Viewliner II - Part 1 - Initial Production and Delivery

[CCC1007]

Amtrak's CAF baggage cars look pretty cool.

I think it would be awesome to see CAF get the amfleet 2 replacement contract at some point in the future--and model them as the baggage cars are with seats in them.

Not likely with their current status.

 

[CraigDK]

As long as it is a joy ride and not a return to sender!

It is scheduled for return to sender (Hialeah) in a few days.

Hopefully for deployment to the LSL

No.

Some additional cars will join the joyride at JAX this afternoon.

When I said return to sender, I was referring to it going back to CAF! That would have been a cause for concern, going back to Hialeah is a good sign.

 

[Steve4031]

Amtrak's CAF baggage cars look pretty cool.

I think it would be awesome to see CAF get the amfleet 2 replacement contract at some point in the future--and model them as the baggage cars are with seats in them.

I think I would prefer more windows then are currently in the baggage car.. But I wouldn't mind a viewliner coach wit windows.

 

[Acela150]

Amtrak's CAF baggage cars look pretty cool.

I think it would be awesome to see CAF get the amfleet 2 replacement contract at some point in the future--and model them as the baggage cars are with seats in them.

So you're ok with passenger cars that are years behind schedule??? I'm not. You're a first....

 

[StriderGDM]

Well, let's start with we don't know why the cars are behind and if the same reason would impact coach cars.

And we have no real evidence that any other builder would do any better. CAF at least has a production line going.

I actually think the bigger problem would be that any single-level fleet order would probably want 100-125 cars a year, and I'm not sure CAF is equipped for that level of production quantity.

 

[west point]

Well, let's start with we don't know why the cars are behind and if the same reason would impact coach cars.

And we have no real evidence that any other builder would do any better. CAF at least has a production line going.

I actually think the bigger problem would be that any single-level fleet order would probably want 100-125 cars a year, and I'm not sure CAF is equipped for that level of production quantity.

Good points. There has been many speculations why the order is so late but no concrete info. CAF being able to build 100 - 125 cars per year does appear very unlikely. Isn't there other production orders going on at CAF as well ?

 

[MikefromCrete]

Well, let's start with we don't know why the cars are behind and if the same reason would impact coach cars.

And we have no real evidence that any other builder would do any better. CAF at least has a production line going.

I actually think the bigger problem would be that any single-level fleet order would probably want 100-125 cars a year, and I'm not sure CAF is equipped for that level of production quantity.

Good points. There has been many speculations why the order is so late but no concrete info. CAF being able to build 100 - 125 cars per year does appear very unlikely. Isn't there other production orders going on at CAF as well ?

They've been building streetcars for a number of cities, but the orders are small. I doubt if they could build 100-125 coaches in a year.

 

[A Voice]

Well, let's start with we don't know why the cars are behind and if the same reason would impact coach cars.

And we have no real evidence that any other builder would do any better. CAF at least has a production line going.

I actually think the bigger problem would be that any single-level fleet order would probably want 100-125 cars a year, and I'm not sure CAF is equipped for that level of production quantity.

Good points. There has been many speculations why the order is so late but no concrete info. CAF being able to build 100 - 125 cars per year does appear very unlikely. Isn't there other production orders going on at CAF as well ?

Well, let's start with we don't know why the cars are behind and if the same reason would impact coach cars.

And we have no real evidence that any other builder would do any better. CAF at least has a production line going.

I actually think the bigger problem would be that any single-level fleet order would probably want 100-125 cars a year, and I'm not sure CAF is equipped for that level of production quantity.

Good points. There has been many speculations why the order is so late but no concrete info. CAF being able to build 100 - 125 cars per year does appear very unlikely. Isn't there other production orders going on at CAF as well ?

They've been building streetcars for a number of cities, but the orders are small. I doubt if they could build 100-125 coaches in a year.

Direct one-to-one replacements (Amtrak really needs more than that, of course) for the Amfleet II coaches and lounges is only 150 cars; No real reason they have to all be delivered the same year (even Budd didn't do that in 1982-83). I'd agree that with the production line already open, now would be the best time for a follow-on contract for more cars.

