Railroad Forums 

  • Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 5:18 am

Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 Reply

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636554  by Gilbert B Norman
 
GWoodle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 12:13 am A little surprised Auto Train doesn't use a DPU Put 1 unit in front of the auto racks. If full this could be heavy part of the train?
Mr. Woodle's proposal has merit. "Distributed power" overseas (well, Continental Europe) is quite common. I have observed OBB RailJets meet at Salzburg, one from Innsbruck (they do not go over the Brenner Pass into Italy) and another from Bregenz (Easternmost point in Austria). At Salzburg, they are coupled together to make one fourteen car train with one engine center, and another, depending whether the sets are in push or pull mode, on head or rear as the case may be.

"Meanwhile back in the States", if there were to be an engine mid-Auto Train, breaking the passenger and auto rack consists would be expedited. Simply cut the cars at the mid train engine, passenger cars pull in, Yard crew (Engineer only) boards second engine and handles the set of racks to the stub vehicle handling tracks.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636563  by electricron
 
Sounds nice until you look at the numbers and how the Auto Train is set up in its consist. Your Railjet train example was just 14 cars in length after both trains were assembled. The Auto train usual consist has 16 Superliner cars and 33 Autoracks. Per Wiki:
"Two GE Genesis locomotives in the front, a transition sleeper car, three sleeping cars, a sightseer lounge car, a full-service dining car, five sleepers, a cafe dining car, four coaches, and up to 33 autoracks."
One locomotive powers the starboard HEP bus, and the second locomotive powers the port HEP bus, placing eight Superliner cars being powered from each bus. The odd cars in the consist are powered off one bus, the even cars off the other bus.
Having the locomotive back to back allows refueling at the halfway point from a single refueling truck.
And yes, these locomotives need refueling because the distance traveled between Lorton and Sanford is 855 miles (1,376 km), with a P42 distance range without refueling between 880 and 1012 miles. See data and math below.

Do you really want to risk running out of fuel a few miles short of your destination?

Per another website left unmentioned.
"Based on the Dec 2010 report (the most recent) trains average between 2.2 and 2.5 gallons per train mile. In the figures your looking for, that would be between .4 and .46 miles per gallon."
A P42 locomotive has 2200 gallons of fuel per Wiki
Math = 2200 x .4 =880 miles, or 2200 x .46 = 1012 miles

I wish to add that while there are very few mountains to climb along this corridor, few Amtrak trains have as heavy a load to pull. therefore the .4 miles per gallon is closer to the truth than .46 miles per gallon.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636576  by eolesen
 
Perhaps more of an argument to run the autoracks as a separate section...

Put freight engines on the front that won't need refueling, and the racks could get there first and start unloading.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636580  by scratchyX1
 
eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 6:49 pm Perhaps more of an argument to run the autoracks as a separate section...

Put freight engines on the front that won't need refueling, and the racks could get there first and start unloading.
I've wondered why the auto racks aren't a separate section, and contracted to be operated as a freight movement. They could leave 30 minutes ahead of the passengers, and actually fit most sidings.
Does auto train run with MAS of 79 mph, or 60 mph?

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636587  by west point
 
electricron wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 1:47 pm
Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 7:56 am One locomotive powers the starboard HEP bus, and the second locomotive powers the port HEP bus, placing eight Superliner cars being powered from each bus. The odd cars in the consist are powered off one bus, the even cars off the other bus.
Unless Amtrak has changed its HEP distribution that wiki statement is false. That HEP method is not even the same as VIA's crossover ,method as Amtrak has considered t9o change to VIA's method but rejected it as too expensive.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636592  by electricron
 
west point wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 9:22 pm
electricron wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 1:47 pm One locomotive powers the starboard HEP bus, and the second locomotive powers the port HEP bus, placing eight Superliner cars being powered from each bus. The odd cars in the consist are powered off one bus, the even cars off the other bus.
Unless Amtrak has changed its HEP distribution that wiki statement is false. That HEP method is not even the same as VIA's crossover ,method as Amtrak has considered t9o change to VIA's method but rejected it as too expensive.
I think the quotes above were misidentified which I have fixed in this reply. Maybe I had confused what VIA does with the Canadian with Am6trak on the Auto Train. If I had, sorry for the misinformation. Never-the-less, the need to refuel midway happens on every train in both directions because of the distance traveled.
As for the running a separate section of the train for the autoracks, someone has to pay for the additional two crews per direction or an additional four crews every day, whether or not Amtrak or another rail operator runs the autorack train sections.

