Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

Brightline Railcars Any Reason They Can't Be Used By Amtrak?


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 seat38a

seat38a

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County California
  • Interests:Trains, Planes, And Web App Development

Posted 05 August 2017 - 01:54 PM

So with the Brightline railcars up and running and the the bi-level order in a shamble, is there any technical reason's why California or another State could not purchase the same railcars for State Corridor service? The Brightline runs with the same Charger Engines and all but other than the info that the railcars are made by Siemens in California, I can't seem to find very much information on them.



#2 PVD

PVD

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,917 posts

Posted 05 August 2017 - 02:20 PM

They have 2 types of seating, 2+1 with a 21 inch seat width and the 2+2 cars are 19 inch width. In the paired seats, they have center armrests. So the seats are somewhat narrower than Amtrak, but the aisles are obviously that much wider. I don't know what the restroom or food service setup (if any) looks like.



#3 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts

Posted 05 August 2017 - 02:58 PM

This poster likes the idea but --
1. It was not invented here .
2. Haters will never say it but if we ( haters ) allow Brightline type cars Amtrak may succeed as soon as 50 cars are in service ?

#4 norfolkwesternhenry

norfolkwesternhenry

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests:Trains, Boating, Trains, Mountain Biking, Trains, Having Fun, Trains, working on my bikes, Trains, planning my next trip, PV, trains, planning trips for family

Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:06 PM

I thought Amtrak was only using stainless steel cars, from the beginning they eliminated a bunch of fine equipment because it wasn't stainless steel. I don't think the brightline cars are stainless steel so I doubt Amtrak would take them, though IDK what their policy on state supported services is.

Empire Builder MSP-CHI (2) CHI-MSP (2) MSP-PDX (1) MSP-CBS (5.5 H late) (1) MKE-MSP (1) MSP-SEA (1) Coast Starlate PDX-EMY (1.5H late) (1) California Zephyr DEN-SLC (1H late) (1) Hiawatha CHI-MKE (1) NE Regional WAS-BAL (1) WAS-NYP (1) Acela Express BAL-WAS (1) BOS-WAS (1) Late Shore (Limited service) CHI-BOS (On Time) (1) Capitol Limited WAS-CHI (1) Texas Eagle SAS-CHI (1.5 HR late, 1 HR late) (2) CHI-SAS (1) (55 min early) Wolverine DET-DER-ARB-CHI (35 Min late) (1) Cascades SEA-VAC (1)
Non-Amtrak: VIA: Corridor Service Q.C.-Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto-Windsor (1) Canadian: VAC-Winnipeg 4.5 H late (1) D. C. metro, Montreal Metro, Toronto subway, Portland streetcars, BART, Metra, NYC subway, Boston subway, Twin cities Blue/Green line


#5 CCC1007

CCC1007

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:35 PM

I thought Amtrak was only using stainless steel cars, from the beginning they eliminated a bunch of fine equipment because it wasn't stainless steel. I don't think the brightline cars are stainless steel so I doubt Amtrak would take them, though IDK what their policy on state supported services is.

I'm pretty sure there isn't any rules on stainless or not, as the turbo trains and talgos exemplify.

#6 dlagrua

dlagrua

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hillsborough, NJ
  • Interests:Car collecting, Train Travel, Model RR, Visiting Historical sights, Cooking, Antiques, but above all love for friends and family.

Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:43 PM

Brightline orders rail cars and they are delivered and operating. . Amtrak orders rail cars and things sink into the abyss. Anyone know why?



#7 Dutchrailnut

Dutchrailnut

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brookfield, Connecticut, USA
  • Interests:Ships, Planes, Trains

Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:50 PM

Bringhtline is testing, they sure as s*** are not operating yet.


Edited by Dutchrailnut, 05 August 2017 - 03:50 PM.


#8 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 05 August 2017 - 04:10 PM

Just a guess/thought, but it probably helps that AAF/Brightline didn't go to Siemens and say "we want you to build us X, will you?" like was essentially the case with the Viewliner/CAF and bilievel/N-S orders. Instead a version of an existing Siemens product was ordered.



#9 MikefromCrete

MikefromCrete

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,185 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crete, IL

Posted 05 August 2017 - 05:00 PM

If you're talking about replacing the N-S bilevel order with Simens single level cars similar to the Brightline order, then Amtrak has nothing to do with such a decision. The bi-levels were ordered by the states of Illinois, California, Michigan and Missouri for their state-supported trains. If they wish to end the contract with N-S and reorder with Simens, I supposed they can do that, although a large amount of the funding for this order was Stimulus funding which is due to expire soon. So far, all has been quiet as to what the states are going to do. California is using some of its own money for its part of the order, so I suppose they could place an  order whenever they want to. Of course the bi-levels are designed for low-level boarding, while the Brightliners will utilize high-level platforms, so some changes will be necessary, since high-level platforms are practically non-existant west of the Northeast Corridor. So, I guess it could be done, but not overnight. 



