Amtrak considering Bi-levels for NE Corridor

electricron wrote: 1. You don't have to use overhead baggage racks. Larger vertical baggage racks could be used instead.
2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?
3. Already happening everywhere Amtrak runs Superliners today, and it's not a problem with them. Are you suggesting NEC customers aren't as nimble as the rest of the country?

1. Larger baggage racks would take up seat space. The pdf already states that the capacity increase would already be marginal when you factor in Amtrak's very accommodating seat pitches.
2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know, can accomodate 12 cars. Smaller stations like Newark (DE) and Aberdeen could still be serviced from one or two cars.
3. You provide the perfect response to #3 in your own post:

electricron wrote:On the Surfliner [and Superliner] based equipment, the gantries between cars are on the upper level. Once you climb up to the upper level, you can go between all the cars without climbing more stairs. Then you'll climb down a full set of stairs if you desire to exit the train. With the Bombardier;s bilevels and multi-levels proposed for the NEC, you must climb or descend a half set of stairs twice between each and every car. So there is a difference.

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote: 1. You don't have to use overhead baggage racks. Larger vertical baggage racks could be used instead.
2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?
3. Already happening everywhere Amtrak runs Superliners today, and it's not a problem with them. Are you suggesting NEC customers aren't as nimble as the rest of the country?

1. Larger baggage racks would take up seat space. The pdf already states that the capacity increase would already be marginal when you factor in Amtrak's very accommodating seat pitches.
2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know, can accomodate 12 cars. Smaller stations like Newark (DE) and Aberdeen could still be serviced from one or two cars.
3. You provide the perfect response to #3 in your own post.

1. Never-the-less, it can be done. Maybe losing two, or possibly four seats for larger baggage racks might be all that's lost. See 4 below over capacity between the different types of cars....
2. Shouldn't Regional trains on the NEC platform at every station? Majpr stations isn't sufficient.
3. Never-the-less, with a 12 car train, you might have to walk through 6 cars to reach the sole food service car. With an 8 car double level train, you might have to walk through 4 cars to reach the cafe car. Isn't it a toss up?

4. More data....
Amfleet I coach seats 72 passengers. (regional configuration)
Surfliner coach seats 90 passengers. (regional configuration)
NJT Multilvel coach seats 132 passengers. (commuter configuration with restroom)
127 (cab car); 132 (trailer car with restroom), 142 (standard trailer car)
Go Bilevel coach seats 136 passengers. (136 and 162 commuter configuration)
You would have to remove 42 seats from a Multilevel car to match an Amfleet I coach. At 4 seats per row, that's 10 to 11 rows in total, or 5 rows of seats per level. Even if Amtrak follows the seating arrangements of a Surfliner shooting for a goal of 90 seats, there's still 18 seats more than an Amfleet I, 5 more rows of seats.
For comparison purposes only, at 72 seats an Amfleet I coach has 18 rows of seats. So an additional 5 to 10 more rows of seats per car is a significant gain in car capacity.

electricron wrote:

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote: 1. You don't have to use overhead baggage racks. Larger vertical baggage racks could be used instead.
2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?
3. Already happening everywhere Amtrak runs Superliners today, and it's not a problem with them. Are you suggesting NEC customers aren't as nimble as the rest of the country?

1. Larger baggage racks would take up seat space. The pdf already states that the capacity increase would already be marginal when you factor in Amtrak's very accommodating seat pitches.
2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know, can accomodate 12 cars. Smaller stations like Newark (DE) and Aberdeen could still be serviced from one or two cars.
3. You provide the perfect response to #3 in your own post.

*snip*
3. Never-the-less, with a 12 car train, you might have to walk through 6 cars to reach the sole food service car. With an 8 car double level train, you might have to walk through 4 cars to reach the cafe car. Isn't it a toss up?

Not really, I know people, myself included, who have no problem walking around the world when it's flat, but can't negotiate stairs as well and go out of their way to avoid them. Superliners/California cars are one thing where if you're long distance, you can go upstairs and just stay there, or for short distances, park yourself downstairs near the exit, but being given no choice but to negotiate stairs mid-route is another.

