I, for one, wash my face each morning. That is the type of washing up I was referring too. Then there's brushing my teeth. Maybe do a sponge bath rather than take a shower. If you want to wait for me while I do all this in the public bathroom, fine.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong, so that before you wash your face the sink, it will be clean. I just hope that there is always unabated bathroom access, but if the bathrooms go down, all bets are off! .To make the limited bathrooms available to those who need to use a toilet by letting me wash up in my roomette, perhaps.Well, at risk of carrying this topic further than it needs, the Superliner roomettes also don't have sinks. Frankly, I'm puzzled by the sinks still being included. I thought part of the argument against the roomette toilets was the complex plumbing. While I'm sure it's slightly reduced by not having both a toilet and sink, I don't see the need for a sink without a toilet.
There is a big difference in the drainage plumbing for s toilet versus a sink. The sink can be serviced by a small water pipe and small drain pipe. A toilet has a larger drainage pipe and the real world problem of people flushing things down the on-board toilet that they should not. Having a small sink in the roomette to wash up, brushing teeth, or rinse something off is not unreasonable.Well, from a technical standpoint, isn't there some common plumbing? Both need a water supply, both need a drain connection. Eliminate one and sure you've eliminated half the plumbing, but you still have the same maintenance issues, just not as many.
From a human standpoint, I can't think of anything a sink in your room can be used for, that the sink in the public bathroom can't. Maybe you could make the argument of people washing their hands headed to the diner without having to wait for the public bathroom, but it's thin, frankly. Then there's the potable water angle, but do these sinks even have a dispenser of potable water?
Also, understand that the toilets used on Amtrak trains are MUCH more complex than the toilet you use at home.There is a big difference in the drainage plumbing for s toilet versus a sink. The sink can be serviced by a small water pipe and small drain pipe. A toilet has a larger drainage pipe and the real world problem of people flushing things down the on-board toilet that they should not. Having a small sink in the roomette to wash up, brushing teeth, or rinse something off is not unreasonable.Well, from a technical standpoint, isn't there some common plumbing? Both need a water supply, both need a drain connection. Eliminate one and sure you've eliminated half the plumbing, but you still have the same maintenance issues, just not as many.
From a human standpoint, I can't think of anything a sink in your room can be used for, that the sink in the public bathroom can't. Maybe you could make the argument of people washing their hands headed to the diner without having to wait for the public bathroom, but it's thin, frankly. Then there's the potable water angle, but do these sinks even have a dispenser of potable water?
Do you have personal experience with the sink being used as a toilet? You are certainly obsessed with the notion that it has been used for that.I sincerely hope that I am wrong, so that before you wash your face the sink, it will be clean. I just hope that there is always unabated bathroom access, but if the bathrooms go down, all bets are off! .To make the limited bathrooms available to those who need to use a toilet by letting me wash up in my roomette, perhaps.Well, at risk of carrying this topic further than it needs, the Superliner roomettes also don't have sinks. Frankly, I'm puzzled by the sinks still being included. I thought part of the argument against the roomette toilets was the complex plumbing. While I'm sure it's slightly reduced by not having both a toilet and sink, I don't see the need for a sink without a toilet.
Only person who is truly into it seems to be dlagrua at this point He keeps circling back to it no matter what we post.Ok, guys...the sink/toilet discussion is a bit gross. Could we please change the topic?
Remember a contract is a 2 way street. If CAF were building the cars on the original schedule, Amtrak would have to request CAF to delay production in order to delay progress payments. There are probably a number of reasons for the delays: CAF reportedly encountered difficulties in finding qualified workers to hire, design issues, manufacturing and training issues on the first units built, more recently CAF running into delays on the delivery and acceptance of equipment for Houston transit, and yes, maybe Amtrak asking CAF to slow production for a time while Amtrak managed the cash flow to get through the FY13 sequestration, govt shutdown, and waiting on a final FY14 budget. We will not know the reasons unless someone in Amtrak talks honestly about why the Vw IIs are not yet in testing on the NEC.Possible reasons there's been a go-slow on the Viewliner IIs.
...
Amtrak wants to be absolutely sure it can pay for the new Viewliners before ordering more. Maybe the option deadline is tied to when Amtrak receives the first cars from CAF.
...
Amtrak wants to postpone the final payments to CAF until Fiscal 2015, and that's not really so very far away.
...
CAF has made a mess of things.
...
I'm sure I've overlooked the best reason why we haven't see a Viewliner II in motion yet. But I'm starting to think we will not see them joining the fleet until Fiscal 2015.
If Amtrak is "Secretly" Testing ViewlinerIIs/Bag Cars on the NEC @ Night someone is bound to Spot them and it will show up on the Train Forums or U-Tube! Perhaps our Amtrak Insiders can "Secretly" let us know if his is True it would be Good News indeed if Testing is Starting,! Spring is on the way and Amtrak can sure use some Good News to go along with the Better Weather!!!I heard that a viewliner 2 was on train 66 the other day. Can anyone confirm?
The report on railroad.net is that someone on facebook posted that they saw 4 to 5 Viewliners on a train in Binghamton NY. Which is at least plausible if the first set of Viewliners are being moved to an Amtrak facility on the NEC for inspection and testing. It would be very unlikely that a new Viewliner would be on a revenue train. But these are unsubstantiated reports. I would expect a press release and dog & pony show shortly after the test set of Viewliners are delivered.Well you know the old saying... I heard it on the internet so it MUST be true....
This rumor got started by someone saying they saw a "Viewliner II" on 66.. When it was most likely a deadhead for 449.. So someone starting a rumor that is completely false.
Bingo that was just the "Tranquil View" deadheading to Boston.Well you know the old saying... I heard it on the internet so it MUST be true....
This rumor got started by someone saying they saw a "Viewliner II" on 66.. When it was most likely a deadhead for 449.. So someone starting a rumor that is completely false.
The Viewliner prototype that was converted to the 10004 American View is not a company office car. It is a track and ROW inspection car with a large window on the back with theater style seating inside so people can inspect the ROW. It reportedly also has track geometry and sensor equipment on-board. Saw the photos on railroad.net and it looks nice, but it is fresh out of the shops. But how is a system maintenance car a form of corporate extravagance?It seems there is sentiment share by some that yes the Viewliner Theater looks nice, but is it a form of corporate extravagance by Joe Boardman that we and Amtrak can not afford. And it leaves a bad taste in alot of people mouth that this was one of the three prototypes, and as such, should be used right here and now as a prototype for cafe lounges and coaches that Amtrak has to start buying., instead of a car with a glass wall -- that already exists in Beech Grove and Corridor Clipper.
Enter your email address to join: