Superliner

[Amtrak Watcher]

I have a sensitive question, which the moderator may –at his discretion- delete from the forum without offense. Here goes.

The toilets on long Superliner trips can get rather raunchy, a situation not helped with the warm weather and the recent cutbacks in service staff. So, as I try to do my personal best to keep things nice, does anyone know of a way to use the facilities in such a way that (how can I say this…) no lingering evidence of my presence remains after a flush? The surface of the toilet bowel seems a bit too rough for satisfactory cleanliness.

So far, the only technique that seems to work (but only intermittently) is to use one of the little paper cups available in the restroom to fill the bowl with about a pint of water before attending to my personal affairs.

 

[Amfleet]

The toilets are meant to have little or no water in them. When they are flushed though, a rush a fast blowing air mixed with water is supposed to clear the bowl. If this is what you mean?

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

Indeed. This is exactly what I mean. The rush of air with what seems to be relatively little water does not seem to do the job most of the time; there doesn't seem to be enough solvent action of water. The problem, in my experience, seems to be confined to Superliner equipment. The toilets can get overwhelming by the last day of the three-day trip, and I'm sure this must annoying for the service staff.

The all-stainless steel construction of, for example, Viewliner toilets do not exhibit this problem; its easy to keep them clean with little effort.

I ask the question, because too many of my friends I've talked into using Amtrak tell me "never again" because of the dirty toiltes.

 

[Amfleet]

Remember, Viewliners only run on 1 night/1 day trips and the retention tanks are usually emptied after every or every other trip. Out west, on Superliners, trains go up to 3-4 days without retention tanks being dumped. This does lead to a foul odor. I have never found the smell a problem in a Sleeping Car, but Coaches can get pretty bad.

 

[AlanB]

Indeed. This is exactly what I mean. The rush of air with what seems to be relatively little water does not seem to do the job most of the time; there doesn't seem to be enough solvent action of water. The problem, in my experience, seems to be confined to Superliner equipment. The toilets can get overwhelming by the last day of the three-day trip, and I'm sure this must annoying for the service staff.
The all-stainless steel construction of, for example, Viewliner toilets do not exhibit this problem; its easy to keep them clean with little effort.

I ask the question, because too many of my friends I've talked into using Amtrak tell me "never again" because of the dirty toiltes.

Well you can always flush an extra time or two. I've heard people flush the toilet in a Viewliner 4 or 5 times in fact. Don't know if they are actually having a problem or are just confused by the lack of water in the bowl. :lol:

 

[Anthony]

One thing I've found - Super 1 restrooms don't smell nearly as bad as Super 2 restrooms. This is mostly in the sleeping cars but also didn't have a problem in a Super 1 coach last week. I wonder if the toilets were constructed differently somehow?

 

[Amfleet]

I've heard people flush the toilet in a Viewliner 4 or 5 times in fact. Don't know if they are actually having a problem or are just confused by the lack of water in the bowl. :lol:

Funny you mention that. That was one wierd thing I found in the Viewliner was that the occupents behind our room were flushing 3-4 times in a row. I thought maybe they were just having a bad reaction to the dining car, but maybe the flush pressure in some rooms differs in others?

 

[AlanB]

Funny you mention that. That was one wierd thing I found in the Viewliner was that the occupents behind our room were flushing 3-4 times in a row. I thought maybe they were just having a bad reaction to the dining car, but maybe the flush pressure in some rooms differs in others?

I don't think that the pressure varies that much from room to room. I think that there are a few factors at play here. One, many people just don't realize that the toilets operate differently on the train. They are expecting a gallon of water, like they get at home.

Secondly, I've noticed that frequently when one does flush the toilet, that sometimes there seems to be a bit of odor released by the process. This may cause people to think that the first flush didn't work.

Finally if one uses too much paper, this could also cause a problem and require multiple flushes.

 

[battalion51]

Gentlemen, I'm hardly an expert on these sorts of things, but I do my best. It is my best guess that the liquid ruinning through the toilets is not water, rather a chemical, similar to that of a regular Port-a-potty. When you think about it the retention tank is exactly the same thing as a port a john. Also if you notice in the Northeast the liquid in the toilets is blue, not clear. I personally think the stuff swishing through the toilets is chemicals not water.

 

[Steve4031]

One thing I learned the hard way about these toilets, is that periodically, they release waste or something or other in mist form. I found this out when I was riding with the window open early in the 80's. I thought it was raining . . . another railfan explained that this was the toiltets. Anyway . . . that kinda of cured me of riding with the window open. LOL.

 

[AlanB]

Gentlemen, I'm hardly an expert on these sorts of things, but I do my best. It is my best guess that the liquid ruinning through the toilets is not water, rather a chemical, similar to that of a regular Port-a-potty. When you think about it the retention tank is exactly the same thing as a port a john. Also if you notice in the Northeast the liquid in the toilets is blue, not clear. I personally think the stuff swishing through the toilets is chemicals not water.

I'm quite sure that it's not completely water, but a mixture of water and chemical.

However most people just assume that it is water and the question wasn't about what it was, but how much or how little of it there was. :lol:

 

[RandyJay]

I also tend to think, as noted by Amtrak Watcher, that the material of the bowl does have an effect on flushing. The Superliners seem to use a fiberglass or similar type material that does not appear to be as "slick" as it should be, and hence the difficulty in always getting complete flushing. And since you can't actually see the flush and its results, it is very easy just to flush once and leave. Of course the next user gets to come in and lift the lid . . . . . . .

And ditto to Anthony's remark - I thought it was just me, but I too have noticed that the S II's bathrooms do tend have a little more "odor" than the S I's. Can't begin to think of a reason for this, unless there is some kind of difference in the design of the two.

