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

[WoodyinNYC]

Minutes from the NGEC annual meeting and the March 14th monthly meeting ... [are] on the AASHTO website. Concerning ... the Nippon-Sharyo car procurement, the response was obscure:

One question was asked – “What is the status of the Bi-Level Cars procurement?”


The response from the Chair was that the NGEC’s role is to address proposed changes to the control documents for each of our specifications. Since currently there is only one vehicle requesting changes that is the only one on the agenda today, and that is the only one we will be addressing.

... a pertinent question if the bi-level order is salvageable ... And from the monthly report:

The subcommittee continues to review relevant Bi-Level Specification changes that may pertain to the Single Level Specification Revision A, and will revise as appropriate ...

Am I getting this wrong? They could change the specs for the bi-level cars, for example, to allow more weight, to make them able to survive the crush test. But then really, how much can they revise the specs without one of the losing bidders raising hell about the unfairness of it all?

 

[A Voice]

Without looking it up (it's getting late tonight.....) I think the annual meeting minutes mentioned something like 243 design changes to the bi-level specification.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

The subcommittee continues to review relevant Bi-Level Specification changes that may pertain to the Single Level Specification Revision A, and will revise as appropriate through the DCR process.

In short there just checking if any of the changes are good enough that they should be applied to the all type of equipment. If there is a different safety equipment that was add to the bilevel, and if it should be add to the single level fleet too.

Government talk with not much meaning.

One of the Amtrak designer engineers was at EPSA 2017. Interesting talk but it was all nuts and bolts of how multiple agency work together to write spec out.

.

 

[PRR 60]

I read those minutes also.

During past annual meetings, they had slick PowerPoint presentations touting the progress of both the locomotive and bi-level orders. This year, the locomotive order got the PowerPoint treatment, but they seemed to do the best they could to not even mention the bi-level order (Bi-levels? What bi-levels?).

Reading the draft of the March Exec meeting, it appears the first draft of the annual meeting minutes did not even mention that a question about the bi-levels had been asked by some un-named person. Someone reviewing the annual meeting draft minutes picked up on that omission and complained. The wording about the question, and the unresponsive response to that question was added.

By the way, pick up on the little nugget that Amtrak and the states still do not have a lease agreement for the locomotives? They have been hashing that out for months. I think I'm having flashbacks to my working days.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

By the way, pick up on the little nugget that Amtrak and the states still do not have a lease agreement for the locomotives? They have been hashing that out for months.

Not surprised, just surprised the States did not have a breakdown of cost. At some point a State would look at new engine, new cars, or OB services. With a breakdown of the cost, a state could quickly see where to save money. Of course Amtrak was not going to provide that, but the State could of required it during the contract phase.

.

 

[Steve4031]

I think this whole bilevels thing is going to fall through. Lots of money lost and time list and know equipment.

 

[DSS&A]

Hi,

Here's a link to the Glass Door website with some comments about Nippon Sharyo. You need to keep in mind that the most recent comments were posted around the time in January when 100 employees were laid off. The comments are still interesting to read.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/NIPPON-SHARYO-Reviews-E8190.htm

 

[Anthony V]

Even more layoffs were just announced today.

http://www.wrex.com/story/35372003/2017/05/08/nippon-sharyo-announces-more-layoffs

 

[Steve4031]

Thank you for the update. It's looking gloomy for this project.

 

[bretton88]

I would not be surprised if a cancellation of the contract is forthcoming. They just have to negotiate the settlement​.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[DSS&A]

Hi,

The last paragraph in the Metra press release has information about Nippon Sharyo. NS lost an "add-on order" for 21 more commuter cars.

https://metrarail.com/about-metra/newsroom/metra-seek-proposals-new-cars-engines

 

[jis]

Hi,

The last paragraph in the Metra press release has information about Nippon Sharyo. NS lost an "add-on order" for 21 more commuter cars.

https://metrarail.com/about-metra/newsroom/metra-seek-proposals-new-cars-engines

This has nothing to do with the car order that is held up due to buff strength test failure. This is a completely different set of cars and orders involving VRE and METRA.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

... Metra press release ...

https://metrarail.com/about-metra/newsroom/metra-seek-proposals-new-cars-engines

I'd never thought about this problem, and how new equipment can improve air quality in the station(s). But of course.

