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

[jis]

One could surmise similar maintenance practices used on the new cars will yield similar results in a couple of years.

Somebody has yet to figure out how to get Chicago Maintenance Facility to step upto the plate. :help:

 

[rickycourtney]

One could surmise similar maintenance practices used on the new cars will yield similar results in a couple of years.

Somebody has yet to figure out how to get Chicago Maintenance Facility to step upto the plate. :help:

Unlike the Amfleet/Horizon cars, the bi-level will be owned by the states.One would hope that the states would demand better maintenance on their equipment than Amtrak does... and if they don't get one would hope that they would hire someone other than Amtrak.

That being said, Amtrak does a pretty good job maintaining California's state owned equipment.

 

[Paulus]

California will be getting more coaches and locomotives (page 106)

On December 10, 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment being assigned to the San Joaquin Corridor. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages. Please see the attached December 9, 2014 CIPR Leadership Coalition letter of support to the CTC for this allocation.

 

[seat38a]

How are they supposed to get financial backing from California? The state constitution requires a two-thirds approval by the Legislature and voter approval for any debt over $300,000.

Actually, scratch that. It's also a violation of the state constitution for the Legislature to approve any money to benefit a company not under 100% state control (unless they're chipping in alongside Federal funds apparently).

Easy, the Democrats of 2/3 majority in both chambers of the legislature. The GOP effectively don't have to show up anymore.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

California will be getting more coaches and locomotives (page 106)

On December 10, 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment being assigned to the San Joaquin Corridor. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages. Please see the attached December 9, 2014 CIPR Leadership Coalition letter of support to the CTC for this allocation.

[SIZE=12pt]In December 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment for the California fleet. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]The State expects to focus on purchasing new locomotives which will mostly be used to replace locomotives being leased from Amtrak. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]. [/SIZE]

Man, is this formatting getting messed up. LOL.

Anyway, a slightly different paragraph with slightly different info from page 38 (IIRC, before the misbehaving formatting blew away my feeble mind.)

 

[WoodyinNYC]

California will be getting more coaches and locomotives (page 106)

On December 10, 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment being assigned to the San Joaquin Corridor. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages. Please see the attached December 9, 2014 CIPR Leadership Coalition letter of support to the CTC for this allocation.

[SIZE=12pt]In December 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment for the California fleet. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]The State expects to focus on purchasing new locomotives which will mostly be used to replace locomotives being leased from Amtrak. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]. [/SIZE]

Man, is this formatting getting messed up. LOL.

Anyway, a slightly different paragraph with slightly different info from page 38 (IIRC, before the misbehaving formatting blew away my feeble mind.)

So I was trying to say, I don't know enuff about how many Amtrak owned locomotives they want to, or could, replace.

But rough number on the $108 million, about 10% for OBIS, leaves roughly $100 million even.

One locomotive call it $7 million, four coaches and one cafe car at $2.3 X 5 = $13 million, so $20 million for each five-passengercar train and new locomotive, gives five additional train sets out of the $100 million.

That would be the top for additional train sets. Probably less, replacing Amtrak's locos, adding more coaches per train set, etc. But $100 million worth of new equipment will make a nice difference here.

The Revised Business Plan that Paulus linked to above (chock full of tidbits) makes clear the top priority is for an additional roundtrip Bakersfield-Oakland, the 8th San Joaquin, as soon as FY 2015-2016 !!! (I don't see how they get equipment in time, but hey, the is a plan by politicians.) And next priority is for a 9th San Joaquin. The goal is 11 frequencies, with some of them starting midway, rather than all being end to end) but somebody will have to pay for a lot more work on the tracks to make those things happen. Work is already underway to allow that 8th frequency, the first added to Oakland-Bakersfield since 1993.

Whatever the number of new bi-levels ordered out of this $108 million, it's got to be good news for the Nippon-Sharyo plant and all its potential and future customers as the busy assembly line stretches deeper into the future.

 

[Anderson]

You're probably looking at one or two trainsets and an order of 10-15 locomotives. There's an existing EMD-F125 order that CA put together under Metrolink that they'll probably be able to piggyback on. That order was for 10 locomotive and 10 options (the options have been exercised), but it is worth noting that the 125 MPH spec for the design is massively over-engineered for Metrolink territory.

 

[Paulus]

Why would they piggyback on Metrolink's order rather than just exercise some of their own Charger options? The 125 mph spec wasn't a Metrolink requirement either, as I recall, just an artifact of EMD selling the same locomotive they were hoping would win the other competition (there was a high HP bias due to a baffling 10 car Antelope Valley run time comparison).

 

[afigg]

You're probably looking at one or two trainsets and an order of 10-15 locomotives. There's an existing EMD-F125 order that CA put together under Metrolink that they'll probably be able to piggyback on. That order was for 10 locomotive and 10 options (the options have been exercised), but it is worth noting that the 125 MPH spec for the design is massively over-engineered for Metrolink territory.

yes, why would CalTrans order EMD F125s when the state is getting Siemens Charger locomotives for the Amtrak services? Amtrak did post a RFI a few months ago requesting price data for 15 locomotives to be purchased for CA using CA state funds to replace Amtrak's F-59s. I'm sure the RFI was aimed at Siemens, but had to be a public announcement. Since it is clear that CalTrans and the agencies overseeing the 3 corridor services prefer to have entirely state owned equipment to avoid the capital fees that Amtrak has to charge, the bulk of the $108 million is likely to be used to acquire Siemens Charger locomotives.

According to the draft EIS posted to the FRA website for the Coast Corridor route (aka Coast Daylight), CA already has $51 million allocated for starting the Coast Daylight service and track improvements. Some of those funds may go to equipment acquisition, so how about 10 bi-level cars for the Coast Daylight?

 

[rickycourtney]

This multi-state contract has really lowered the cost of buying equipment and rail is popular in the Golden State, so this announcement isn't entirely unexpected, but I'm really glad to see it happen.

Those extra trains have been in the works for years (including lots of track construction) and they are anxiously awaited. Last I heard, the first run that will go into service is one of the "short turn" runs between Merced and Bakersfield. Problem with the current schedule is that the first southbound train/bus of the day won't get you to Southern California until about 2:30pm and if you're booked on the last northbound bus/train of the day, you need to leave by 3pm. They'd like to get a train/bus that can get valley passengers to Southern California around 11:30am and a bus/train that can allow them to stay until around 5p.

 

[Anderson]

Honestly, I forgot about the Chargers. For some reason I got it in my head that the Siemens plant was producing equipment for everywhere except California (i.e. the ACS-64 order and the FEC coach order).

 

[WoodyinNYC]

California will be getting more coaches and locomotives (page 106)

On December 10, 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment being assigned to the San Joaquin Corridor. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages. Please see the attached December 9, 2014 CIPR Leadership Coalition letter of support to the CTC for this allocation.

[SIZE=12pt]In December 2014, the CTC approved allocation of $108 million in Prop 1B funding for additional passenger rail cars and locomotives. This will result in additional new equipment for the California fleet. The exact breakdown between locomotives and railcars is still under negotiations. The option locomotives will cost about $6.5 million and the option railcars will be approximately $3.2 million each. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]The State expects to focus on purchasing new locomotives which will mostly be used to replace locomotives being leased from Amtrak. [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]About 10% of this allocation will be utilized for an “On-board Information System (OBIS)”. The OBIS is an integrated video and audio communications system for on-train travel and service messages as well as potential advertising messages[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]. [/SIZE] Anyway, a slightly different paragraph with slightly different info from page 38 (IIRC, before the misbehaving formatting blew away my feeble mind.)

But rough number on the $108 million, about 10% for OBIS, leaves roughly $100 million even.

One locomotive call it $7 million, four coaches and one cafe car at $2.3 X 5 = $13 million …

[Oops!]

The Revised Business Plan that Paulus linked to above (chock full of tidbits) makes clear

the top priority is for an additional roundtrip Bakersfield-Oakland, the 8th San Joaquin ...

Sorry, I've got to stop posting at my bedtime. LOL.

One locomotive @ $7 million, four coaches and one cafe car @ $3.2 million

(not figure used in my post, sorry) is $16 million, so $23 million per train set.

They'd need a minimum of two such train sets to add the 8th frequency on

the San Joaquin route, so $46 million right there? Leaves roughly $50 million

for replacing locomotives, or 7 of them.