#10 chrsjrcj

chrsjrcj

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Palm Beach, FL

Posted 05 August 2017 - 06:13 PM

They have 2 types of seating, 2+1 with a 21 inch seat width and the 2+2 cars are 19 inch width. In the paired seats, they have center armrests. So the seats are somewhat narrower than Amtrak, but the aisles are obviously that much wider. I don't know what the restroom or food service setup (if any) looks like.


One ADA restroom per coach. Probably comparable to the Acela, though Brightline is a bit more techier. There is no food service car (that will be Phase II, but the final specification hasn't been made), but there is a microwave in each end car (two per trainset).

Most of the interior is customer specific. If Amtrak wanted these cars, it would probably look completely different, other than the same car shell. I don't think these cars would be good for low level boarding, otherwise we'd be looking at the same situation as the Amfleets/Viewliners with the trap doors. Maybe they would make decent replacements for the Amfleet I's.

#11 seat38a

seat38a

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County California
  • Interests:Trains, Planes, And Web App Development

Posted 05 August 2017 - 06:40 PM

Well if anything, I can see California going for these as a temporary solution until the bi-levels get sorted out. The fact that they are also built in State probably would not hurt the cause as well. I'm thinking, they could probably be used on the HSR segment when phase 1 is complete since as I understand it, electrification will only happen once the full system is built out or something like that. Also, since the Talgo lease for the Surfliner has been stalled, the State could probably just straight out buy the new railcars and get more bang for the buck than turning to buying up old equipment and refurbishing them like what was done with the comet cars to increase capacity. I know the automated doors would be vast improvement over the manual doors on the Horizon cars. Nothing like a busy train trying to board and deboard from only 3 open doors.



#12 Ngotwalt

Ngotwalt

    Train Attendant

  • Training
  • Pip
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:30 PM

I thought Amtrak was only using stainless steel cars, from the beginning they eliminated a bunch of fine equipment because it wasn't stainless steel. I don't think the brightline cars are stainless steel so I doubt Amtrak would take them, though IDK what their policy on state supported services is.


Not correct, Pullman built cars with I think corten steel, and over time it didn't hold up as well as stainless. A lot of frame cracking issues started to arise, and once that happens, it's all over. Buff cars on the other hand were all stainless including the frames. Even those are starting to crack now, so not perfectly good.
Nick

Edited by Ngotwalt, 05 August 2017 - 10:34 PM.

Amtrak mileage, who knows? Approximately 250,000 miles. Keystones, Pennsylvanian, Three Rivers, Broadway Limited, Capitol Limited, Lake Shore Limited (NYC&BOS), Regionals, Acela Express, Silver Meteor, Silver Star, Palmetto, Auto Train, Crescent, City of New Orleans, Sunset Limited, Texas Eagle, California Zephyr, Desert Wind, Southwest Chief, Empire Builder (SEA&PDX), Coast Starlight, Cascades, Wolverines, the International, the Maple Leaf, Adirondack, Ethan Allen Express, Downeaster, and Surfliners.
Outside the US, VIA: The Canadian, The Ocean, The Corridor QC to Sarnia; Rocky Mountaineer; Western Europe: The Deerstalker (London-Inverness), IC125s, IC225s, Pendolinos, Eurostars, TGV, Thalys, CNL's Pollux (Amsterdam-Munich), Glacier Express, Ave (BCN-Madrid), RZD Moscow-Chita train, Astrakhan-Volgograd train.

#13 Green Maned Lion

Green Maned Lion

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,644 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ
  • Interests:Sleeping

Posted 06 August 2017 - 06:15 AM

Yeah, how dare a 70 year old car crack it's frame.

Pullman used carbon steel, I think it was ACF that played with Corten and only for one order. Corten steel is steel that rusts a protective layer. It has applications, but a rail car constantly pelted with dust as it moves is not one of them- the dust wears off the protective rust, and therefore the car just rusts away.
Travelled: Broadway Limited (1), Lake Shore Limited (6), Capitol Limited (7), Empire Builder (1), Southwest Chief (2), Sunset Limited (1), California Zephyr (3), Coast Starlight (2), Silver Meteor (5), Silver Star (5), Silver Palm (2), Crescent (1), Cardinal (4), Auto Train (4), Pennsylvanian (2), Palmetto (1), Acela Express (1), Empire Service (1), Northeast Regional (11), Keystone Service (1) --- Total Miles: 50,144 --- Total Trains: 61
Most important: Keep it Simple, Stupid!
Posted Image
Dream of love, dream of me, for you are my love. I love you.
Avatar and sig were done by my fiance, Corvidophile.

#14 bretton88

bretton88

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 11:52 AM

Part of the issue with replacing the NS order with Siemens is that the stimulus money requires the cars to be built to the next generation specs (hello problem #1) so the states can't just switch models. Supposedly there where only 2 bidders, NS and a drastically higher Siemens bid because they thought the design was going to be major problems.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

If I won the lottery, I'd probably build a passenger from nowhere to nowhere.