Metra would expect ... delivery of the first locomotive in 2020. New locomotives ... to replace outdated diesel locomotives serving Chicago Union Station with modern, cleaner-burning engines, significantly improving air quality for the 120,000 passengers who travel through the station each day.

So I'm glad to see a beginning. In 2020.

Now if only someone had a plan to invest a Trillion dollars in infrastructure.

 

[frequentflyer]

Someone on the Trains mag forum is stating that the contract will be cancelled and the Midwest states will rebid for single level cars.

If true, my thinking is the states see Brightline about to start in Florida and will order similar equipment. Would not be surprised to see Siemens coaches all over the Midwest.

 

[jis]

Now if only someone had a plan to invest a Trillion dollars in infrastructure.

Specially if $800 Billion of that was not smoke and mirror.

 

[Thirdrail7]

That will add years to the process. Hopefully, the Horizons, Amfleets and Comets can keep up the good work.

 

[jis]

What is an interesting side issue is what happens to the committee developed specification that appears to be unmanufacturable (is that a word?)

 

[frequentflyer]

The only problem going with single cars in the Midwest is a change in operations. Siemen single level cars do not have cabs. So if they Midwest went that route, they would have to bookend the consists with Charger locomotives.

 

[A Voice]

This really isn't much of a surprise, and if its the same post I've seen, it also notes the order will be re-bid if they can get an extension on funding. Assuming they're still hoping for the expiring federal stimulus funds, that's a big if.

I'd expect the unworkable "design by committee" specification to be quietly forgotten and swept under the rug. That said, I wonder if California will also opt for a single-level car when basically everything else except interim solutions (Horizon/Amfleet and rebuilt Comets) are bi-level and set up for low level boarding.

The Siemens design (we can't just assume they'll get the contract, though they are likely in a good position) would already require modifications for either Midwest or California use (traps, for one thing); A cab car addition should be possible.

Just thinking out loud, but there is one single-level design extant for which two trainsets could be delivered within weeks or months of contract signing date. I would expect them to bid also.

 

[R30A]

Single level high floor equipment would be a nightmare from an accessibility perspective. Bilevels or Talgos really are the only practical existing designs

 

[RPC]

Yes, this could be Talgo's foot in the door. OTOH, the committee design would probably be workable without the weight reduction requirement - without that it's essentially a Surfliner with LED lighting.

 

[Karl1459]

Expect the next round of bidding to have three results:

1. Bid to specifications, with an unrealistic higher price (N-S obviously underbid). Perhaps proposing titanium underframes, lol.

2. Bids with exceptions to weight requirement.

3. Bids with exceptions to buffer requirements.

 

[PVD]

depends how the specs are written, many times exceptions are expressly forbidden for certain items

someone correct if wrong, but the strength requirement is FRA, not committee spec and would require change or waiver, not exception

 

[Steve4031]

Taglgos are tried and true. They do work in the Pacific Northwest. They will have automatic doors which allow boarding at all doors. Not sure about push pull operations.

The Chicago hub could be modernized into a Talgo hub for MidWest corridor trains.

This would be a pretty fast process compared to starting over.

 

[jis]

depends how the specs are written, many times exceptions are expressly forbidden for certain items

someone correct if wrong, but the strength requirement is FRA, not committee spec and would require change or waiver, not exception

Yep, the buff strength requirement is a very very old one and there are literally many hundreds of cars that meet that requirement running around today - read that as all cars in commercial operation. So no one is going to relax that one, except for what is allowed with CEM in the modified standard.

I think what will change is the weight requirement, since that is basically just a made up one. Having worked in many standards committees I have watched aghast many times as completely pointless requirements were added in because it was the favorite hobby horse of the guy on the committee who had never built anything in his/her life and got it to work. It happens. In most cases they are harmless twiddles that fall by the wayside. Sometimes not.