If they want to use this money to replace all 15 of the Amtrak locomotives

with this funding, that would leave nothing for that added frequency of the

San Joaquin. Not to mention the Coast (Daylight) Corridor.

In other words, this funding is good news, but they'll need another $100 million

or so of more good news pretty soon.

 

[Paulus]

Daylight has its own allocation already set aside patiently doing nothing at all (ever I suspect) and I'm not sure that they'll need two trainsets for the additional San Joaquin frequency; depends on how things are turned. California's cap and trade program has some money set aside for conventional intercity rail, however, (10% of auction proceeds to the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program), so we'll manage to find it.

 

[neroden]

I can't keep track of the total size of the California loco or car orders, since they keep coming in dribs and drabs. Maybe I'll just wait until 2017 and look at OTOL to see what happened.

 

[sakers]

Riding the 305 to Alton now the bilevels can not come soon enough. They are only opening one door because of all the snow and ice and dumping bags of salt at every stop on the steps. Also anyone know why they got rid of the protect engines on the Illinois service recently?

 

[sakers]

Just an update we left Joliet crossed over the rock island tracks and stopped. Waited for the 304 backed up to the station to switch tracks now we need to back into the station again to get back onto the other track. Supposedly only single track between here and Dwight. Not sure how the intermodals keep passing on each direction.

 

[CCC1007]

I think you are seeing the bnsf transcon next to you. You are on another railroads track, not bnsf.

 

[afigg]

A comment on another forum about the lack of news on the Nippon-Sharyo order led me to conduct a Google search for updates. Used "CalTrans bi-level procurement updates", which turned up two document links of interest.

First is this 9 page February 20, 2015 presentation from Nippon-Sharyo and Sumitomo to the Next Generation Equipment Committee. Turns out that the project is encountering schedule slippage with the Feb 2015 schedule calling for the completion of testing of 3 pilot cars by December 2016 (from end of May 2016) and the 130th car to be completed by October, 2018. The Feb 2015 status bullets:

• Preliminary & Intermediate Design: Completed
• Mockup Review: Completed
• Final Design: 92% Complete
• Carbody Steel Procurement: Completed up to car #39
• First Article Inspection: 18% Complete
• Started Fabrication of Metal Parts: July 2014
• Started Carbody Shell Assembly: September 2014
• Completion of 1st Carshell: June 2015

I think it is a safe bet that the first bi-level cars will not enter revenue service until at least early 2017. How that is reconciled with the September, 2017 deadline for spending the stimulus funds, I do not know.

The second another interesting document is a November, 2014 RFI from Michigan DOT on the behalf of the Midwest States (IL, MI, MO, and WI (Yes, Wisconsin)) for statements of interests and comments for a Fleet Maintenance Contract for the Midwest bi-levels. Amtrak's Chicago facility is not assured to get the contract for the maintenance of the Midwest bi-levels.

PS. The MI DOT RFI states this about the CHI-STL corridor which currently is constrained by the IL DOT agreement with UP to be allowed to run only 3 of the 4 daily Lincoln service trains at 110 mph: "In addition, the state, Amtrak and the UPRR have been negotiating to run the fourth train pair at 110 mph (where safe track conditions allow), which is expected to begin by the end of 2015."

 

[neroden]

I think it is a safe bet that the first bi-level cars will not enter revenue service until at least early 2017. How that is reconciled with the September, 2017 deadline for spending the stimulus funds, I do not know.

Once the cars are debugged and rolling off the line, I don't think there's a problem with sending the contractor money in mid-2017, even if the last cars won't be *delivered* until 2018.

 

[Amfleeter]

Apparently the cars failed the 800k lb crush test.... badly. Hearsay on the trains magazine forums, but it could mean delays. If N-S screws up the corridor order, it won't look good for them when it comes time for Superliner replacement. Might be we actually see Amtrak try Bombardier again for real-deal Superliners.... or more Siemens.

 

[jis]

Apparently the cars failed the 800k lb crush test.... badly. Hearsay on the trains magazine forums, but it could mean delays. If N-S screws up the corridor order, it won't look good for them when it comes time for Superliner replacement. Might be we actually see Amtrak try Bombardier again for real-deal Superliners.... or more Siemens.

Why would they want to try Bombardier when Alstom is the one that has delivered scads of viable Superliner sized double deckers Surfliners (62 of them) more recently?