And that my friends, places a long distance train that occasionally earns a profit deeply into not breaking even. I doubt Congress believes the American taxpayers should help pay for transporting "automobiles" to and from Florida.

The reason Amtrak occassionally earns a profit with this train is because it is one long train and not two shorter trains.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636651  by STrRedWolf
 
RandallW wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 1:45 pm
Maybe? These all followed on from a question about toilets and hotel power in the new coaches and could they do something different on new LD coaches to make it easier and/or safer to provide hotel power for passenger cars that are added or dropped en route since vacuum flushed toilets require power.
I think having some way to provide isolated toilet power in case of accidents is worth while. Having to wait 4 hours to flush a toilet isn't the best thing in the world.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636718  by lordsigma12345
 
If they’ve indeed gone bilevel as stated I suspect that the Auto Train is one of the primary reasons. The Auto Train operation is certainly the most compelling argument for bilevel cars. On the previous post about HEP I’d concur that description of a “port and starboard” (don’t you mean engineers side and fireman’s side) HEP isn’t correct. It’s like all other Amtrak trains one engine powers the entire HEP for the train and the other is just a puller providing the bulk of the traction. The 800KW HEP output of the Genesis units is one of the limits on the number of superliners in the AT consist. When the ALC42s eventually take over it will increase this to 1000 KW. But trying to keep the main topic - I think the Auto train is at least an argument for bilevel.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636719  by RandallW
 
The Auto Train uses two platforms in Sanford because the number of passenger cars exceeds the platform length, are there any other Superliner trains that switching to single level would force a capacity reduction on?

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636733  by STrRedWolf
 
RandallW wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:21 pm The Auto Train uses two platforms in Sanford because the number of passenger cars exceeds the platform length, are there any other Superliner trains that switching to single level would force a capacity reduction on?
Well, how large was a pre-pandemic Superliner consist at it's longest (in terms of number of coaches and sleepers)?

That said, equal cars of Superliner and Viewliner II equipment gives the following: Viewliner II sleepers have 2/3rds the capacity of the Superliner. So you need 50% more Viewliner II's. Amfleet II LD coaches are 79% over Superliner coaches, thus one more for every four.

The question now is... how long is Pittsburgh's platform?

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636739  by west point
 
IMO what is sad is that some of the new Superliner cars cannot be taller to be used exclusively on Auto train. Taller cars would be able to give amenities that would attract many more passengers. As well the present Auto Train cars would go into the general nationwide pool. IMO there could be other uses for taller cars I could imagine Starlight, Sunset, the new SAS -- DFW - Meridian - Atlanta - Florida to interchange with Auto Train. Of course no way to go to CHI.

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636834  by west point
 
electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:57 pm Since all but two long distance Superliner trains go to Chicago, that height restriction would be a disaster for taller cars.
I guess they could implode Union Station and rebuild it from scratch????????.
do not forget Auto Train #3. Correct about CHI. But it is going to need fixing for at least several platforms and tracks. That is because the clearances are not tall enough for the future HSR CAT to be installed for present Superliners. As for METRA and the CAT???

Re: Superliner Replacement Request For Proposal Released

 #1636841  by electricron
 
west point wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:51 am do not forget Auto Train #3. Correct about CHI. But it is going to need fixing for at least several platforms and tracks. That is because the clearances are not tall enough for the future HSR CAT to be installed for present Superliners. As for METRA and the CAT???
All but two Superliners go to Chicago. One being the AutoTrain and two being the Coast Starlight. Hmmm, three being the Heartland Flyer. Oooops, I was wrong technically, but not figuratively. For all practical purposes, the new Superliners need to fit into Chicago's Union Station.
 Reply
 Return to “Amtrak”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -