Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

How many platforms would need raising in the northeast, to do away with traps? Presuming these cars are for that regional service only.

even if only for emergency egress the traps are not major item , it not like you save millions

R36 Combine Coach wrote:ACF is the only one of the great American coach builders left, now in freight only. But the St. Louis Car assembly plant is intact and still has the cranes used to lift cars in the assembly shop (now repurposed as the St. Louis Business Center).

And they made the right decision by getting out of the passenger business early, it seems. Would still be cool to see them catalog an aluminum-body passenger car like a Comet, it would be within their capabilities, but no one is buying that style of car anymore.

WesternNation wrote:

east point wrote:Why replace AM-1s when AM-2s have much more mileage and wear and tear on tracks that are rougher than NEC ?

Because the AM-1s are nearly as old as Amtrak and are probably showing signs of wear. Amtrak’s refresh is only a temporary measure, as the cars are more economical to replace than to repair.

So if you buy a 2010 model XZ car and I bought a 2014 model XZ . You drove yours 150000 miles on smooth roads but I drove mine 190,000 miles on rough roads which one would have a rougher ride now and be more on its way to the junk yard ? That is what we are comparing on the AM-1s and Am-2s. Both have had their interiors redone so that should not count. We have ridden both models on the same track section and find the AM-2s have more rattles and ride rougher both over the trucks and in the middle of the cars. Calendar age is not everything . Used the fleet strategy plan of AM-2s on average 40% more miles than AM-1s. However that figure is several years old and suspect that AM-2s have 50% more miles now on rougher freight RRs for the most part.. The AM-1 lounges used on LD trains are the exception as they have relatively the same mileages as AM=2s.

Siemens is by far the obvious choice for these cars. I will be very surprised if any other vendor even comes close to getting this contract.

I suspect CAF, Bombardier and Nippon Sharyo will bid but I doubt they will get selected. Hyundai-Rotem also seems like a likely bidder but unlikely winner given their recent history with the MBTA. Alstom is the potential spoiler for Siemens on comparable quality, experience and relationship with Amtrak.

Kinkisharyo in Jersey City seems like an unlikely bidder given their U.S. focus on light rail. New entrant CRRC in Springfield is an interesting possibility and potentially a major spoiler on price.

This should be interesting to watch ...

WesternNation wrote:

east point wrote:Why replace AM-1s when AM-2s have much more mileage and wear and tear on tracks that are rougher than NEC ?

Because the AM-1s are nearly as old as Amtrak and are probably showing signs of wear. Amtrak’s refresh is only a temporary measure, as the cars are more economical to replace than to repair.

Here's Amtrak Press Release on this topic
https://media.amtrak.com/2018/06/amtrak ... equipment/

Yes, "early days" but clearly they have started the process.

I thought Alstom and Siemens were merging - wouldn’t that mean bidding against themselves?

Also, has Kinkisharyo ever built mainline rolling stock in the United States? Some of their LRTs are very substantial (DART’s fleet comes to mind) but they still aren’t 85’ FRA-compatible.

I bet Stadler and CRRC will return the RFI, and I bet CAF will not. I’d be surprised if Kawasaki or Mitsubishi did either. BBD can’t afford not to return an RFI, or maybe two (single- and multi-level.) Nippon Sharyo may just fold up shop in America rather than chase this contract, the trade wars aren’t in their favor.

But so far Siemens has the best product, which means they will probably lose the contract to a low bidder

You're right I forgot about the merger. I do not believe that Kinkisharyo has ever built FRA compliant main line stock.

Agreed that Siemens is vulnerable to being underbid.

There 're 2 basic forms of coaching stock designs out there,1,Siemens Brightline design,with a little tweak for traps for low platforms
2,The Viewliner bodyshell,with modules for coach seating,food service,lounge seating,and Biz class seating,already has traps for low platforms
those 2 designs are the best bet for Amfleet I and II replacement orders.
The Viewliner bodyshell is a proven design,and good for 125 mph ops already,Amtrak owns the design and could licence it to Nippon Sharyo
to build the coach/food service shells,then plug in the needed modules.
Siemens has the state owned Ca/midwest order on their books,Amtrak would need to wait for that order to finish,
and the modified design will need to go thru FRA tests to boot

Backshophoss wrote:There 're 2 basic forms of coaching stock designs out there,1,Siemens Brightline design,with a little tweak for traps for low platforms
2,The Viewliner bodyshell,with modules for coach seating,food service,lounge seating,and Biz class seating,already has traps for low platforms

I remember the proposed corridor car concept some years ago was an Acela based coach design.

If a Viewliner coach is chosen, it will probably be either CAF or CRRC building it. N-S already has a proven 125 mph-capable stainless steel coach (the MARC II) should they choose to bid, and after the dismal failure of their bilevel they have good reason to not try to reengineer another car.

Backshophoss wrote:There 're 2 basic forms of coaching stock designs out there,1,Siemens Brightline design,with a little tweak for traps for low platforms
2,The Viewliner bodyshell,with modules for coach seating,food service,lounge seating,and Biz class seating,already has traps for low platforms
those 2 designs are the best bet for Amfleet I and II replacement orders.
The Viewliner bodyshell is a proven design,and good for 125 mph ops already,Amtrak owns the design and could licence it to Nippon Sharyo
to build the coach/food service shells,then plug in the needed modules.
Siemens has the state owned Ca/midwest order on their books,Amtrak would need to wait for that order to finish,
and the modified design will need to go thru FRA tests to boot

It has been kiboshed here but if Amtrak decides to go multilevel for whatever reason there is Bombardier and Kawasaki.

Viewliner is a 1980s product, while a safe pick I bet Amtrak wants to see what the latest in rail pax stock running now around the world.

Isn't Siemens narrower than Amfleet and Viewliner?

On some dimensions it is probably wider (for example at the top) than a Viewliner. It is definitely wider than an Amfleet on most dimensions above and below the center line of the cabin.

frequentflyer wrote:It has been kiboshed here but if Amtrak decides to go multilevel for whatever reason there is Bombardier and Kawasaki.

Multilevel equipment has gotten complaints about lack of space, the only time they were used outside a commuter configuration was ACES train.

gokeefe wrote:You're right I forgot about the merger. I do not believe that Kinkisharyo has ever built FRA compliant main line stock.

Agreed that Siemens is vulnerable to being underbid.

Both the MARC II coaches/cab cars and the South Shore's current EMU fleet are Nippon-Sharyo designs - I'd call both of those FRA compliant main line stock... While it's true that they're not currently focusing on the heavy rail market in the US, they have before, and they certainly could again.