What will happen to Acela trainsets when Acela II comes online?

[afigg]

There are 3 maintenance buildings, WAS, NYP and BOS. When Amtrak was planning on buying more Acela coaches, the plan was to lengthen the buildings. They'll probably still get lengthened to support the Acela II or whatever they end up being called.

So a non-issue, really.

No, the specifications in the HSR trainset RFP issued by Amtrak specified that: "For Amtrak, the distance between the first and last axles of the Trainset shall be a maximum of 205 m (672.6 feet)." The new trainsets are to be no longer than the Acela trainsets, which I assume is driven by the decision that lengthening the Acela maintenance buildings was too expensive and difficult to accomplish. The new HSR trainsets will be EMUs, so they can be 8 coach cars long.

As for installing traps, when Amtrak was seeking to purchase 40 new Acela coach cars to add to the 20 trainsets, the new coach cars were specified to have traps for lower level platforms. But that reportedly would have been a significant structural design change and - pure speculation on my part - may have been one of the reasons Bombardier passed on bidding to build the 40 coach cars. So, the Acelas will be limited to high level platforms and the only way to expand total seating capacity would be to pull out the cafe and first class cars and insert coach cars from other trainsets, reducing the total number of Acela trainsets. Hence the planned order for 28 new close to off the shelf HSR EMU trainsets to double the daily seat capacity over the Acelas.

 

[Ryan]

I'd missed that detail, thanks.

I wonder what they would have done had the plan to purchase the 40 extra coaches continued on.

 

[PRR 60]

There are 3 maintenance buildings, WAS, NYP and BOS. When Amtrak was planning on buying more Acela coaches, the plan was to lengthen the buildings. They'll probably still get lengthened to support the Acela II or whatever they end up being called.

So a non-issue, really.

The current Acela maintenance buildings are shoe-horned into some pretty tight spots. Lengthening them would require major track work and maybe even property acquisition. I think the side of Amtrak that proposed adding two coaches to the existing trainsets did not talk to the side of Amtrak that would have maintained them. Not an uncommon occurrence at Amtrak.

 

[jis]

OTOH, they will have to find additional space for maintenance buildings for the Acela IIs which will almost certainly be longer than Acela Is. So we'll see how all that evolves.

 

[VentureForth]

OTOH, they will have to find additional space for maintenance buildings for the Acela IIs which will almost certainly be longer than Acela Is. So we'll see how all that evolves.

There are 3 maintenance buildings, WAS, NYP and BOS. When Amtrak was planning on buying more Acela coaches, the plan was to lengthen the buildings. They'll probably still get lengthened to support the Acela II or whatever they end up being called.

So a non-issue, really.

No, the specifications in the HSR trainset RFP issued by Amtrak specified that: "For Amtrak, the distance between the first and last axles of the Trainset shall be a maximum of 205 m (672.6 feet)." The new trainsets are to be no longer than the Acela trainsets, which I assume is driven by the decision that lengthening the Acela maintenance buildings was too expensive and difficult to accomplish. The new HSR trainsets will be EMUs, so they can be 8 coach cars long.

 

[PRR 60]

OTOH, they will have to find additional space for maintenance buildings for the Acela IIs which will almost certainly be longer than Acela Is. So we'll see how all that evolves.

According to the Section 7.3.1 of the RFP, the new sets will be no longer than the existing Acela sets.

 

[jis]

Oh boy. What a terrible limitation. So we will continue to be horribly capacity constrained. I sure hope that they will at least be able to operate in coupled pairs at full speed unlike the current ones. The Acelas as they stand are some of the shortest HSR consists in the world today, and I suppose they shall remain so.

The more I learn about NEC plans the more I get discouraged that it will ever be anything like a world class high speed high capacity operation. Sigh....

 

[Paulus]

There's still the option for two additional coaches on each Acela if I'm not mistaken nor any reason that they couldn't add onto the order and run joined sets as a single train, like CAHSR plans for some of its runs.

