Wishlist for Superliner III's

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

norfolkwesternhenry

Lead Service Attendant
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
474
Location
Minneapolis, MN
What are some things you would want on Superliner III's, should they ever be built. Here is my list:

1. better electrics in sleepers

2. wider staircases

3. acces ability to high and low level platforms

4. more glass in the dining car (windows)

5. handle 125 MPH

6. slumber coach cars

7. double windows in the roomettes

8. no toilets in the roomette!!!

9. more headroom in the upper bunk

10. bigger shower stall

11. more controllable water faucets

12. room for me!!
 
In addition or in place of wider stairs, I would suggest seriously exploring if some sort of elevator could be practical in a bi-level passenger car. Given the numbers of senior passengers are others who cannot handle or just don't do well on stairs, this seems a natural addition.

I know a steam elevator was at least mentioned in the development of the original Superliners back in the 1970's, but of course the continued use of steam was a non-starter. Surely an electric elevator should be possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The 'Ultradome' bilevels the cruise lines operate on the Alaska RR have lifts. Unfortunately, those cars are too tall to be used on some Amtrak Superliner routes
 
The 'Ultradome' bilevels the cruise lines operate on the Alaska RR have lifts. Unfortunately, those cars are too tall to be used on some Amtrak Superliner routes
Could you please specify what locations are too tight of clearance for two additional feet of railcar?
 
There are small elevators that could fill the bill on the market already, but any kind of mechanical or electrical failure could leave a vulnerable person trapped for a long time in many areas. Not sure that would fly. You would still need the stairs for safety, so you would be taking space away from something else. No reason to get wheelchairs to the upper level in the sleepers, they won't fit in the aisles.
 
Chicago is a location that cannot take taller cars.
Exactly, and that eliminates several routes. There may be some others...
That is quite an understated fact. It eliminates everything except the west coast service, The Sunset Ltd. and the Auto Train. Such cars may thrive on a few short haul tourist operations. It is very unlikely that they will see the light of the day anywhere on the national network.

BTW, where exactly are these hypothetical cars going to run at 125mph?
 
Many of the points are valid, but considering the era in which the existing cars were designed, should/would be incorporated as a matter of course in anything designed today, and are not wishlist, they are completely reasonable. Better HVAC, improved lighting and communications (incl data, cars with more receptacles, and second row windows for the uppers in sleepers would be non controversial and expected. Other list items may not be practical (that doesn't mean not desirable) given the dimensions that need to be met, or economic realities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are some things you would want on Superliner III's, should they ever be built. Here is my list:

1. better electrics in sleepers

2. wider staircases

3. acces ability to high and low level platforms

4. more glass in the dining car (windows)

5. handle 125 MPH

6. slumber coach cars

7. double windows in the roomettes

8. no toilets in the roomette!!!

9. more headroom in the upper bunk

10. bigger shower stall

11. more controllable water faucets

12. room for me!!

13. elevator for wheelchairs
1. I am not exactly sure what you mean by better electrics. If that's more outlets, possibly, probably.

2. I would suspect they would probably have staircases similar to the California/Surfliners/California-Midwest Cars, my understanding (with no personal experience with them) is they are a better arrangement (although I don't know if they are wider).

3. I wouldn't count on that happening. I don't think there are many stations that this would be useful and it would require a third (intermediate) level that would limit the floor space on the upper and lower levels.

4. Possible.

5. Likely, though I wouldn't expect them to reach that speed in operation.

6. Not a big fan of the idea, its possible but I would not expect it.

7. Possible, but unlikely.

8. I doubt they will consider toilets in the roomettes again.

9. No idea if that is possible or not.

10. See number 9.

11. Possible

12. That is a question I cannot answer.

13. I agree with some of the other opinions offered above on the possibility of elevators.
 
The doors for high level and low level boarding I strongly doubt is feasible. The only way I could see that would be to have it three or four steps up from the bottom door in the stairwell. But then the stairs into the car would take up too much space in the car. And I know I would hate to go up and then down again. Plus the clearance would be low. The commuter cars that facilitate both are actually trilevel cars. With an upper and lower level connected by a mezzanine level.
 
There are small elevators that could fill the bill on the market already, but any kind of mechanical or electrical failure could leave a vulnerable person trapped for a long time in many areas. Not sure that would fly. You would still need the stairs for safety, so you would be taking space away from something else. No reason to get wheelchairs to the upper level in the sleepers, they won't fit in the aisles.
In a hypothetical, couldn't you mount the lift where the luggage racks are on the lower level? Then trade space on the lower level (given that you'd need less space, as the necessity to accommodate people with mobility issues on the lower has then gone down) for luggage racks? Or only install elevators in coach-baggage cars? Elevator goes where the rack was and then there's racks in the coach baggage area instead of "big open room?"
 
Instead of Superliners, I'd rather have bi-level cars that fit through the New York tunnels so we can have one common car for all LD travel while allowing for two level seating like the current Superliners.
 
The multilevel cars that are used in the northeast are rather unsuited for intercity service where passengers often pass from car to car through the train. They work for commuter service, but not really for intercity service.

Also, I don't really understand the fascination with having a single car that is used nationwide. Clearances (and platform heights) aren't uniform nationwide, so why does the car type need to be uniform? Insisting on such would seem to result in a lower-quality car type for all.
 
Chicago is a location that cannot take taller cars.
Exactly, and that eliminates several routes. There may be some others...
That is quite an understated fact. It eliminates everything except the west coast service, The Sunset Ltd. and the Auto Train. Such cars may thrive on a few short haul tourist operations. It is very unlikely that they will see the light of the day anywhere on the national network.
BTW, where exactly are these hypothetical cars going to run at 125mph?
maybe on the corridors with LD SC-44's pulling them, for ex: TE, EB, Card (?), CS, CZ, SWC, CL, , all run on corridor track, or achieve >79 MPH and use superliners. Aparently, the current Superliners can only handle 100, even when on 110 MPH track and enigines that can do 110.
 
Chicago clearances are so tight that there is question whether it will allow future HSR service to clear the 25Kv CAT for superliners ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are small elevators that could fill the bill on the market already, but any kind of mechanical or electrical failure could leave a vulnerable person trapped for a long time in many areas. Not sure that would fly. You would still need the stairs for safety, so you would be taking space away from something else. No reason to get wheelchairs to the upper level in the sleepers, they won't fit in the aisles.
In a hypothetical, couldn't you mount the lift where the luggage racks are on the lower level? Then trade space on the lower level (given that you'd need less space, as the necessity to accommodate people with mobility issues on the lower has then gone down) for luggage racks? Or only install elevators in coach-baggage cars? Elevator goes where the rack was and then there's racks in the coach baggage area instead of "big open room?"
The California cars do have a gallery elevators for the cafe car. At some point, the idea was that the elevator would be also used for transporting disabled passengers to the second level, but due to evacuation rules this was scrapped from what I saw in a video once of a tour of the Oakland yard. Another words, if your in a wheelchair and come upstairs, how is this person going to be evacuated in an emergency from the second level.

Larger stairs are already used on the corridor trains so those could probably just moved to the new cars.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are small elevators that could fill the bill on the market already, but any kind of mechanical or electrical failure could leave a vulnerable person trapped for a long time in many areas. Not sure that would fly. You would still need the stairs for safety, so you would be taking space away from something else. No reason to get wheelchairs to the upper level in the sleepers, they won't fit in the aisles.
How about using talgo technology to create a bi-level train where you can walk end to end on both levels?

Talgo did actually present a concept prototype in the earyl 2000s showing this was possible, but there was no follow-up.
 
Back
Top