Superliner Shortages?

[jis]

You know, I have always been a huge opponent of FRA Structural Requirements for Amtrak equipment. I've hated the fact that this equipment has to be so heavy and nearly unproducable by most rail companies out there today. But after the Nevada Crash, where ONLY 6 people died, the structure continues to be a testimony to the strength of that shell.

It's also a testimony to all the thousands of potential collision points that still exist in America. The reason other countries can get by without Superliner style carbodies is because they chose to spend their time and effort removing grade crossings, upgrading traffic control systems, and creating more attentive drivers. If our country's trucks and trains weren't one distracted phone call away from a fatal collision course we probably wouldn't need fortified tanks on rails in the first place.

That same logic led to the Eschede crash.

A defect resulting from an insufficiently tested redesign of the wheels and a standard operating procedure that delayed reaction by the staff during crucial decision time led to the Eschede crash. The strength or fragility of the carbodies is likely to have been a contributing factor in the number and severity of injuries and fatalities, but it was by no means the cause of the crash. I did not mean to imply other countries have zero derailments. I only mean to point out that there are fewer opportunities for random collisions with commercial trucks and heavy machinery and that this helps explain why trains in many countries are not as heavily armored as Amtrak trains are.

And as I keep pointing out, it is not clear how well Superliners will survive a concrete bridge falling on top of them. Fortunately no one has tried such a trick yet. Afterall the front car of the Colonial in Chase MD - an Amfleet I - did not fare that well either as it was hit from the side by the next car after the train accordioned and parted. Buff strength works very well when trains stays in line in a collision, not so well otherwise. This is not to say that the ICE carbodies did not have welding issues that caused certain weld seams to rip apart either. Incidentally at least half a dozen TGVs have been involved in altercations with trucks and such at grade crossings and so far there has just been a single fatality AFAIR.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I didn't vote for any severe budget cuts, Governor.

Neither did I, but as a whole Americans did vote for politicians who favored severe spending cuts right in the middle of a faltering economy. I'm not aware of many respected economists who recommend such counter-intuitive actions, but I do know several politicians who have insisted that an immediate freeze on government spending combined with yet another round of tax cuts will get the economy up and humming in no time. I can't say for certain what will happen if the government puts a freeze on most spending, but I'm sure we'll find out soon enough. Don't you just love being a Guinea pig in one of the world's grand experiments?

 

[George Harris]

You know, I have always been a huge opponent of FRA Structural Requirements for Amtrak equipment. I've hated the fact that this equipment has to be so heavy and nearly unproducable by most rail companies out there today. But after the Nevada Crash, where ONLY 6 people died, the structure continues to be a testimony to the strength of that shell.

It's also a testimony to all the thousands of potential collision points that still exist in America. The reason other countries can get by without Superliner style carbodies is because they chose to spend their time and effort removing grade crossings, upgrading traffic control systems, and creating more attentive drivers. If our country's trucks and trains weren't one distracted phone call away from a fatal collision course we probably wouldn't need fortified tanks on rails in the first place. -_-

How about the following list of French high speed trainset grade crossing collisions? Note: All of these are on lines that existed before the TGV lines were built. These things performed amazingly well, but for the most part involved trainsets built after a really bad one.

This list of grade crossing accidents involving French high speed train sets only. This list may be incomplete, and does not include any other equipment types, nor any accidents, if any, since about 2000.

23 September 1988: Voiron, France, speed 110 km/h (68 mph), struck a special road transport with a weight of 80 tons. “The large mass of the road vehicle made this crash much worse than it might otherwise have been; the engineer and one passenger died, and many more were injured when the first trailer was ripped open by debris.” Only the lead power unit derailed, but the train set was never returned to service. 2 deaths, 60 injuries, no mention of truck driver.

It was also stated that as a result of this accident several safety features to improve crashworthiness were made part of trainsets built later, including deformable sections, at the front and rear of the power unit and at the front of the first trailer, to manage and absorb crash energy without damage to passenger compartments. One of these discussions of an accident at a later date mentions the “rectangular impact shield” in the front of the power unit which would significantly improved the survivability of the occupants of the driving cab.

10 August 1995: near Vitre, France, speed 140 km/h (87 mph), struck a tractor-trailer combination with farm equipment. Train did not derail. Stopped about 1.6 km beyond the point of impact. Damage limited to nose of power unit and a catenary mast. 2 passengers with slight injuries, truck driver escaped.

25 September 1997: Bierne, 10 km south of Dunkerque, France, speed 130 km/h (81 mph), struck an asphalt paving machine. “The leading power unit left the rails, spun around to the left, and came to rest on its side down the track embankment. The engineer suffered minor injuries, and the unit was destroyed. Four trailers derailed and two left the track bed. None of them rolled over thanks to the articulated design of the train.” 7 slight injuries. No mention whether the train driver was included in that count. No mention of the operator(s) of the paving machine. Trainset withdrawn from service. No mention of disposition of equipment other that rear power unit and two coaches were used in the restoration of the trainset involved in the 9 May 1998 collision.

19 November 1997: Neau, near Laval, France, speed 140 km/h (87 mph), struck a tractor-trailer combination carrying a load of calcium carbonate. First wheelset derailed, heavy damage to front end of power unit. Some unspecified damage to track and catenary. 6 passengers with slight injuries, truck driver escaped.

