Viewliner Ride Quality...I'm Impressed!

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
 
Green Maned Lion said:
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
Click to expand...
The problem with rebuilding all the old stuff is two fold. First, the cars all needed new trucks of a design no longer commercially made, they needed to be fitted with retention toilets, and of course a general major overhaul. That put the price tag for doing all that work rather close to the price of the new cars. So there wasn't much savings to be had, even though in the long run it probably would have been cheaper.

Second, only railfans really loved those old cars. The general public wants new, not old. There is a reason that Acela has the ridership that it does, even on weekends when one can't say that it's the business traveler who doesn't care about the cost. People like shinny, new stuff. I'm not saying that it's logical or even sensible that people think that way.

But the bottom line is that Amtrak would have lower occupancy rates on the single level sleepers, if we didn't have the Viewliners.
 
Green Maned Lion said:
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
Click to expand...
Like AlanB, I doubt that refurbishing the Heritage sleepers would have been as easy a process nor as inexpensive as you think. I wilt thinking of replumbing the things. Things seem much simpler on paper than they are in messy reality, especially plumbing. Just remodel your kitchen or bathroom if you have any doubt of that.

So I think that Amtrak was given a bad set of choices: go with what seemed a good design, using a company that didn't have a track record building rail cars or refurbish old cars built by a company that was out of business to a very different standard than when they were built. All with much less money than they had planned for.

The world is a stubborn place. And many poor decisions seemed like a good idea at the time. I reserve my scorn for bigger game, say the Milwaukee Road's de-electrification. Of course, if I had to ride Viewliners more often, I might not be as charitable.
 
While I am really not knowledgeable enough to weigh in on the rebuilding of train cars or spraying of fecal matter, I will let y'all know how my Viewliner roomette is on my trip Monday on the Crescent.
 
AlanB said:
The problem with rebuilding all the old stuff is two fold. First, the cars all needed new trucks of a design no longer commercially made, they needed to be fitted with retention toilets, and of course a general major overhaul. That put the price tag for doing all that work rather close to the price of the new cars. So there wasn't much savings to be had, even though in the long run it probably would have been cheaper.
Second, only railfans really loved those old cars. The general public wants new, not old. There is a reason that Acela has the ridership that it does, even on weekends when one can't say that it's the business traveler who doesn't care about the cost. People like shinny, new stuff. I'm not saying that it's logical or even sensible that people think that way.

But the bottom line is that Amtrak would have lower occupancy rates on the single level sleepers, if we didn't have the Viewliners.
Click to expand...
People would occupy them because it would look a heck of a lot nicer than the currently cobbled together set.

Ispolkom said:
Like AlanB, I doubt that refurbishing the Heritage sleepers would have been as easy a process nor as inexpensive as you think. I wilt thinking of replumbing the things. Things seem much simpler on paper than they are in messy reality, especially plumbing. Just remodel your kitchen or bathroom if you have any doubt of that.
So I think that Amtrak was given a bad set of choices: go with what seemed a good design, using a company that didn't have a track record building rail cars or refurbish old cars built by a company that was out of business to a very different standard than when they were built. All with much less money than they had planned for.

The world is a stubborn place. And many poor decisions seemed like a good idea at the time. I reserve my scorn for bigger game, say the Milwaukee Road's de-electrification. Of course, if I had to ride Viewliners more often, I might not be as charitable.
Click to expand...
I think it would have been much cheaper then buying a new car. I also think that the Hertiage sleepers blow the Viewliners out of the water on design, construction, quality, ride, longevity, and reliability at a given age.

I'd rather remodel the kitchen in the Breakers then build a new one. Nobody knows how to build ANYTHING anymore. Everything is flimsier, more poorly made, "crappier, faster, cheaper." People cut nickels and dimes. Its all about making quick profits.

Naturally, Budd was about making profits too. But the company understood that they made better profits building a damned good product and selling it for what it was worth, then cutting corners and losing customers after.

I was born too late, I think.
 
Ispolkom said:
Green Maned Lion said:
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
Click to expand...
Like AlanB, I doubt that refurbishing the Heritage sleepers would have been as easy a process nor as inexpensive as you think. I wilt thinking of replumbing the things. Things seem much simpler on paper than they are in messy reality, especially plumbing. Just remodel your kitchen or bathroom if you have any doubt of that.

So I think that Amtrak was given a bad set of choices: go with what seemed a good design, using a company that didn't have a track record building rail cars or refurbish old cars built by a company that was out of business to a very different standard than when they were built. All with much less money than they had planned for.