 

[Amfleeter]

Apparently the cars failed the 800k lb crush test.... badly. Hearsay on the trains magazine forums, but it could mean delays. If N-S screws up the corridor order, it won't look good for them when it comes time for Superliner replacement. Might be we actually see Amtrak try Bombardier again for real-deal Superliners.... or more Siemens.

Why would they want to try Bombardier when Alstom is the one that has delivered scads of viable Superliner sized double deckers Surfliners (62 of them) more recently?

Ah, fair enough - though I thought Alstom was caught up in the Acela/HHP-8 mess than soured the Amtrak-Bombardier waters as well, as well as only licensing the Superliner design from Bombardier to produce Surfliners? If it was more extensive than a simple license, then Alstom might be a better idea.

 

[neroden]

Bombardier is a complete mess right now, as I've explained elsewhere. With the problems Toronto's having with delivery, the supply chain problems, and the general risk of the company going completely bankrupt in the near term, I would avoid making a Bombardier order at this time. The Amtrak-Bombardier history is really the least of it.

At least with Nippon-Sharyo / Sumitomo, it's quite clear that they're capitalized well enough to deliver the order even if it is delivered at a loss due to screwups and having to redo cars. Bombardier is now seriously undercapitalized and has been stripping capital from the rail business to subsidize their money-pit CSeries airplane.

Alstom, Siemens, Kawasaki, whatever... there's a fair number of choices to order from.

 

[jis]

At the end of the day it matters very little who owns the design these days, way less than passenger rail aficionados seem to think. If there is money to be made such things are freely licensed back and forth. The Acela thing did not cause any damage to Alstom since they were sub contractors. It was Bombardier that got burned on that one.

Frankly Amtrak would be foolish to worry about such stuff 15 years later anyway. Bombardier is about to shed its rail equipment business possibly as a jointly owned subsidiary with Siemens as a starter. It is a completely different game in a different setting. But Alstom does have the latest successful manufactured design, which is different from the Bombardier original as is obvious when one takes a closer look at the Surfliners. Nobody can own rights to all designs and variations of 16' tall cars anyway.

I agree with neroden. There are plenty of credible manufacturers that are well capitalized that are around to pick up such an order. Any licenses needed they can take care of. All the patens have expired.

 

[afigg]

Apparently the cars failed the 800k lb crush test.... badly. Hearsay on the trains magazine forums, but it could mean delays. If N-S screws up the corridor order, it won't look good for them when it comes time for Superliner replacement. Might be we actually see Amtrak try Bombardier again for real-deal Superliners.... or more Siemens.

I went looking for updated info on the AASHTO HSR website, specifically the Section 305 Executive Board page. I knew I had seen this site before, but it took a little digging to find it again. Some good news and some not good news with regards to the bi-level car order in the August 2015 Activities Report,

With regards to the compression test for the Nippon-Sharyo car shell, the report states:

Schedule information (additional detail) has been provided by the manufacturer and will be discussed in a meeting in Rochelle, Illinois on August 19, 2015. Caltrans, IDOT, FRA and Nippon Sharyo will attend.

On August 20-12-2015 there will be a compression test of the car shell.

A meeting including Nippon Sharyo and FRA’s Office of Safety on safety issues was held and it was reported to be successful.

So, if I am interpreting this correctly, the car passed the compression test. Or was the N-S and FRA meeting successful?

The bad news is that the plans for the up to 45 car option order funded by federal money for the N-S bi-levels are dead. Excerpt:

- Bi-Level Car Procurement Update as of August 19th:

On August 19, 2015, Larry Salci, Consultant to the FRA on the Bi-Level Specification, provided a brief high level update on the status of the bi-level car procurement.

FAIs are ongoing.

There are no option cars being added to the order – it was thought there might be, but it did not happen.

The big picture challenge is to meet the HSIPR ARRA deadline for expending the federal funds by 9/30/17.

Some of the money is state money which does not have the same deadline, but the effort is underway to make sure that the ARRA funds are spent and the deadline is met.

Since Caltrans has money, CA may be in position to buy the additional bi-levels that were in the proposed option order for CA. But the Midwest states buying more bi-levels with their own money, especially Illinois with Gov. Rauner? Longer odds.