MattW wrote:Not really, I know people, myself included, who have no problem walking around the world when it's flat, but can't negotiate stairs as well and go out of their way to avoid them. Superliners/California cars are one thing where if you're long distance, you can go upstairs and just stay there, or for short distances, park yourself downstairs near the exit, but being given no choice but to negotiate stairs mid-route is another.

Actually, climbing the stairs is usually easier when the train is in motion because there is a hand railing to hold onto to keep you steady. Walking the aisle in the middle of a coach usually means banging into a few armrests along the way as you're rocked from one side of the train to the other with the motion of the train. I'll admit there will be some who will never be able to climb stairs, but I'm sure they could find someone willing to bring them food and drinks from the cafe car.

electricron wrote:

MattW wrote:Not really, I know people, myself included, who have no problem walking around the world when it's flat, but can't negotiate stairs as well and go out of their way to avoid them. Superliners/California cars are one thing where if you're long distance, you can go upstairs and just stay there, or for short distances, park yourself downstairs near the exit, but being given no choice but to negotiate stairs mid-route is another.

Actually, climbing the stairs is usually easier when the train is in motion because there is a hand railing to hold onto to keep you steady. Walking the aisle in the middle of a coach usually means banging into a few armrests along the way as you're rocked from one side of the train to the other with the motion of the train. I'll admit there will be some who will never be able to climb stairs, but I'm sure they could find someone willing to bring them food and drinks from the cafe car.

Descending the stairs can be dicey on NJT when a brake application is made. The up-down for several carlengths would discourage many from visiting a cafe car.

It is not unheard of for baggage to be stolen on the NEC. Many people will not want to use a rack away from their seat.

i think you need to think of ada requirements in 20 - 30 years time .

Sorry if I missed this being mentioned while perusing the responses, but Amtrak did mention that in the current layout, an MLV car with the Amtrak seating layout would not increase capacity to the point of warranting the purchase of such vehicles. They said they would continue to research into other alternatives for an MLV seating layout that would be beneficial.

But please refer back to my original post:

"I still think if there isn't a good argument for new coach replacement, they (multi-levels) would make a good diner with a nice wide kitchen below with dining above and at the ends. Also maybe even a take-out counter at one end. This would serve more passengers than the Viewliner II diner wouldn't it? Think Lake Shore Limited and Silver Service.

How about a Bi-level baggage car that would generate a lot more revenue than a sole purpose baggage car? You'd have to get creative in loading and unloading in high-level territory, but it would be even easier in low level territory."

Any thoughts on this?

bostontrainguy wrote:But please refer back to my original post:

"I still think if there isn't a good argument for new coach replacement, they (multi-levels) would make a good diner with a nice wide kitchen below with dining above and at the ends. Also maybe even a take-out counter at one end. This would serve more passengers than the Viewliner II diner wouldn't it? Think Lake Shore Limited and Silver Service.

How about a Bi-level baggage car that would generate a lot more revenue than a sole purpose baggage car? You'd have to get creative in loading and unloading in high-level territory, but it would be even easier in low level territory."

Any thoughts on this?

The dining car I could see, given the success of the Superliner style and the need to only traverse one short stairway. Of course, the new V-II diners make this concept unnecessary.

For your other point, you don't want two floors on a baggage car when one big open space would be better, and good luck redesigning a Multi to have the necessary stiffness with a big hole in the side and no center floor. The V-II baggage car shares mechanical parts with the rest of the proposed fleet and does a good job of filling the NEC clearance envelope, and for that reason it's the best option. (Though not the cheapest - I'd like to see Amtrak take another shot at making an MHC-style car work.)

electricron wrote:

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote: 2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?

2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know,

2. Shouldn't Regional trains on the NEC platform at every station? Majpr stations isn't sufficient.

That's not the case now though and since there's no station WAS-NYP that can platform 8 cars and not 12, there would be no difference if trains were lengthened to 12 cars.