The world is a stubborn place. And many poor decisions seemed like a good idea at the time. I reserve my scorn for bigger game, say the Milwaukee Road's de-electrification. Of course, if I had to ride Viewliners more often, I might not be as charitable.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that the heritage cars were not all of the same standard design, this in and of itself would make maintenance difficult much less a major overhaul. Personally I think they made the right decision by wholly replacing heritage equipment, if only they had of had enough money to buy what they need. I think they would be in a much better place right now if they had of made Viewliner Diners, Viewliner Cafes and Viewliner Coaches. They would have Viewliners for all single level LDs, The Amfleet II's would then have been able to be use in corridor service in place of horizon coaches, and as business class cars on the NEC. Not to mention most people believe the horizion's were poorly designed, horrible surface that is always filthy looking, unprotected stairs which make winter use a nightmare, and many other smaller problems. As far as I'm concerned the Viewliner series should have been the LD standard in the East just as the Superliners are in the West, however this failed to happen.

If the designs for the Viewliner's is still available to Amtrak I say save a couple of years in designing a new fleet of cars for purchase and take the design's for the Viewliner Sleepers and Diner and fix any problem area's design a cafe (hopefully with a Superliner-style glass ceiling), a coach (with interiors based on Amfleet IIs with modifications to fix any problems) and decide what to do about baggage cars (they still have a good bit of life but for the sake of saving on replacement while orders are being placed design a replacement). Then place an order to switch Silvers, Crescent, Lake Shore Limited and Cardinal to Viewliner service put Amfleet IIs on corridor duty where growth is already warranting more equipment. This will help ridership on the Eastern LDs, and give Amtrak a lot more equipment to work with.

With the better view toward Amtrak funding and the dire need of equipment money is on its way. Don't waste time on designing from scratch, and order a sufficient amount of each car type to last for at least 10yrs of projected growth. Once new equipment is acquired it should get top priority on maintenance to ensure it lives up to its life expectancy if not exceed it.
 
They'd be better off building more Amfleets, Amfleet IIIs, if you like, and building sleeper versions of them, and consign the damned Viewliners to the garbage heap from which they came.
 
Green Maned Lion said:
They'd be better off building more Amfleets, Amfleet IIIs, if you like, and building sleeper versions of them, and consign the damned Viewliners to the garbage heap from which they came.
Click to expand...
Personally I like the Viewliners, they seem to be just as good if not slightly better than the Amfleets in ride quality, and while I've seen the Crescent lose an Amfleet due to mechanical reasons but I've never known it to lose a sleeper. The main problem with Viewliners is the lack of maintenance partly due to constrained funds and partly due to a shortage of cars for service meaning a limited number can be out for maintenance at a time. The Viewliners only problem is the roomette toilet, the sink should stay, but a roomette could be converted into a bathroom for roomette passengers to solve this problem in future models.

As for the Amfleets they do great in corridor service which is what they were designed for in the beginning, the Amfleet IIs boast almost no changes from the Amfleet Is, the main difference a only one vestibule per car. To me a Viewliner has a lot more in common with a Superliner than an Amfleet, a Viewliner is essentially t he top half of a Superliner. So Why not take the interior configuration of the Superliners and apply that to the exterior car body of the Viewliner for each car type. Of course the doors would need to be in the same configuration as the Viewliner Sleepers. Also the Viewliner design would allow for Sightseer lounges on single level trains since its structural strength is not based on a cylindrical shape. Also I don't think it would be possible to design a sleeper based off of the Amfleet design due to the cylindrical shape requiring lower ceiling clearances in the rooms, the square shape of the Viewliners much more easily accommodates the square shape of the rooms.

And what is so horrible about the Viewliners? They have been in service for almost 14 years now with few major problems.
 
One thing that I hate about Amfleets is the airliner like tubular structure. It is a product of an age when everything was expected to become like airplanes. Glad we are now beyond that. We do not need to resurrect the horrors of that age even if they were built by Budd.

The other thing about Amfleets is that they really need a less wobbly wheelset under them. Those Pioneer trucks are not the best thing to perpetrate either.
 
Personally when I ride the local trains to chicago (under six hours), I use the business class.. I think the cafe/business car is an Amfleet version. It ran often. Recently they had the Heritage style cars running when we took the round trip. No comparison. The car was nicer feeling, the seats were much nicer, although a bit worn, and the ride was minus all that jerking and jolting the amfeet versions have. In fact it reminds me of the 50's cars in look and ride. I have never found anything to like about amfleet, except perhaps for those who are young and want modern looks, then they may have a fan base there, but ride and layout of those leave me cold. Oh, yes, I don't like that low luggage rack and rounded ceiling either, like riding in a soda can to me. Part of its appeal to some may be is somewhat airline feel.
 