#15 seat38a

seat38a

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County California
  • Interests:Trains, Planes, And Web App Development

Posted 06 August 2017 - 12:49 PM

Part of the issue with replacing the NS order with Siemens is that the stimulus money requires the cars to be built to the next generation specs (hello problem #1) so the states can't just switch models. Supposedly there where only 2 bidders, NS and a drastically higher Siemens bid because they thought the design was going to be major problems.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Don't know about other States but California has its own stash of cash from a bunch of vague taxes that we pay to pay for trains out here. Let the Federal Money follow whatever BS rules that it is required to follow, but the suggestion is only for California money. Right now the Surfliner is bursting at the seams and have to turn people away on many trains. During busy times same with the San Joaquin. The Surfliner alone is approaching 3 million riders a year with no new railcars available to add to the system.

 

I'd say with some shinny new Semen's railcars in the system, which from the Brightline website already come with bike racks, I can see the State having more flexibility. From what I'm reading, the Talgo lease scheme is pretty much dead and currently Santa Barbara and north of LA has been screaming for more Surfliner service that is better timed for commuters between Simi Valley and Goleta.



#16 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,150 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 01:05 PM

Just a guess/thought, but it probably helps that AAF/Brightline didn't go to Siemens and say "we want you to build us X, will you?" like was essentially the case with the Viewliner/CAF and bilievel/N-S orders. Instead a version of an existing Siemens product was ordered.

Well, when you're ordering sleepers and dining cars, you have to order custom, there's really no choice.  I actually don't think this has anything to do with it. 

 

The mistake with CAF was trying to build cars in Elmira.  Siemens could have built the Viewliner design no problem.

 

With N-S... bilevels are structurally tricky and they needed someone with experience building them, which they didn't get.  They also specified too much of the design in advance and apparently it wasn't actually buildable; someone should have listened to the feedback from Siemens regarding why their bid was so high.  (By contrast, we know the Viewliner design is buildable, because there have been 50 of them on the road for two decades.)

California can't order single-level cars unless they're prepared to raise their platforms (which sounds great to me but is unlikely).  ADA rules on new orders are getting strict these days (as they should).  They could probably find a buildable bilevel design (after all, they ordered the Surfliners, right?) and order some of those.

The thing is... the Siemens Desiro Double Deck would probably be fine, except our inane FRA rules probably make it illegal in the US.  (Sigh.)


Edited by neroden, 06 August 2017 - 01:11 PM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#17 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 06 August 2017 - 01:18 PM

I still don't understand why anyone would need to insist on a Viewliner shell if say Siemens could figure out a way to plug the modules into an adapted Railjet shell. I think that is the relevant point. It is the interior furnishing and dimensions that is specified, not which specific shell it needs to be put into and how it needs to be designed and manufactured.

Many a standard written by many experts who don't understand this simple thing, have then fallen by the wayside ignored by all that wanted something that actually worked for a reasonable price. Having spent half my professional career in the world of International Standards, including in several committees of the US National Bodies associated with ISO, we have seen this happen over and over. Nothing new really.

#18 dlagrua

dlagrua

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hillsborough, NJ
  • Interests:Car collecting, Train Travel, Model RR, Visiting Historical sights, Cooking, Antiques, but above all love for friends and family.

Posted 08 August 2017 - 09:32 AM

I still don't understand why anyone would need to insist on a Viewliner shell if say Siemens could figure out a way to plug the modules into an adapted Railjet shell. I think that is the relevant point. It is the interior furnishing and dimensions that is specified, not which specific shell it needs to be put into and how it needs to be designed and manufactured.

Many a standard written by many experts who don't understand this simple thing, have then fallen by the wayside ignored by all that wanted something that actually worked for a reasonable price. Having spent half my professional career in the world of International Standards, including in several committees of the US National Bodies associated with ISO, we have seen this happen over and over. Nothing new really.

I agree that Amtrak doesn't need to keep insisting on having the Viewliner rail car design. It makes perfect sense to use an existing standard passenger car and develop modules for the interior. The Viewliner is a 1980's design. Technology has changed since then and perhaps there is a better more cost effective way to filling the eastern train consists.. Back when the private railroads ran passenger trains, the coaches and sleepers were of basic designs and many of these run as PV and tourist trains today. I believe that the later ones were painted steel cars and they had a very colorful look to them.



#19 A Voice

A Voice

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 August 2017 - 11:12 AM

California can't order single-level cars unless they're prepared to raise their platforms (which sounds great to me but is unlikely).  ADA rules on new orders are getting strict these days (as they should).  They could probably find a buildable bilevel design (after all, they ordered the Surfliners, right?) and order some of those.

 

There is a rumor (and just a rumor) the Midwest states are considering a single-level design in place of the previous bi-level order (assuming they still have funding.....).  They don't have high platforms either.

 

I still don't understand why anyone would need to insist on a Viewliner shell if say Siemens could figure out a way to plug the modules into an adapted Railjet shell. I think that is the relevant point.

 

 

Aesthetics, for one.  Hardly the most important aspect, but it does matter.   



#20 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 08 August 2017 - 12:16 PM

If that mattered they should have stuck with the classic Budd shape (no not Amfleet. The original Budd shape like the Heritage Sleepers). They didn't. So it is safe to assume that it really does not matter.


Edited by jis, 08 August 2017 - 12:17 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users