Long Distance (LD) fleet replacement RFP discussion 2024 H1

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
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.
I don't know if VIA looks to Amtrak for inspiration. They tried Superliners on the Skeena and didn't like them. Even if they had money, they would not have bought them.

VIA could have bought Santa Fe hi-levels from Amtrak for a song in the 1990's when Amtrak got rid of them and refurbished them nicely. Such coaches, lounges, and diners would have been fine for the Skeena, Ocean, and perhaps the Corridor's Windsor - Quebec City thru train. It still did not occur to them. Instead they bought REN cars - and regretted it. They don't like winter and they rotted out. They are the first thing to go. There's only one set left on the Corridors.
 
Willbridge said:
UP favored that style of lounge. In the mid-60's when UP dropped running a tail-end lounge on the City of Portland, they moved it to the center of the train, between coaches and the diner.

Train 106 departs Portland for Chicago.
View attachment 36256
Click to expand...
That change to mid-train actually happened just after those cars were built, with mid-train operation starting in 1956. I've always found it fascinating that UP had those cars built as tail-end cars and used them that way briefly, then suddenly changed its mind and had them modified for mid-train use, blanking those beautiful end windows. In the early Amtrak era, I spoke with a man who had bought one of those cars (Amtrak didn't take any of them). He said that when he had those blanked-out end windows opened up, the glass was still there and just fine! UP was apparently in such a hurry that it simply welded steel or aluminum panels over the windows and never removed the glass! I assume it did the same on the inside of the cars.
 
Are the travel market's "needs and expectations" truly different than when there were trains renowned for their consists and service? Today the few long-distance trains can mean both paying more and taking a lot more time, so why would anybody prefer lower ceilings, narrower beds, going down a hallway or downstairs to use the bathroom, having limited or no lounge space, unremarkable dining (if any dining at tall), etc.? Much of the public now does not realize how much nicer it was and still could be, especially if they take the train to see the scenery. Considering how locomotives rival bilevels in height and freight trains stacked to the sky with big containers seem to have no problem, why dome cars do is puzzling. Numerous tunnels especially on mainlines (which is what passenger service uses) of course have been raised. If NEC low clearance is a problem, why not set out a dome car when the locomotive is switched?
 
Harmon Shay said:
That change to mid-train actually happened just after those cars were built, with mid-train operation starting in 1956. I've always found it fascinating that UP had those cars built as tail-end cars and used them that way briefly, then suddenly changed its mind and had them modified for mid-train use, blanking those beautiful end windows. In the early Amtrak era, I spoke with a man who had bought one of those cars (Amtrak didn't take any of them). He said that when he had those blanked-out end windows opened up, the glass was still there and just fine! UP was apparently in such a hurry that it simply welded steel or aluminum panels over the windows and never removed the glass! I assume it did the same on the inside of the cars.
Click to expand...
I think I was wrong on the date because they kept using advertising photos that showed the dome lounge at the end of the train. (I won't upload it again, but the SP&S used a photo of the Portland<>Pasco Columbia River Express in the Columbia Gorge for years after it was discontinued.)

Not a great photo, but below shows an SP&S coach equipped for rear of train operation. For a surcharge, passengers could ride in rear-facing seats on the Columbia River Express and enjoy the view.

1972 018.jpg
 
Last edited:
jimdex said:
Amtrak could use a similar design with an upper-floor pass through. Take a look below at this flat-end observation car that used to run on the B&O. It worked as an observation car when placed on the end of the train, but it had a pass-through door that could be used when the car was used mid-train. Now imagine this design on the top floor of a Superliner running either at the end or the front of a future Amtrak train. This would give passengers a forward view or a backward view when placed at the front or end of a train, but still allow pass-throughs when the car is used mid-train.
View attachment 36255
Click to expand...
That was what I suggested in an earlier post. The only problem with the above pictured car if used mid-train, is the lack of a "diaphragm" to protect passengers passing between cars. There were several of this type that did have a modified diaphragm added, that only covered the door, and not the windows. There were even some added to round end obs cars, but those were ugly looking apparitions, but they did function. Amtrak had a few of them in the "rainbow era"...
 
Last edited:
Amtrak25 said:
I don't know if VIA looks to Amtrak for inspiration. They tried Superliners on the Skeena and didn't like them. Even if they had money, they would not have bought them.

VIA could have bought Santa Fe hi-levels from Amtrak for a song in the 1990's when Amtrak got rid of them and refurbished them nicely. Such coaches, lounges, and diners would have been fine for the Skeena, Ocean, and perhaps the Corridor's Windsor - Quebec City thru train. It still did not occur to them. Instead they bought REN cars - and regretted it. They don't like winter and they rotted out. They are the first thing to go. There's only one set left on the Corridors.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify, they tried Superliners on the Panorama between Edmonton and Winnipeg. Passengers loved them. Publicly, VIA liked them, as reported in Rail Travel News in 1985. Perhaps some insiders did not.

