Well, they probably would need a lot of work at this point thanks to Amtrak's negligence in allowing them to rot outdoors for over a decade. But at the point they were stolen from New York, they were roadworthy and two of the three sets had been in revenue service for a few months, and they were essentially brand new trains with all new components. Also, I know the lone RTL-II set was hauled by a P32AC-DM in revenue service for a while after its turbines failed, before finally being retired. So, it is feasible.
Amtrak spare equipment?
- Thread starter DSS&A
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Iran's Turbos actually worked in all of those configs, being converted from gas turbine to diesel propulsion before being used as trailers in their later years. Looks like they're all out of service now, however!
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/577738/
west point
Engineer
Turbos ? Forget it probably can refurbish 5 Amfleets for 1 turbo car. The fuel consumption is probably 2 - 4 times as much per passenger seat. That is because of the typical Amtrak track profile there is a lot of speeding up and slong. Turbines idle fuel consumption is about 80 % of full power. Turbo shafts ? Then you get rebuilding costs.
Just for the sake of argument, and not a real possibility, but a Turboliner set pulled by a diesel locomotive (one of the options considered, per Thirdrail7) would not have greater fuel consumption.
west point
Engineer
The first post of this thread illustrates a fact of life for Amtrak. There is going to be damaged rolling stock from time to time. Where possible there has to be rebuilding of damaged equipment. But a certain amount will be totaled. It will only take one major incident to put Amtrak into the hole with no spare equipment. As it appears now Amtrak schedules more equipment work during low travel times and just a few major items during peak periods.
That is why we are skeptical of any new routes going into service until more equipment is built. The chargers going into service certainly will help the P-42 availability situation but passenger cars ? WE all know that situation.
That is why we are skeptical of any new routes going into service until more equipment is built. The chargers going into service certainly will help the P-42 availability situation but passenger cars ? WE all know that situation.
But 1 Turbo car is 5 times more awesome than an Amfleet car!
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
And holds half the passengers?
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
For VT you quintuple the awesomeness for just being Turbo, even if you carry no passengersDidn't you know that when you halve the passenger count you quintuple the awesomeness?
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2016
- Messages
- 838
True that. The turboliners weren't that spectacular even when brand new. More like tricked out urban commuter cars in my opinion.
west point
Engineer
There is no spare equipment. It is a rob peter to pay Paul. As third rail pointed out in the past LD trains had many more cars in the consist. But number of cars does not define train capacity. Now 6 Heritage coaches ( 48-52 ) seating would equal 5 Amfleet-2s- ( 60 ) and 4-1/2 Amfleet-1s ( 70 ) . So shorter current Amfleet trains do meet some of the longer consists of the past. Before the Superliners the difference is even greater.
Because of the regulations eliminating direct discharge of effluent the Heritage cars had to be retired or be retrofitted with a very expensive system which probably would require completely redoing the car's undersides.
Now 100 new single level LD coach cars at first thought would all go to the 25 sets of single level LD trains. We cannot expect that to happen of course. With the Nippon N-S bilevel fiasco any new single level cars would be divided out with some including new V-2 sleepers and diners probably going to replace SL trains. Capitol and CNO would appear best candidates ?
So it appears that an additional 300 - 500 new single level cars are needed as well
Because of the regulations eliminating direct discharge of effluent the Heritage cars had to be retired or be retrofitted with a very expensive system which probably would require completely redoing the car's undersides.
Now 100 new single level LD coach cars at first thought would all go to the 25 sets of single level LD trains. We cannot expect that to happen of course. With the Nippon N-S bilevel fiasco any new single level cars would be divided out with some including new V-2 sleepers and diners probably going to replace SL trains. Capitol and CNO would appear best candidates ?
So it appears that an additional 300 - 500 new single level cars are needed as well
Regarding the Turboliners...I rode the French ones between Chicago and Flint when they were new and liked them. But back around 1990 I was riding the Broadway and got seated in the diner with Amtrak's car design engineers (Cesar Vergaras et al.). They had nothing good to say about the Turbos. Apparently the shells are carbon steel and started rusting from day one, the restrooms are out past the doors and have all sorts of problems in extreme weather, the fixtures and fittings are finicky and easily broken, the trucks are unlike anything else on Amtrak...they went on for quite a while! (Nice big windows, though.)
When the RTG Turboliner's came out, most everyone liked them, if for no other reason than they were the first new cars Amtrak ever got...everything else were inherited from the railroads, including the MU Metroliner's and UA Turbo Train's...
brianpmcdonnell17
Conductor
Superliners are a better fit for both the CONO and CL than single-level cars, so why would Amtrak order single-level cars for those trains? If there happened to be an excess of single-level cars and a shortage of Superliners, it might make sense to convert those trains. However, that is not the case as there is a shortage of both car types. The Nippon-Sharyo order actually would have freed up far more Amfleets and Horizons than Superliners, so that is really irrelevant to the shortage of Superliners. If you were trying to argue that Superliners are too hard to build, the basic structure has been built in the recent past for California cars. The reason the NS order failed is that NS had no experience building the Superliner design.
There seems to be a disproportional number of people in this forum who dislike Superliners relative to single-level cars, likely due largely to the high number of sleeper passengers, the one category in which Viewliners are likely superior. However, most forum members will continue riding regardless of Viewliner or Superliner. To contrast, the general public may very well choose another transportation method. It may be partly because of their similarities to Amfleet I, as I have heard multiple times that Amfleet long distance cars are essentially glorified commuter equipment. The Superliners however, are exactly what many people think of when they picture a long-distance train. The trains that do use single-level cars are generally also those with fewer passengers riding because Amtrak seemed very attractive and luxurious to them, but rather that it was cheaper or more convenient. These passengers will ride regardless of equipment type. Amtrak also seems to advertise it this way, as Superliners are seen far more frequently than Amfleets in advertising.