 

[Ryan]

There's still the option for two additional coaches on each Acela if I'm not mistaken

I thought that they killed that when the decided that they would just go ahead with the joint CAHSR acquisition (which isn't joint anymore).

 

[Ryan]

I think the side of Amtrak that proposed adding two coaches to the existing trainsets did not talk to the side of Amtrak that would have maintained them. Not an uncommon occurrence at Amtrak.

That's depressingly true.

 

[keelhauled]

Personally I would rather see them trade trainset capacity for frequency. I think six car trains every half hour would be more useful than twelve car trains every hour, assuming the demand is there, which it probably is south of New York, though not north.

Of course it would cost more. But on the other hand the Acelas are apparently profitable already (at least operationally) so maybe it would work between Washington and New York at least.

But I suppose the capacity isn't there, certainly not into NYP. And getting anything much north to Boston is probably a lost cause, at least until they punch a new right of way through Connecticut. Which will probably be after everyone on this board today is long dead and buried, so really this is all pie in the sky dreaming.

 

[neroden]

According to the Section 7.3.1 of the RFP, the new sets will be no longer than the existing Acela sets.

Oh boy. What a terrible limitation. So we will continue to be horribly capacity constrained.

Well, they're specifying fully-distributed-traction EMUs rather than Power Cars, so there should be a 2-car increase in capacity.

 

[jis]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

 

[jis]

I have to agree with the high platforms comment - the lack of traps on the Acela is a serious fault in the design - I see no real reason that you couldn't put traps on an Acela. It seems like it was another fault of Bombardier design, I guess.

I had heard that FRA basically said no break in the floor beam for Tier II, which meant that any step structure would have to be outside the core structure of the car. That implied some mechanical doohickey to fold the steps out at the stop without disturbing the integrity of the main side member. European high speed trains also have a similar arrangement where the step comes out from under the floor at stops.

 

[Me]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

 

[afigg]

Personally I would rather see them trade trainset capacity for frequency. I think six car trains every half hour would be more useful than twelve car trains every hour, assuming the demand is there, which it probably is south of New York, though not north.

Of course it would cost more. But on the other hand the Acelas are apparently profitable already (at least operationally) so maybe it would work between Washington and New York at least.

But I suppose the capacity isn't there, certainly not into NYP. And getting anything much north to Boston is probably a lost cause, at least until they punch a new right of way through Connecticut. Which will probably be after everyone on this board today is long dead and buried, so really this is all pie in the sky dreaming.

The plan is do just that, increase service frequency for the Acela class service to half-hour during the morning and evening peaks. The RFP is for 28 new trainsets to replace the 20 Acela trainsets. 16 out of the 20 Acela trainsets are in use on a weekday. With 28 trainsets, 22 or 23 could in daily use assuming ~80% in service rate. I expect the plan would be to have Acela IIs depart WAS and NYP on the half-hour at 5:30 and 6:30 PM and maybe 4:30 PM(?) between the hourly departures.

The demand is there on the northern end of the NEC, it is the capacity that is the problem. The RFP is seeking trainsets with a nominal capacity of 425 seats, so each trainset is to have about a 40% increase in seat capacity. 22 daily trainsets of 425 seats will about double daily capacity over 16 trainsets of 303 seats, so that is where part of the NEC capacity growth will come from.

With regards to running more trains between BOS and NYP, Amtrak and CTDOT have a service plan to increase the number of daily trains on the Shore Line East by 2030. The Environmental Assessment for the CT River Bridge replacement, which was posted last May, discusses the 2030 NEC service plan as follows:

Amtrak’s 2030 service plan includes an increase in the number of average weekday Acela trains crossing the Connecticut River Bridge from 20 to 32; the number of Northeast Regional trains is expected to remain the same. ConnDOT is planning to increase the number of SLE trains traveling between Old Saybrook and New London from 12 to 24 trains per average weekday.

How they plan to achieve that, don't know. Could be with a CT River bridge replacements, following the Niantic bridge replacement and other upgrades, they think the agreement limit of 39 daily Amtrak trains can be renegotiated. Or the idea is to get it into the baseline service plan and then say, see more trains over the SLE is in the official plan so it should be implemented. More Acelas, but no additional Regionals sucks though for those wanting lower cost travel options. But 2 or 3 Inland Route Regionals would provide an alternative for Regional price level travel.

 

[west point]

We are all making an assumption that may or may not happen. If Acela-2s are EMUs the question has to be how are they coupled ? Is the connection going to be semi-permanent or using current type tight lock "F" couplers? If the latter there will be no need to have service facilities longer as whatever length any Acela-2 train is. But again we do not know how these sets will be built so no speculation is yet appropriate.

 

[Guest]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

Slight correction on Acela Business class. There are 65 seats in each of the 4 cars. 260 BC seats and 43 FC seats for a total of 303 seats.

 

[afigg]

We are all making an assumption that may or may not happen. If Acela-2s are EMUs the question has to be how are they coupled ? Is the connection going to be semi-permanent or using current type tight lock "F" couplers? If the latter there will be no need to have service facilities longer as whatever length any Acela-2 train is. But again we do not know how these sets will be built so no speculation is yet appropriate.

The Acela replacements will be tilting EMU trainsets. Or that is the plan anyway. They will be integrated HSR trainsets, not stand-alone cars, so upgrading or converting the Acela maintenance facilities is part of what the respondents to the RFP will put into their bids.

 

[Amfleeter]

Indeed. I don't believe Type F couplers play well with tilting trainsets in the first place. I believe it's the bending forces - the drawbars of tilting trains are designed to handle it.

 

[Me]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

Slight correction on Acela Business class. There are 65 seats in each of the 4 cars. 260 BC seats and 43 FC seats for a total of 303 seats.

I know that is what the manufacturer says, and what Wikipedia says, etc. But as far as Amtrak is concerned, it's 64 seats in the Business Class coaches, and 43 in First Class. I'm not sure what the discrepancy is. Maybe it has something to do with the ADA seat, I'm really not sure.

 

[Guest]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

Slight correction on Acela Business class. There are 65 seats in each of the 4 cars. 260 BC seats and 43 FC seats for a total of 303 seats.

I know that is what the manufacturer says, and what Wikipedia says, etc. But as far as Amtrak is concerned, it's 64 seats in the Business Class coaches, and 43 in First Class. I'm not sure what the discrepancy is. Maybe it has something to do with the ADA seat, I'm really not sure.

I don't know where you get your Amtrak count but I know how many actual seats are in Acela Business Class (65) and how many are in First Class (43). And to verify that I have the trainset schematics and counted the seats on them. They agree with my count. There are 65 seats in Business Class and 43 seats in First Class. As far as ADA seats of the 65 there is one single ADA seat with wheelchair space on the other side of the table from the single seat in Business Class and a double ADA seat in Business Class. In First Class there are two ADA seats, one of which has wheelchair space on the other side of a table from the single seat.

 

[Guest]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

Slight correction on Acela Business class. There are 65 seats in each of the 4 cars. 260 BC seats and 43 FC seats for a total of 303 seats.

I know that is what the manufacturer says, and what Wikipedia says, etc. But as far as Amtrak is concerned, it's 64 seats in the Business Class coaches, and 43 in First Class. I'm not sure what the discrepancy is. Maybe it has something to do with the ADA seat, I'm really not sure.

I don't know where you get your Amtrak count but I know how many actual seats are in Acela Business Class (65) and how many are in First Class (43). And to verify that I have the trainset schematics and counted the seats on them. They agree with my count. There are 65 seats in Business Class and 43 seats in First Class. As far as ADA seats of the 65 there is one single ADA seat with wheelchair space on the other side of the table from the single seat in Business Class and a double ADA seat in Business Class. In First Class there are two ADA seats, one of which has wheelchair space on the other side of a table from the single seat.

I am getting my information from the internal website for Amtrak employees, and working on board these trainsets regularly.

I'm a bit confused. There's a single ADA seat with wheelchair space on the other side of the table, both in Business Class and First Class. And there is only one ADA seat per car, not two.

