Acela Replacement and Disposition Discussion

Matt Johnson wrote:Having a tilting coach in a non-fixed standard consist is possible (see VIA LRC) but comes with additional complexity and limitations (such as having to set up the locomotives, even if they don't tilt themselves, to interface with the tilting equipment). Obviously all coaches in a consist would have to be tilt coaches in order to use the feature. In short, not worth the cost and complexity for the Regional trains whereas it makes sense for the premium fare high speed service.

The Talgos do OK with passive tilt pulled by conventional locomotives, but that configuration is strictly a ride comfort thing for superelevated track where the upper level of a Superliner would be (and was) a little bit of a barf bag ride for those prone to motion sickness. It doesn't allow the trains to go a single MPH faster. Across the scale of the single-level using route network that's just not worth the cost of having to maintain 500 cars worth of tilt mechanisms. You quickly get to the point where you're having to segment the order to places where tilt matters vs. tilt not mattering...which fragments the fleet worse than it is today and starts harming the economy-of-scale of the order. Quickly down the slippery slope to a place Amtrak really doesn't want to go, since they've taken such great pains with these next-gen fleet plans to enforce more car and loco design uniformity for the sake of scale. People on RR.net might say--"Yes, go for it and fragment for the Regionals' sake"--but Amtrak's actually crunched those numbers and pretty clearly come out in favor of more, not less fleet uniformity. We don't necessarily have to agree with them, but do have to acknowledge that they did the math to back up their stance. Personal preferences for Pendolinos as all or a fragment of the single-level fleet need to meet the same standard of showing the maths.


Also...one of the potentially big--and very underrated--features of the Viewliners and/or any competing designs they allow into the bidding is the modularity of the interiors. Viewliner livery is all snap-in sections that can be changed out to something completely different with minimal downtime, simply by popping off the end cap on the vehicle and lifting out the snap-in sections. Changing a coach from corridor configuration to LD configuration--and vice versa--can be done in as little time as a couple weeks of shop rotation. You can cook up all sorts of half-and-half configurations for more economical-to-operate business cars, cafe cars, lounges, etc. You can change the % makeup of the fleet if a certain car configuration needs to be surged for some new category of service class. And, if the states are willing to pony up the $$$, individual routes can finally have custom liveries without needing to deviate from standard Amtrak spec or create headaches for Beech Grove (i.e. no need to go 'rogue' like the Piedmont). That last one I think is where things are going to get interesting when all 500+ single-levels are upgraded to the Viewliner/next-gen spec.

Unless somebody can float a Pendolino design with the same modularity where you can pop the end cap, un-bolt the sections, and lift in/out with a forklift...I don't see a good reason to sacrifice the flex that's otherwise right around the corner. It's less fleet-wide dexterity, more total cost of ownership over life of the cars because the interiors are harder to change, and not a sacrifice worth the upside of tilt when so few single-level routes can actually make use of the tilt. Which again brings us to the whole pickle of: do you have to fragment the fleet NE Regionals vs. everything else to accomplish the service goals?

Now, there may indeed be a bidder who can finagle a universally configurable tilt vehicle. But I doubt you're going to get more than 1 or 2 of them sticking their necks out for a domestic order that has to meet every other spec in the next-gen standard, so it's a very very limited pool of potential manufacturers compared to just any old non-modular tilt vehicle. Then, even if they are reconfigurable, weigh whether they are as reconfigurable as the bidders of non-tilt rolling stock (either Viewliner or competing design) without that inducing harder-to-maintain design customization. Limits the potential buying options even more. You start banking on a winning bid hitting a hole in one of perfect modularity, perfect tilt performance, and perfect orthodoxy-of-design when the odds of finding a design and manufacturer who can sweep all 3 categories diminishes the stiffer those feature requirements get. Back to that dilemma: how much compromise and/or fleet fragmentation is worth it for meeting the service goals? And how does the math for that stack up vs. the math Amtrak has crunched pointing strongly in favor of fleet uniformity and design hegemony?


There's no one right answer to these questions, but let's all agree there's a whole lot more number-crunching complexity to meeting the burden of proof for this order than meets the eye of an NE Regional rider who pines for the comfort of a tilting car.

With the exception of the View II Bags,the design of the Viewliners,there are 2 Plugs,1 on each car side to allow
interior modules to be swapped out.
These "plugs" are part of the carside structure,it might be not allowed HSR carbodies under the current FRA rules.

I don't think it is quite as easy as it sounds, aren't the "plugs" welded in ??? . Also if you want to swap the module furtherest away from the plug , the whole lot has to come out .
On most rolling stock , seats are on rails , so changing seat pitch is easy, the window pitch stays the same though, but it would on a viewliner as well.

One massive fleet of the same style equipment and forget about the next-generation single level concept cars.

My understanding of the latest Northeast Corridor Future report is that it proposes this: use the same equipment for intercity express and corridor trains that don't leave the corridor.

I wonder if any Viewliner car in regular service has ever been modified using the modularity feature. I guess the first major experience will be in converting Viewliner Is to Viewliner IIs. It will require a whole lot of work pulling every module out and replacing them. Also I wonder what, if any is the weight penalty for this modularity.

8400 was the Diner "Test Lab" of moduler swapout of the interior componets,as is
the other Viewliner prototype at Bear,of the View II sleeper modules.
The "Kitchen" module on "American View" is close to the "plug"on that car side.
While the "plug"is good for 125 mph service,having that on a 220 mph HSR car,
might become the "weak" link in a wreck.

Yes , a high speed design would be a moocoque design, with the whole body been structural .

But the baggage cars don't have that plug, right? So it's something that can be eliminated.

Relying on old memory (1993-1994), I recall from a tour of the Bombardier facility in Barre, Vermont that on the Superliner I cars the modules were originally brought through the side plug. However, the new Superliner II cars had differently designed modules that could come through the ends of the car.

Although I have to wonder how a larger module could have been brought through the side plug and end up on the top floor in the originl procedure.

Possibly thru a floor "plug" on the Superliner I's

From the Hornell Evening Tribune:

While a lot of what is being said is presumption prior to all of the ancillary issues being resolved, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest, the matter stands at about 7 or 8. I believe the director of Amtrak is saying that, yes, other bids could be considered, as The Evening Tribune stated in its article.

http://www.eveningtribune.com/article/2 ... /151029992" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So it would appear that Alstom is the preferred bidder and that Sen. Schumer opening his mouth too soon hasn't affected the procurement process.

How fast can a train go with original viewliners in the consist?

I've done 125 MPH in them.

TrainPhotos wrote:How fast can a train go with original viewliners in the consist?

Currently they're rated for 110mph operation.

The new ones will be rated for 125mph and eventually the old ones uprated.

http://www.lerail.com/alstom-en-discuss ... rames-lgv/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If this article is correct and if my google translate is also, it appears that alstom proposed a hybrid train with tgv locomotives, unpowered agv cars, and pendolino tilt mechanisms.

Interesting to note the new Eurostar E320 train has seats for 900 passengers. That's equivalent to a packed cattle car on Metra or Jersey Transit. Today's Acela holds maybe 300. A regional can hold ~520. I know there are length limitations on NEC, but wow, can you imagine each regional and Acela holding 900 people?

Here's some fun with seat math. Currently, 16 Acela at 300 seats and 21 Regionals at 518 seats means 15,742 seats on the NEC every day. If you were to put all of those trains into Eurostar E320's at 900 seats, you get 33,300 seats, a whopping double capacity.

Now perhaps it seems worth it to lengthen some platforms?