9 May 1998: Hoeven, Netherlands, speed not given, struck a truck crossing the tracks. Train’s power unit and first two trailers derailed. Some unspecified damage to track and catenary. Lead power unit and first two coaches “had to be scrapped.” 6 passengers with slight injuries, truck driver killed.

28 November 1998: Guipavas, France, speed less than 120 km/h (75 mph), struck a semi-truck/lorry stopped on the track. The lead power unit sustained heavy damage. Train did not derail. No injuries/deaths. (truck driver escaped)

 

[Anderson]

IIRC, Amtrak ideally wants to cycle equipment out after 40 years. I suspect that 50 years is a "we're willing to go this far" line with most equipment...while the diners, PPCs, and baggage cars are more exceptions than anything (Amtrak's latest Viewliner diner order was its first such order, period).

By the way, what happened with the Viewliner company going out of business, and did part of the order not get fulfilled?

 

[MikeM]

Indeed, the PPC's are ex Santa Fe high levels. And having enjoyed them a number of times, long may they run.

Interestingly enough, Gateway Rail Services outside of St Louis bought a whole bunch of the old Hi-levels, and they haven't done anything with them like sell or scrap them. When I wrote my original comment, I was thinking perhaps they were holding them just in case Amtrak came calling. I'd have to think they could be rehabbed far quicker than new cars built, and would relieve some of the stress on the current fleet. Of course, no sleepers, unless you count the transition cars that had bunk rooms for the crews which were primitive but functional.

I definitely agree with the concerns expressed about the budget and debt. With Amtrak, however, debt functions more as a way to shift expenditures between friendly and unfriendly administrations. I doubt the company's cash flow is sufficient to cover debt service totally. Much of the existing debt on cars and stations was taken on to cover operating expenses, not to purchase the stations and equipment in the beginning. I do worry we will see a situation in the next election where we could end up with someone who is totally hostile to Amtrak. In which case, any excuse will be a good excuse to close the service down. I doubt a clean (cleaner?) balance sheet will be the defense they need.\

But at the end of the day, it'll be nasty if we end up being unable to support the national network, fragmented as it is, if we don't have enough cars and engines to do so.

 

[jis]

IIRC, Amtrak ideally wants to cycle equipment out after 40 years. I suspect that 50 years is a "we're willing to go this far" line with most equipment...while the diners, PPCs, and baggage cars are more exceptions than anything (Amtrak's latest Viewliner diner order was its first such order, period).

By the way, what happened with the Viewliner company going out of business, and did part of the order not get fulfilled?

Construction of the Viewliners was started by Morrison-Knudsen, which went bankrupt in course of fulfilling the contract. As part of the bankruptcy proceeding a partly owned subsidiary of Alstom named Amerail picked up the railcar operations of MK (The rest of it went to Washington Group International) and completed the Viewliner order. Later Amerail became part of Alstom USA and has since then proceeded to manufacture many more passenger railcars.

The entire order that was actually placed was fulfilled. Originally the plan was to order 100 Viewliners, but by the time the order was placed Congress cut the funding in half and Amtrak was not as financially innovative back then than it is now.

 

[dlagrua]

I believe that we will see new Superliner equipment in the next 5 years but the process is going to be a hard road to navigate. Politicans and some of the general public get too caught up in the subsides going to passenger rail, while ignoring the much higher subsidies given for building and maintaining highways and airports. The other argument is that government should not be in the passenger train business. This is all B.S. as we really don't have a true free enterprise system in the USA. The government subsidizes the oil companies, it provides a subsidy on the making of alcohol, the auto industry, Wall Street, the growing of wheat, corn and many farm commodities, there are subsidies to green energy businesses, minority businesses, small businesses, R&D subsidies for military and advanced weaponry programs and the list goes on and on. If you look at the R&D subsidies going for military research to Raytheon, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dymnamics, Northrup-Grumman,ITT, you are talking billions of government subsidies being awarded and we are worrying about Amtrak. It just doesn't make sense.

If we argue against subsidies then we must be fair about it and criticise all of the businesses receiving government money as wasteful. However, if we just single out Amtrak, we must make our politicans aware of the entire picture. Either we should have government subsidies or they should be eliminated totally. I feel that government subsides are good but only when they serve the public interest and not the likes of big business, the financiers, Wall Street, the banks and the military industrial complex.

 

[Gord]

When the new cars for the east coast trains are deliverd in a few years, Amtrak will think about getting funds to order a new generation of Superliners. Until that time they will keep rebuilding the Superliners I's. The Santa Fe cars are past the 50 year rule for passenger cars to be in service.

Do you have a "chapter and verse" for this 50 year rule? I have done some searching, admittedly not exhasutive, in the CFR and have not found it. (Finding things in teh CFR is at times necessary in my job, so I have some familiarity in plowing through it.) Curent date minus 50 equals 1961. I seriously doubt that most of teh diners rolling around in the eastern trains were built post-1961. Likewise, the Budd RDC's running around were most likely built pre 1961. Plus, some of the Santa Fe Hi-Levels are still running around in the western trains. I would suspect that these were built in the same time frame as the Hi-Level coaches.

Not to mention almost all the private and business cars currently in use. It is 40 years for freight cars in interchange service.

Gord