Layover in downtown Edmonton in 1984.
1984 108 (2).jpg

1984 RTN 301 VIA law 001.jpg
1985 RTN 311 VIA rplans 001.jpg
 
Last edited:
Willbridge said:
Just to clarify, they tried Superliners on the Panorama between Edmonton and Winnipeg. Passengers loved them. Publicly, VIA liked them, as reported in Rail Travel News in 1985. Perhaps some insiders did not.

Layover in downtown Edmonton in 1984.
View attachment 36261

View attachment 36262
View attachment 36263
Click to expand...
I remember when they sent that four car consist North...always wondered why they didn't include a SSL? Not any to spare? Guess we'll never know the answer to that.... 🤔
 
cocojacoby said:
Insiders not liking Superliners, which are so much more efficient than single levels, makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Everybody has their reasons and preferences for wanting one option over another. The main time I get annoyed is when someone who lives along a dense corridor tells people who live along a light LD route what should be acceptable for us. We can make our own decisions on what is best for us thank you.
 
Jis, as always, your posts are informative and helpful. This explains why I am looking at significantly higher sleeper fares for a trip on the CZ in June. IMHO, things are only going to get worse because there is no apparent evidence that Amtrak can make short-term adjustments to correct this.

It will be an impossible task to maintain the current number of cars in service. It is only a matter of time before there is another derailment that removes more cars from service.
 
I got bored. Following the footsteps of @Paniolo Man, I kindly asked the Amtrak FOIA officer if we could have the original digital PDF of the specification for legible figures and images. She obliged and here it is!

Nothing we don't know already, but now we can see the nice CAD mockups Amtrak put together. I think the consist top-down mockups are especially nice (Pages 1-11 to 1-15).
 

Attachments

  • Exhibit D Amtrak Long Distance Fleet Replacement Technical Specification #1132 Rev 1.pdf
    13.8 MB · Views: 19
turtlypo said:
I got bored. Following the footsteps of @Paniolo Man, I kindly asked the Amtrak FOIA officer if we could have the original digital PDF of the specification for legible figures and images. She obliged and here it is!

Nothing we don't know already, but now we can see the nice CAD mockups Amtrak put together. I think the consist top-down mockups are especially nice (Pages 1-11 to 1-15).
Click to expand...
Thank you. That helps a lot!
 
A few things on the roomettes that previously escaped my notice but are now clear, thanks to turtlypo:
- Occupant of the upper berth can see out of the upper section of the window (Figure 11-69).
- On the aisle side of the cabin there is only a single small(ish) window in the door. The wall panels on either side of the door are window-less (Figure 11-69).
- There is a "hidden" lavatory in the room (Figure 11-71).
 
Wow!! This latest digital version shows that Amtrak put a lot of thought into the design of these cars. I would enjoy riding in any of the sleeping car accommodations. The plans said that the sleeper lounge setup could be altered. I think the aisle should be in the middle, with seats on both sides so that people can view the scenery on either side of the train.
 
I don't like that the suggested lounge only has seating on one side of the train. Sometimes theres only great views on one side and a wall on the other, so during those cases everyone would presumably want to stand and go into the pathway to see the view.
 
My favorite part of this is that segmentation of Coach to Business to First feels much clearer with this equipment. AFAIK business class doesn't exist on Amtrak LD currently, and this 2-1 vs 2-2 config seems nice. SoloSuites are a "first class coach" with sleeper class benefits, while the other rooms are First+, ++, and +++.

Cal said:
I don't like that the suggested lounge only has seating on one side of the train. Sometimes theres only great views on one side and a wall on the other, so during those cases everyone would presumably want to stand and go into the pathway to see the view.
Click to expand...
Agreed, sightseer lounge is already a great design. No need to fix what isn't broken.

I also noticed Figure 1-11: Priority Sleeper (Page 1-14) is likely the wrong schematic, copied over from Figure 1-7: Priority Coach (Page 1-12). Hopefully their execution of the order won't be this sloppy!
 
I noticed that the seat cushion are not going to be used when the berths are made. Hopefully amtrak gets thicker mattresses for the bottom berths. I also noticed that there is going to be displays at every entrance area and at ends of hallways showing information about train status, avertissement, weather, news, and route map with stations tracking. They are calling the system that controls the announcement and display system "OTIS" which probably stands for Online Transit Information System. This system can be controlled at a terminal on board or wirelessly from a control center. It also can provide information about passengers reservations via displays above coach seats and next to bedroom doors. The system can also tell the car attendant who is getting off and what rooms need to be cleaned for a upcoming passenger. This is going to be a huge jump in technology from the Superliners.
 
If memory serves me correctly, Stadler is the only current manufacturer of bi-level cars. They did a great job with the "Rocky Mountaineer's" Gold Service" cars. Experience is important as I remember what a mistake it was when Amtrak gave the Superliner orders. Comments?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top