Green Maned Lion said:
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
Click to expand...

What about to purchase these Talgos for Amtrak :rolleyes: :D wouldn't it be a nice dream?
 
jis said:
One thing that I hate about Amfleets is the airliner like tubular structure. It is a product of an age when everything was expected to become like airplanes. Glad we are now beyond that. We do not need to resurrect the horrors of that age even if they were built by Budd.
The other thing about Amfleets is that they really need a less wobbly wheelset under them. Those Pioneer trucks are not the best thing to perpetrate either.
Click to expand...
The pioneer trucks are horrible, but they can run with other trucks. There is no reason they can't install GS trucks under there. The shape is probably as related to its unitary construction as anything else.

Larry H. said:
Personally when I ride the local trains to chicago (under six hours), I use the business class.. I think the cafe/business car is an Amfleet version. It ran often. Recently they had the Heritage style cars running when we took the round trip. No comparison. The car was nicer feeling, the seats were much nicer, although a bit worn, and the ride was minus all that jerking and jolting the amfeet versions have. In fact it reminds me of the 50's cars in look and ride. I have never found anything to like about amfleet, except perhaps for those who are young and want modern looks, then they may have a fan base there, but ride and layout of those leave me cold. Oh, yes, I don't like that low luggage rack and rounded ceiling either, like riding in a soda can to me. Part of its appeal to some may be is somewhat airline feel.
Click to expand...
Those aren't Heritage cars. Those are Horizons. They are rotten little cars, basically NJ-Transit commuter cars converted to short-haul intercity duty. They use GS trucks, I am pretty sure.

wkaemena said:
Green Maned Lion said:
Ispolkom said:
But what was Amtrak supposed to do? It needed single-level sleepers, and for political reasons had to use an American builder. Refurbish heritage sleepers? Replumb their toilets? Stop having sleepers out of Penn Station? If all you have are bad choices, bad results are not surprising.
Click to expand...
I would like to know why refurbishing the Heritage sleepers strikes you as a bad idea. If they rebuilt them from the ground up, they'd be fine. They'd last a lot longer then the Viewliners will. Take a look at what VIA is doing with their old Budd cars. Amtrak had over a 130 10-6 Budd-built sleepers. Plus a bunch of all-bedroom sleepers, and quite a few Slumbercoach cars. Between them all, they could easily come up with 80 good 10-6s, 20 good slumbercoaches, and maybe even kept all the all-bedroom cars in service on top of that.

If they rebuilt the Heritage sleepers with 4 double bedrooms, and 8 Superliner-type roomettes (no toilets) and a handicapped room, with the other space used for toilets, they'd be able to fit the same number of people as in a Viewliner, be able to sell more bedrooms per train, and save a crapload of money utilizing a superior piece of equipment.
Click to expand...

What about to purchase these Talgos for Amtrak :rolleyes: :D wouldn't it be a nice dream?
Click to expand...
Why not use Talgos? Amtrak has bought Talgo equipment before.

In anycase, stop complimenting cars as riding better than an Amfleet. That's like saying a car has a better back seat than a Porsche 911.
 
wkaemena said:
What about to purchase these Talgos for Amtrak :rolleyes: :D wouldn't it be a nice dream?
Click to expand...
Man, I need to get over there to Germany for vacation. I have been wanting to for years now and that just makes me want to more! I was in a German "clan" playing America's Army a few years ago and started learning German. I have forgot most of it, but looks like I need to start learning again for a future trip :)
 
wkaemena said:
The Night Talgos running in Germany have a cheap sleeper class called "Komfort Liegewagen" ( Comfort Bunk) which is a bit comparable with a roomette
http://homepage.mac.com/wkaemena/FS/Muench...ortLiegewagen1/
Click to expand...
Interesting. A curtain instead of a wall/door, separating it from the hall, but otherwise pretty close to a Superliner roomette.

However, the fold down chair in the hall is interesting. Such a feature could be useful on the Viewliner; a place to sit when privacy by your roommate is required in the roomette. :D
 
jis said:
wkaemena said:
NO it is the most expensive and luxurious sleeper accomodation and comparable with Amtrak Bedroom
The Night Talgos running in Germany have a cheap sleeper class called "Komfort Liegewagen" ( Comfort Bunk) which is a bit comparable with a roomette

http://homepage.mac.com/wkaemena/FS/Muench...ortLiegewagen1/
Click to expand...
That looks more like a spiffied up Section than a Roomette to me.
Click to expand...
Thats not a "spiffed up section". A Superliner Roomette is a spiffed up section- its spiffed up by larger walls and a door. Nope, that is a plain old section right there. Modernized a bit, sure, but a section nonetheless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top