If you don't mind, can you share how to find these schematics? I'd like to look and see where the discrepancy is. Are you counting the space for the wheelchair as capacity for a passenger, by chance? Because it's against the service standards to "sell" a seat to a passenger, and make them sit in their own wheelchair.

 

[OBS]

The Acela has 260 in Business and 43 in First Class. They will routinely sell slightly more than that, in Business, to account for no shows and folks that sit in café car...maybe that is where the confusion is coming from?

 

[Guest]

Only if FRA allows passengers in end cars. They have not say boo about that yet. So until we hear from them there are no guarantees. And still it limits to 8 cars.

A pair of these is going to be 16 cars which is not going to fit at too many stations. So seems like a "interesting" plan to me overall. but I have come to expect that so no surprise there.

It limits it to eight cars, an upgrade from six cars. But even the smallest, quietest Regional train on the corridor, 65/67 and 66, has a consist with a higher capacity than the current Acela train sets.

Usual 65/67 and 66 consists are four coaches at 70-72 seats, and the split cafe car, so 18 business class seats, for a total of 302 seats. The largest Regionals today ran with seven coach cars, one business class, and one cafe, for a total of nine cars and 566 revenue seats. Current Acelas have four coaches with 64 seats, and first class with 43, for a total of 299. In theory, if the Acela II cars held the same amount of passengers, including one first class car, I think they would be perfectly fine with 427 passengers. Any more than that, and I think it would be a complain waste of resources, except for literally the PHL-NYP section of the corridor, as that's where I see it sell out the most.

So let me ask, how what capacity do you think we need on the trains, then?

Slight correction on Acela Business class. There are 65 seats in each of the 4 cars. 260 BC seats and 43 FC seats for a total of 303 seats.

I know that is what the manufacturer says, and what Wikipedia says, etc. But as far as Amtrak is concerned, it's 64 seats in the Business Class coaches, and 43 in First Class. I'm not sure what the discrepancy is. Maybe it has something to do with the ADA seat, I'm really not sure.

I don't know where you get your Amtrak count but I know how many actual seats are in Acela Business Class (65) and how many are in First Class (43). And to verify that I have the trainset schematics and counted the seats on them. They agree with my count. There are 65 seats in Business Class and 43 seats in First Class. As far as ADA seats of the 65 there is one single ADA seat with wheelchair space on the other side of the table from the single seat in Business Class and a double ADA seat in Business Class. In First Class there are two ADA seats, one of which has wheelchair space on the other side of a table from the single seat.

I am getting my information from the internal website for Amtrak employees, and working on board these trainsets regularly.

I'm a bit confused. There's a single ADA seat with wheelchair space on the other side of the table, both in Business Class and First Class. And there is only one ADA seat per car, not two.

If you don't mind, can you share how to find these schematics? I'd like to look and see where the discrepancy is. Are you counting the space for the wheelchair as capacity for a passenger, by chance? Because it's against the service standards to "sell" a seat to a passenger, and make them sit in their own wheelchair.

I suggest that the next time you work onboard a trainset count the seats in a Business Class car. You will count 65. I am not counting the wheelcahir space as a seat. Also think about it logically. If there is one single seat and the rest of the seats are doubles then there has to be an odd number of seats in the coach. That is simple math.

Also look at the double seats right across from the single seat in Business Class. You will see that they have an attendent call button overhead and that the side armrest lifts up for access unlike the other Business Class seats. They are designed as ADA seats. Granted many crew members don't know that, but that double set of seats are ADA seats. That is good to know as some ADA passengers don't want the table and also for ADA passengers who are not traveling alone. You can offer them those seats.

The schematics are in the High-Speed Trainset Operating Instruction Manual in a binder put out by the Bombardier Alstrom Consortium. I recieved that at an Acela High Speed Trainset Training Class. I don't know if the printed versions are still available or handed out, mine is a numbered copy and had to be signed for, but it is available as a PDF. I have a PDF version on my iPad and phone which makes it portable.