 

[StriderGDM]

While you're right about the Amfleet II cars, the stated Amtrak goal in one of their plans is to replace the entire fleet of Amfleet Is and IIs. That's 650 cars. Plus ideally another 100-150 more (at least) in expansion. And the goal was to do so at a rate of about 100+ a year. Hence my numbers.

Now, since Amtrak does own the plans to the Viewliner design, they in theory could do what is rarely done these days by the government and let out contracts to two vendors. This might actually create some cost competition and speed things up.

 

[west point]

While you're right about the Amfleet II cars, the stated Amtrak goal in one of their plans is to replace the entire fleet of Amfleet Is and IIs. That's 650 cars. Plus ideally another 100-150 more (at least) in expansion. And the goal was to do so at a rate of about 100+ a year. Hence my numbers.

Now, since Amtrak does own the plans to the Viewliner design, they in theory could do what is rarely done these days by the government and let out contracts to two vendors. This might actually create some cost competition and speed things up.

If you study the retirement schedule you will find that Amfleet retirements lag replacements by many cars. Amtrak may in future order even more single and bi-level cars than retirements. And that does not count the extra seats in the Acela-2s

 

[Andrew]

I thought that Amtrak wanted to replace Amfleet 2 separately and before Amfleet 1.

Which companies would be able to manufacture over 100 coaches a year?

 

[west point]

I thought that Amtrak wanted to replace Amfleet 2 separately and before Amfleet 1.

That is correct the -2s have about 40% more mileage than the -1s.

Which companies would be able to manufacture over 100 coaches a year?

Maybe Siemens can build 100 + with the V-2 blueprints but even that is questionable.

 

[PVD]

Forget the V2 idea. The starting point for new single level equipment will be a much more modern design. The NGEC designs have a number of problems that they seem to be trying to hide, but the VL design is 30 years old, things like roof line package HVAC and drastically improved power distribution, overhead compartment design and much more are to be expected. The ability to re purpose a car more easily (like corridor to LD to BC) is highly likely. I really like the as a sleeper or diner, but I'm not sure that added height makes sense for a coach. All that adds is weight, and air volume for the HVAC to handle.

 

[jis]

I cannot understand the AU fascination with the insistence on an outdated V2 design instead of just stating the requirements in the RFP and asking the manufacturer to provide the best modern design they can, like everyone else does. Sort of like was done with the Acela II RFP. Put in a stipulation retaining the non-exclusive ability to use the design for further orders in the future. All reputable large systems in the world do that.

 

[Brian Battuello]

Sure would be nice to see the second level of windows continued in a coach, but no idea how that would accomodate luggage racks. Guess we'll never see an entire train with the same basic shape.

 

[Ryan]

We need the AU engineering squad to design us a locomotive (dual mode, of course) that fits in a Viewliner shell.

 

[TylerP42]

We need the AU engineering squad to design us a locomotive (dual mode, of course) that fits in a Viewliner shell.

You made me laugh loudly at 1 AM...

Don't forget Acela-2's in a Viewliner Shell... need those double windows when you're going 150!

 

[jis]

We need the AU engineering squad to design us a locomotive (dual mode, of course) that fits in a Viewliner shell.

And it must have the upper row windows to make the diesel engine and the electric switching gear inside feel nice.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

We've already endured thirty years of slow and ugly fluted boxcars and yet we we apparently can't wait to lock in another three or four decades of outdated 1980's designs? *shrug* I honestly have no idea why these cars are so popular. Must be something you need a sixth sense to understand.

 

[A Voice]

I cannot understand the AU fascination with the insistence on an outdated V2 design instead of just stating the requirements in the RFP and asking the manufacturer to provide the best modern design they can, like everyone else does. Sort of like was done with the Acela II RFP. Put in a stipulation retaining the non-exclusive ability to use the design for further orders in the future. All reputable large systems in the world do that.

One chief advantage the Viewliner II does have is a currently open production line. Yes, there have been unreasonable delays that shouldn't have happened, but presumably with the problems ironed out a follow-on order (assuming CAF would touch it at this point...) for coaches and lounges shouldn't be so problematic. Further, an RFP and new design has to start largely from scratch; The Viewliner is an essentially completed model. Deliveries of new cars could, one would hope, begin much sooner and avoid even the possibility of Nippon-Sharyo level setbacks. But there are more reasons, below, not to arbitrarily or completely discard the Viewliner design.

We need the AU engineering squad to design us a locomotive (dual mode, of course) that fits in a Viewliner shell.

I once saw a mock-up (from General Motors - thus EMD) locomotive designed into an Amfleet body shell.

Sure would be nice to see the second level of windows continued in a coach, but no idea how that would accomodate luggage racks. Guess we'll never see an entire train with the same basic shape.

Indeed, aesthetics matter. Since Amtrak's inception in 1971 the company has been having a contest with itself to see how many different types of cars can be included in one train consist. Top Prize goes to the early 80's Desert Wind with Heritage baggage and sleeper, Amfleet I dinette, Hi-level transition car, and Superliner coaches. Close runner up has to be the mid-90's Three Rivers with seven different car models on the train: Heritage baggage, Viewliner sleeper, Amfleet II coaches, Horizon dinette, Material Handling Cars, Express Boxcars, and Roadrailers. There's a reason you never saw either of these consists displayed in advertising or Amtrak passenger publications.

Yes, the Viewliner design has grown old waiting on funding for new cars and we do need new, modern designs to carry forward. However, there are compelling reasons to build more Viewliners in the interim; I don't think anyone is advocating that Amfleet I replacements for the corridor should be a Viewliner. We have an opportunity, though, that won't come again for decades for matching train sets in the east that should not be so readily or arbitrarily dismissed just because the basic body shape is from the 80's.

We've already endured thirty years of slow and ugly fluted boxcars and yet we we apparently can't wait to lock in another three or four decades of outdated 1980's designs? *shrug* I honestly have no idea why these cars are so popular. Must be something you need a sixth sense to understand.

Huh? The boxcars have been gone for a long time now, and they were never fluted. What were you referring to?

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

We have an opportunity, though, that won't come again for decades for matching train sets in the east that should not be so readily or arbitrarily dismissed just because the basic body shape is from the 80's.

Ohhhh.... matching train sets.

 

[jis]

I guess the difference of opinion may be on the relative importance of matching train sets. It is a nicety that is not essential for providing good service. IMHO good reliable service is way more important than matching train sets. I would happily forgo an outdated design even with a creaky production line open to get more modern design with more modern tried and tested workmanship if I can, and even better if I can get it at world competitive prices rather than from a special cobbled together production line with astronomical costs.

 

[Palmetto]

Matching trainsets were quite far from the norm pre-Amtrak. Some of us here would've gone bonkers to see them. It's probably true that only railfans would be pushing this concept. Passengers in general could give a hoot about the issue, as long as they get to where they're going in a comfortable manner.

 

[A Voice]

We have an opportunity, though, that won't come again for decades for matching train sets in the east that should not be so readily or arbitrarily dismissed just because the basic body shape is from the 80's.

Ohhhh.... matching train sets.

The Simpsons dates from the 1980's and thus that character is an outdated design. You therefore shouldn't be using it to produce new message board comments.

It is a nicety that is not essential for providing good service. IMHO good reliable service is way more important than matching train sets.

And I wouldn't disagree with that comment. Point is, however, that aesthetics and details do make a difference (paint schemes, car types, interior design and accommodations, etc.), arguably more than many people realize.

Amtrak apparently places some importance on this as well. Note that promotional materials have often shown matching sets of Superliners or Amfleet cars (often staged, since few real trains look like that).

Matching trainsets were quite far from the norm pre-Amtrak. Some of us here would've gone bonkers to see them. It's probably true that only railfans would be pushing this concept. Passengers in general could give a hoot about the issue, as long as they get to where they're going in a comfortable manner.

Only railfans can have an appreciation for aesthetics and design?

 

[west point]

The lack of any information about the delays is puzzling. Maybe we need to find out if somehow there is a non disclosure clause embedded in the contract somewhere ?