it, but they might be able to sell luggage rack advertising inside.

Not much sense in a railroad advertising itself on its own boxcars; most people waiting for a freight train to clear a grade crossing are not industrial traffic managers controlling $millions in freight shipments, while everyone at an airport is a potential future customer for some airline or other. As concerns Amtrak, many recent comments suggest that washing the cars would do a lot to encourage future travel by rail.