And since we're talking bathrooms, now what I really do miss in the S II sleepers vs. the S I's is that little window in the upstairs bathroom . . . . . . . talk about a unique aspect of traveling by train . . . . . there's nothing like watching the world go by while - well, you know what I mean.

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

I seem to recall a crew member working with a stuck toilet in El Paso telling me that the Superliner IIs have a larger hole (in the toilet) and attached pipes than the Superliner Is, and that the larger hole lowers the possibility of stuck toilets caused by people trying to stuff in things that will not fit. He also complained that, given the large number of stuck toilets, the holes need to be even larger. A stuck toilet can shut down an entire sleeper, or make the trip an unpleasant experience. I wonder of the larger hole has an effect on the odors.

Also, many "slick" surfaces (Teflon is an example) are effected by what seem to be harmeless chemicals making them not as slick as before. I wonder if cleaning compounds and practices have removed some of the slickness from Superliner toilets.

 

[tubaallen]

Gentlemen, I'm hardly an expert on these sorts of things, but I do my best. It is my best guess that the liquid ruinning through the toilets is not water, rather a chemical, similar to that of a regular Port-a-potty. When you think about it the retention tank is exactly the same thing as a port a john. Also if you notice in the Northeast the liquid in the toilets is blue, not clear. I personally think the stuff swishing through the toilets is chemicals not water.

On the long distance trains that I work, it is just water. You can tell, because it is clear. I know about the blue you're talking about...our Metra trains use that. However, on my trains, it's water.

 

[tubaallen]

Another problem...on Superliner IIs, is that they have that new toilet system: the one that you close the lid and it flushes. I don't know why, but the vacuum seems to be a real problem on those. It get's very edgy at high altitudes, so when we go over the mountains, we often have problems with the toilets not flushing at all. It sucks.

 

[Amfleet Fan]

I just posted a trip report on the reports forum about trains 41, 21, 422, and 48.

I should have added in the fact that consistently on all these trains the toilets had "residue" from the previous trips left in them.

It was obvious the car was cleaned, but I guess they decided to let that stuff stew in there.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Ah....toileting.....it was so simple in the past......"it" all went straight to the ground (before retention toilets)......an unusual experience, now gone(thankfully, yes).......seeing the rail and ballast going by at 79 mph right under your feet........

 

[seajay]

Another problem...on Superliner IIs, is that they have that new toilet system: the one that you close the lid and it flushes.  I don't know why, but the vacuum seems to be a real problem on those.  It get's very edgy at high altitudes, so when we go over the mountains, we often have problems with the toilets not flushing at all.  It sucks.

For a toilet, wouldn't "sucking" be a good thing? :lol:

seajay

 

[AMTRAK-P42]

Ah....toileting.....it was so simple in the past......"it" all went straight to the ground (before retention toilets)......an unusual experience, now gone(thankfully, yes).......seeing the rail and ballast going by at 79 mph right under your feet........

I can recall when I rode on the Starlight in 90' the experience. The most amusing moment of the trip occured when a kid thought it was to cool to flush the toliet over and over again so that he could watch the tracks outside.....it made it hard for the rest of us to use that bathroom for the duration of the trip. :lol:

 

[Amfleet]

Ah....toileting.....it was so simple in the past......"it" all went straight to the ground (before retention toilets)......an unusual experience, now gone(thankfully, yes).......seeing the rail and ballast going by at 79 mph right under your feet........

I can recall when I rode on the Starlight in 90' the experience. The most amusing moment of the trip occured when a kid thought it was to cool to flush the toliet over and over again so that he could watch the tracks outside.....it made it hard for the rest of us to use that bathroom for the duration of the trip. :lol:

Well considering the Coast Starlight has been Superliner equipped since the early '80's and Superliners were built with retention tanks, there is no way to see the tracks..

 

[AMTRAK-P42]

Ah....toileting.....it was so simple in the past......"it" all went straight to the ground (before retention toilets)......an unusual experience, now gone(thankfully, yes).......seeing the rail and ballast going by at 79 mph right under your feet........

I can recall when I rode on the Starlight in 90' the experience. The most amusing moment of the trip occured when a kid thought it was to cool to flush the toliet over and over again so that he could watch the tracks outside.....it made it hard for the rest of us to use that bathroom for the duration of the trip. :lol:

Well considering the Coast Starlight has been Superliner equipped since the early '80's and Superliners were built with retention tanks, there is no way to see the tracks..

That is a good point. But I can promise you that I do recall seeing the tracks. But then again I was in a transition coach, one of the old El-Captian cars. I wonder if that had something to do with it.

 

[Amfleet]

By the '90's the ex-High Level transition coaches were remodeled for crew only. I don't know how you ended up being seated there?

 

[AMTRAK-P42]

The coast starlight was running 8 hours late due to a bridge fire and the previous day the train was canceled. So there were twice the number of passengers. Being a train fan, I asked if it was ok to be seated in that coach. The conductor gave me a funny look, :lol: , but allowed me to seat myself in that car. I was not the only passenger in there though.

 

[socalsteve]

We just got back from taking the Sunset Limited from L.A. to Orlando and the one downside of the trip was the toilets in our sleeping car. They had sporadic trouble starting the second day out, and the attendant goofed around with them for a while. But by the start of the third day, they'd given out entirely and we had to use the toilets in the next sleeping car.

Other than that though, it was a great trip! At one time we were running almost five hours late, but ended up only (!) two hours late into Orlando. Great scenery, great food, a great time!

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

Service technicians at both San Antonio and El Paso tell me that toilet problems on Superliners such as those described by socalsteve are caused almost entirely by passengers trying to flush things down the toilet that don't belong there: paper bags, certain medical things, cosmetics, sanitary napkins, huge amounts of TP, etc. All of these folks assure me I would not believe what people try to flush down the toilet.