Lastly, the largest difference is the observation/lounge cars, which are clearly far superior in Superliners. For many vacationing travelers, that makes a huge difference. In conclusion, I would not object to a single-level conversion if it was necessary. However, it would make little sense for Amtrak to go out of their way to to change consists from Superliner to Amfleet and Viewliner.
west point
Engineer
Do not put this poster into the disliking Superliners. Do have issues with the upper bunks of SLs but coach and lounges are great. Yes SLs are better for CNO and Capitol but it appears that getting any more Bi-levels before 5 -7 years will be nearly impossible. N-S has really screwed the pooch. Amtrak needs cars now not then !
Granted the Amfleets are compared to narrow airplane tubes but the V-2 design certainly is much improvement.
But for the short term Amtrak needs much more capacity on just LD trains with no consideration to corridor and the NEC. That means ASAP
Granted the Amfleets are compared to narrow airplane tubes but the V-2 design certainly is much improvement.
But for the short term Amtrak needs much more capacity on just LD trains with no consideration to corridor and the NEC. That means ASAP
brianpmcdonnell17
Conductor
The issue is there are currently no orders for either Amfleet or Superliner. If it was as simple as there was currently an add-on order for more Viewliners/Amfleets than I may agree. Since no order is currently being built, I think an ideal scenario would be to try and order Amfleets and Superliners at the same time from the same bidder for a potential discount.
Even if Nippon-Sharyo had successfully delivered the entire order by now, it wouldn't have done a thing for Amtrak's Superliner equipped long-distance trains. These cars were for Midwest corridor operation; They would have freed up the cars currently in use there (primarily Horizon Fleet), granted, but single-level cars are already in shorter supply than Superliners. Amtrak needs single-level cars much worse than it needs bi-level long-distance equipment.
Viewliners are currently being built. Were the funding to magically appear, probably the most expedient solution would be an add-on order for Viewliner II lounges and coaches (high-mileage Amfleet II cars then shifted to the Northeast Corridor as an interim solution).
Last edited by a moderator:
west point
Engineer
Certainly both single and Bi-levels are needed. Write your congress critters, We know that in higher travel times Amtrak is woefully short of surge equipment.
Hi,
MBTA has some out of service single-level passenger cars that could be rehabilitated and used to increase the fleet to improve the spare ratio. Metra has bought back some of its former C&NW believed that were previously sold to and used on VRE and MARC (approximately 12 to 15 over a few years) to make small increases to its fleet to help with its spare ratio. Here is a link to an on-line MBTA equipment roster.
http://www.transithistory.org/roster/
If some coaches could be bought and rehabbed before winter, they could be used in the Midwest helping both Midwest routes and freeing up a few amfleet coaches currently on Midwest trains to be relocated back east. I see a few amfleet cars on the Hiawatha train every week.
MBTA has some out of service single-level passenger cars that could be rehabilitated and used to increase the fleet to improve the spare ratio. Metra has bought back some of its former C&NW believed that were previously sold to and used on VRE and MARC (approximately 12 to 15 over a few years) to make small increases to its fleet to help with its spare ratio. Here is a link to an on-line MBTA equipment roster.
http://www.transithistory.org/roster/
If some coaches could be bought and rehabbed before winter, they could be used in the Midwest helping both Midwest routes and freeing up a few amfleet coaches currently on Midwest trains to be relocated back east. I see a few amfleet cars on the Hiawatha train every week.
Last edited by a moderator:
west point
Engineer
It may be more and more congress critters will note the USA lack of equipment. There should have been at least 100 spare cars this winter to cover the various problems. Surf liners, , PNW, the present EB delays causing cancellations, Charters, etc
Some Congress critters who notice the equipment shortage might take action to help, while others will be continue to starve the railroad. The recently posted new 5-Year service plan calls for an upgrade to the Superliner 1 equipment. The winter slowdown will create opportunities to refresh a few cars, but it would take a long time. When enough single level cars are available, possibly after the Siemens cars are delivered (and a few Amfleet-1s converted to long distance leg rest seating), converting the Capital Limited or the City of New Orleans to single level equipment will create more spares for Superliner 1 service and rehabilitation efforts.
Last edited by a moderator:
KnightRail
Lead Service Attendant
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 493
Leadership wants to get rid of old equipment, not get more of it. It has become a priority to move forward with replacing Amfleet and Horizons.
- Joined
- May 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,807
Congress needs to get some backbone and fund the capital expense for new equipment rather than pushing it off to the next Congress. Amtrak needs new equipment. What Congress refuses to see is the high cost to maintain old equipment, some which could be moved to pay for new equipment once old car repairs are phased out.
"Leadership wants to get rid of old equipment, not get more of it. It has become a priority to move forward with replacing Amfleet and Horizons."
That's good news. Securing funding is the next obvious challenge. If there are options on the state's single level car contract, that would be great. Otherwise, going out for bids with production line running is also advantageous. I have read that Canada may be going out for bids for new single-level cars this year.
That's good news. Securing funding is the next obvious challenge. If there are options on the state's single level car contract, that would be great. Otherwise, going out for bids with production line running is also advantageous. I have read that Canada may be going out for bids for new single-level cars this year.
grover5995
Train Attendant
The turboliners were used briefly between MILW-CUS-STL in the mid-70s. The ride was good but excessive fuel use put them out of commission. In addition, they used jet fuel, not diesel!
Last edited by a moderator:
