Siemens Caltrans/IDOT Venture design, engineering, testing and delivery (2012-1Q 2024)

[keelhauled]

You would think they would find a better cab car design, more like Rotems design in SoCal.

The same ones with the design suspected of derailing in collisions?

 

[PerRock]

This press release seemed to have gotten missed. and it's pretty big one, as it contains a nice render of the cars. From Nippon-Sharyo:

Nippon Sharyo and Sumitomo Corporation receive the Contract Award for 130 Bi-Level Passenger Cars from Caltrans and IDOT

November 6, 2012

On November 6th, 2012, The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) awarded the contract for 130 High-Speed Bi-Level Passenger Railcars to be built by Nippon Sharyo and the prime contractor Sumitomo Corporation of America (SCOA). The contract includes a base order of 130 railcars for $352 million along with an option to purchase an additional 300 railcars for $898 million, bringing the contract total to $1.25 billion.

peter

Are these cars supposed to fit through the NY and Baltimore tunnels? They look to be as high as the Superliners.

No, these cars are intended for service in California and the midwest. They cannot be run in the Northeast due to clearance restrictions; They will fit neither the Hudson nor B & P tunnels.

You would think they would find a better cab car design, more like Rotems design in SoCal.

The problem with the Rotems design (besides the plow derailing the train) is that the cabs have to be used on the ends of the train. There is no diaphragm connection thru the cab. So if you were to stick the cab car in the middle of a train people couldn't walk thru it to get to the other cars. On a commuter train this isn't too much of an issue, as the conductors are about the only people walking thru the cars; but on longer-distance trains you really need that ability.

That all being said I do think the design of the cab car is hideous!

peter

 

[jis]

Apparently the Metrolink folks specifically asked for the no diaphragm design.

Somehow I am starting to get the impression that left to ourselves we seem to specialize on hideous looking designs of late. Witness the strange looking creature that the Talgo cab unit came out to be. Fortunately when we get stuff close to off the shelf from Europeans they look less hideous. I think the Charger, specially in conjunction with the AAF Viaggio Comfort sets will come out looking unusually nice, since they will be uniform put together by purpose sets, instead of a mish mash of cars with a loco stuck in the front (or behind as the case may be).

 

[PerRock]

Apparently the Metrolink folks specifically asked for the no diaphragm design.

Somehow I am starting to get the impression that left to ourselves we seem to specialize on hideous looking designs of late. Witness the strange looking creature that the Talgo cab unit came out to be. Fortunately when we get stuff close to off the shelf from Europeans they look less hideous. I think the Charger, specially in conjunction with the AAF Viaggio Comfort sets will come out looking unusually nice, since they will be uniform put together by purpose sets, instead of a mish mash of cars with a loco stuck in the front (or behind as the case may be).

If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on the AAF Siemens train looking a lot like OBB's RailJet seen here: http://4rail.info/ger/ger_obb_railjet_taurus1116nr213_1_166_munich_2012_L.jpg

Although I'm also still thinking that the Chargers are going to look a lot like the ACS-64s.

peter

 

[frequentflyer]

The Rotem design offers more crash protection (we are talking 110 mph running), then the illustration here. Did not know pass through was so important?

 

[PVD]

Since cab cars are ordered specifically to be last/first in a push-pull, cab end pass thru shouldn't be an issue. I guess in some sense you lose some versatility in that it would problematic if you needed to add cars at the end, but no one wants too many extra cab cars around because they are more expensive, more complex, and have less seating capacity. I'm sure someone will have the whole story about the safety regs that apply to leading cabs and how that seriously changes things.

 

[jis]

If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on the AAF Siemens train looking a lot like OBB's RailJet seen here: http://4rail.info/ger/ger_obb_railjet_taurus1116nr213_1_166_munich_2012_L.jpg

Although I'm also still thinking that the Chargers are going to look a lot like the ACS-64s.

peter

Well, the Chargers being single cab locomotives, will probably not look like the Sprinters which is double cab. However, the nose may very well look quite similar. The rear end will line up with the body instead of having cab. I have heard rumors that the AAF cab end will be shaped somewhat differently from the Midwest/California Chargers, but that may or may not be true.
And yeah, the cars will definitely look very much like those. They will have only minor modifications to meet FRA external fixture requirements and such.

Since cab cars are ordered specifically to be last/first in a push-pull, cab end pass thru shouldn't be an issue. I guess in some sense you lose some versatility in that it would problematic if you needed to add cars at the end, but no one wants too many extra cab cars around because they are more expensive, more complex, and have less seating capacity. I'm sure someone will have the whole story about the safety regs that apply to leading cabs and how that seriously changes things.

Two factors - Collision Posts, and additional crumple zone for CEM.

 

[Bjartmarr]

The problem with the Rotems design (besides the plow derailing the train) is that the cabs have to be used on the ends of the train. There is no diaphragm connection thru the cab. So if you were to stick the cab car in the middle of a train people couldn't walk thru it to get to the other cars.

The other problem with the Metrolink Rotems is that the seats are horribly uncomfortable, compared to the old Bombardier cars. I wish they could find a way to fix that...

 

[afigg]

If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on the AAF Siemens train looking a lot like OBB's RailJet seen here: http://4rail.info/ger/ger_obb_railjet_taurus1116nr213_1_166_munich_2012_L.jpg

Although I'm also still thinking that the Chargers are going to look a lot like the ACS-64s.

There are rendering of the Siemens Chargers from a recent presentation discussed in the Charger order thread (my post with the links). Don't have to guess what the Chargers are going to look like. Nor discuss it here, really, because this is a thread on the Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, not Siemens locos nor Rotems as should be pointed out.

The rendering of the Nippon-Sharyo bi-level that was linked to above is an old one which I'm sure is in earlier posts in this thread. That rendering is from the contract award announcement before N-S had a final design, so odds are that there have been numerous small changes in the details of the car.

 

[DSS&A]

It was announced yesterday that Nippon Sharyo will be laying off more workers in November. Here is the basic information:

Nippon Sharyo has announced even more temporary reductions in its Final Assembly shop staff.

These staff reductions will affect about 60 employees and will go into effect beginning November 30. According to Nippon Sharyo, this reduction, as well as the one announced in early September, is a result of complications during the testing phase of one of its prototype cars.

The company has not said how long the temporary lay-offs will last, but they say they will be providing a severance package to those employees.

 

[jis]

How is the 2017 deadline for the funding going to play into all of this?

 

[afigg]

How is the 2017 deadline for the funding going to play into all of this?

That is the $352 million dollar question. Are there ways for the FRA to "pre-pay" for delivery if the production schedule slips on the portion of the contract that is 2009 ARRA funds with the 2017 deadline. Which is most of the funding as I recall. Or is the entire 130 car order at risk? There is much we do not know.

 

[afigg]

The Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee webpage has posted a September update to their activities report. The report is a long document that they are inserting updates into, so one has to search carefully for the relevant update. There is a brief update on the compression test failure which has caused Nippon-Sharyo to lay personnel off at the plant:

- Bi-Level Car Procurement Update as of September 24, 2015:'

Two FAIs were scheduled for 9-29/30-2015.

With regard to the car shell compression test failure – the contractors issued an analysis on 9-12-15. The results show that design and modeling were the major causes of the failure. The contractors will submit a proposed approach and strategy for the redisign on 10-1-15.

Design Review hot list open items – there are currently 10 open items remaining. The redesign effort, however, will result in a design review meeting to go over the re-design. This date has not yet been determined.

The schedule is now under review until the redesign approach and strategy is fully understood. It is hoped that a schedule revision will be forthcoming next month.

 

[neroden]

Ooooh, that's embarassing. The engineers at Nippon-Sharyo just plain screwed up the design.

 

[afigg]

Went digging on the AASHTO NGEC website and came across this page with links to minutes from meetings of the Technical Subcommittee. The most recent minutes from October 8 has the following updates on the failed compression tests and the potential impact on the delivery schedule. What it means with regards to the September, 2017 stimulus funds deadline is not discussed.

Update: Procurements:
Bi-Level Cars – Rob Edgcumbe for Momoko Tamaoki:

Rob Edgcumbe, on behalf of Caltrans, provided a brief update on the bi-level car procurement activities:

Rob reported that there are two primary courses of action underway:

The ongoing FAI and testing on the existing car design
The re-design after the failed compression test.

On the FAIs – there have been several conducted recently with additional ones upcoming. The FAIs are progressing well.

On the issue of the failed compression test, a meeting was held with Nippon Sharyo (NS) during which they went through their analysis report on what heppened. Their findings indicate that it was a welding issue which was design related rather than manufacturing related. Re-design activities are underway and by mid to end of the month re-design revisions should be complete. NS is using margin of safety criteria higher than is necessary.

Unofficial tests are taking place on items such as endframes and collision parts.

Design Review – there are 10 remaining open items.

They are holding on new design review until the revised car shell re-design is completed. This will probably happen by around the end of December.

RSCs – there are a couple of outstanding items.

Schedule – with the compression test failure the schedule is under review. Initial indications are that the schedule is going to have a “significant slip”. It is not yet known what the impact will be on funding with the schedule slipping.

While Rob did not have a firm timeline on the schedule slippage, he responded to a question of what does “significant” delays mean? – a year, more than a year? Rob responded “don’t pin me down on this, but not far off a year.”

The November 11 draft minutes don't add much beyond this ominous line:

After these open items are closed, it will be down to the car shell redesign – it drives the final schedule.

There is no doubt there is a significant impact on the production schedule and it will impact funding.

 

[seat38a]

The Rotem design offers more crash protection (we are talking 110 mph running), then the illustration here. Did not know pass through was so important?

On the Surfliner, it seems to be quite important. I have been on many trains where they will attach another car at the end, open up the metal door and allow passage to the attached cars. This seems to be done mostly during times when they are really busy during long weekends, comicon etc.. Also, remember, they don't have a wye to turn things around in SD or move cars around. Generally speaking, they will add or subtract by adding cars to the end but will not move cars around in the consist.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Went digging on the AASHTO NGEC website and came across this page with links to minutes from meetings of the Technical Subcommittee.

Their findings indicate that it was a welding issue which was design related rather than manufacturing related.

Schedule – ... Initial indications are that the schedule is going to have a “significant slip”. It is not yet known what the impact will be on funding with the schedule slipping.

... what does “significant” delays mean?... Rob responded “don’t pin me down on this, but not far off a year.”

The November 11 draft minutes don't add much beyond this ominous line:

... the car shell redesign – it drives the final schedule.
There is no doubt there is a significant impact on the production schedule and it will impact funding.

Ouch.

Sadly, this means the by-then finished Billions in upgrades for the Wolverines and Lincoln service will not be up to speed until 2018, or later. The two biggest items out of the roughly $10 billion in Stimulus rail grants will be considerably delayed. Oy vey.

Don't these infrastructure grants all have terms and conditions about full completion, speed, maybe added frequencies? So they default and the Feds ask for their $2 Billion back? Do they also ask for money back on the new locomotives that can't be deployed as promised?

Well, the deadline falls in the term of the next president. So perhaps knee-jerk Obama haters can just blame him and the foreigners and simply vote to extend the deadline.

Lessee. A very train-friendly Republican governor in Michigan, but he's term limited out in 2016, in a lean-Democratic state. Probably it will be a Republican governor in Missouri, it's been trending red and many voters are inflamed about the state's response (or lack thereof) to Ferguson and the U of Missouri stuff. Illinois has a train-hater in office now, who doesn't face an election until 2018. California will still have a Democrat until 2018.

So politically it will be rough, but not impossible, to persuade Congress to waive and extend in this one case (or a few more ) the deadline that Congress set. If that's what President Cruz wants to do.

 

[keelhauled]

The Horizons are rated for at least 110 mph service, and they are already doing so regularly in Michigan. Therefore I don't see why highish speed trains in the Midwest are contingent on the NS order. Nor do I see any reason why the Charger locomotives have any connection to this mess at all.

 

[Ryan]

The Horizons are rated for 125.

 

[jis]

The Horizons are rated for 125.

Right, and they have been known to operate on the NEC at 125mph.

Ironically, the first place where the Chargers or their close cousin will operate regularly at 125mph is apparently in Florida, since it is unlikely that any of the midwest and California Chargers will find their way onto the NEC. The of course there will be the MARC Chargers that should be able to operate at 125 on the NEC. It is possible that they could land up doing so before the ones in Florida. But still, apparently no Amtrak operated train will run at 125mph under diesel traction for a while.

 

[neroden]

Lessee. A very train-friendly Republican governor in Michigan, but he's term limited out in 2016, in a lean-Democratic state.

Michigan is very unlikely to elect a train-hostile lunatic, unless waves of outside money are poured in to do so, and probably not even then.

Probably it will be a Republican governor in Missouri

I wouldn't bet on that.

Illinois has a train-hater in office now, who doesn't face an election until 2018.

This is the least of Rauner's problems. There are fairly decent odds he'll be impeached. Or recalled. Or arrested. I've never seen a governor make enemies so fast; his "my way or the highway" attitude is not suitable for a governor.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Don't these infrastructure grants all have terms and conditions about full completion, speed, maybe added frequencies? So they default and the Feds ask for their $2 Billion back? Do they also ask for money back on the new locomotives that can't be deployed as promised?

The Horizons are rated for at least 110 mph service, and they are already doing so regularly in Michigan. Therefore I don't see why highish speed trains in the Midwest are contingent on the NS order. Nor do I see any reason why the Charger locomotives have any connection to this mess at all.

This is somewhat reassuring, that even using Horizons the half-new trains could still cut 40 or 50 minutes out of the schedules when the track upgrades are finished.

But I still worry a bit about the terms and conditions. I'd been thinking that the Chargers would be quicker to accelerate etc and so contribute to the promised speeds and trip times. But if every major component of the new-n-improved routes -- track upgrades, locomotives, passenger cars -- had to perform as agreed, the whole house could collapse if they fall 10 minutes short of their promise. (Of course, they may have left enuff fudge factor that it won't matter.)

 

[George K]

This is the least of Rauner's problems. There are fairly decent odds he'll be impeached. Or recalled. Or arrested. I've never seen a governor make enemies so fast; his "my way or the highway" attitude is not suitable for a governor.

Illinois (please, don't pronounce the 's') has a long and proud tradition of sending its governors to prison.

 

[Palmetto]

Lessee. A very train-friendly Republican governor in Michigan, but he's term limited out in 2016, in a lean-Democratic state.

Michigan is very unlikely to elect a train-hostile lunatic, unless waves of outside money are poured in to do so, and probably not even then.

Probably it will be a Republican governor in Missouri

I wouldn't bet on that.

Illinois has a train-hater in office now, who doesn't face an election until 2018.

This is the least of Rauner's problems. There are fairly decent odds he'll be impeached. Or recalled. Or arrested. I've never seen a governor make enemies so fast; his "my way or the highway" attitude is not suitable for a governor.Have you noticed that his anti-train proposals have gone to rest? I'm thinking he heard some stiff opposition to his train-off proposls.

 

[keelhauled]

This is somewhat reassuring, that even using Horizons the half-new trains could still cut 40 or 50 minutes out of the schedules when the track upgrades are finished.

But I still worry a bit about the terms and conditions. I'd been thinking that the Chargers would be quicker to accelerate etc and so contribute to the promised speeds and trip times. But if every major component of the new-n-improved routes -- track upgrades, locomotives, passenger cars -- had to perform as agreed, the whole house could collapse if they fall 10 minutes short of their promise. (Of course, they may have left enuff fudge factor that it won't matter.)

My understanding is that the major advantage of the Chargers is they can handle the 110 mph trains with a single locomotive, whereas two P42s are presently required. So even if the Charger order goes down the tubes somehow, *in theory*, Amtrak should be able to utilize the upgraded trackage with existing equipment, although additional frequencies will have to wait--after all, on Amtrak's end, that would just continue the status quo. Of course, this assumes Amtrak can continue flogging the P42s indefinitely for the immediate future. But I am optimistic, if cautiously so, about the Charger order. If I had to place a bet, I would expect to see Chargers hauling Horizon equipment in 2018.