As for the stairs issue, walking up and down stairs can be a pain, especially the steep stairs of bilevels and while in motion (and as Ken said a brake application could be disastrous). If I'm elderly (and no offense to anyone out there who is) I'd rather walk through 3 single level cars than a single bilevel.

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote:

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote: 2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?

2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know,

2. Shouldn't Regional trains on the NEC platform at every station? Majpr stations isn't sufficient.

That's not the case now though and since there's no station WAS-NYP that can platform 8 cars and not 12, there would be no difference if trains were lengthened to 12 cars.

As for the stairs issue, walking up and down stairs can be a pain, especially the steep stairs of bilevels and while in motion (and as Ken said a brake application could be disastrous). If I'm elderly (and no offense to anyone out there who is) I'd rather walk through 3 single level cars than a single bilevel.

Agree with the above, but mostly I agree that the MLV design on the NEC is completely impractical and lawsuits waiting to happen with the stars between the car. Also, Amtrak is already not happy with the wear and tear that the NJT MLV's are causing on the NEC.

Not only do people like to "line up" at the door before they get off at their station, but now they have to go and find their luggage in this MLV - traversing or standing on stairs (likely not for long once the brakes hit)? Then if you go the cafe car (even if two cars away), you have to hold onto the railing, maintain your balance, and keep your food in place in the other hand.

Elderly and handicap riders would largely have to sit in the "mezzanine section" of the MLV. This would quickly fill up as I think most Amtrak riders woud not want to traverse stairs, especially to scout out seats and find the "luggage rack."

I ride the NJT MLV's pretty often and I hate them as a commuter. Their ride quality has also deteriorated in my opinion.

I think Amtrak will always have to deal with a single level car and bi-level car, the later being so that you can walk car to car without traversing steps. The single level coach should be modeled after the Acela Express car. These are really nice cars with nice large windows and more "open" atmosphere.

jp1822 wrote:I think Amtrak will always have to deal with a single level car and bi-level car, the later being so that you can walk car to car without traversing steps. The single level coach should be modeled after the Acela Express car. These are really nice cars with nice large windows and more "open" atmosphere.

They've already released the proposed specs for the new single level car and it definitely should be as nice or nicer than the Acela Express cars, not to mention more technologically advanced. Here's the pdf:

Amtrak Next-Gen Single Level

electricron wrote:

MattW wrote:Not really, I know people, myself included, who have no problem walking around the world when it's flat, but can't negotiate stairs as well and go out of their way to avoid them. Superliners/California cars are one thing where if you're long distance, you can go upstairs and just stay there, or for short distances, park yourself downstairs near the exit, but being given no choice but to negotiate stairs mid-route is another.

Actually, climbing the stairs is usually easier when the train is in motion because there is a hand railing to hold onto to keep you steady. Walking the aisle in the middle of a coach usually means banging into a few armrests along the way as you're rocked from one side of the train to the other with the motion of the train. I'll admit there will be some who will never be able to climb stairs, but I'm sure they could find someone willing to bring them food and drinks from the cafe car.

No offense, but you're not me, and you're not the people I know. It's not balance on the stairs, its our bad knees having to lift our body weight up them (I'm actually underweight so it's not part of America's obesity problem). Also, for the foreseeable future, I'd be traveling alone, so there would be no one to go retrieve anything for me. Movement about the train should be a simple as possible, stairs only impede smooth movement through the train even for those without vertical mobility problems.

electricron wrote:

realtype wrote:

electricron wrote: 1. You don't have to use overhead baggage racks. Larger vertical baggage racks could be used instead.
2. Do all the station platforms on the NEC really accommodate 12 car trains?
3. Already happening everywhere Amtrak runs Superliners today, and it's not a problem with them. Are you suggesting NEC customers aren't as nimble as the rest of the country?

1. Larger baggage racks would take up seat space. The pdf already states that the capacity increase would already be marginal when you factor in Amtrak's very accommodating seat pitches.
2. I didn't say all of the station's just the major stations between DC and NYC--WAS, NCR, BWI, BAL, WIL, PHL, TRE, NBK, MET, EWR, NWK, NYP--which, as far as I know, can accomodate 12 cars. Smaller stations like Newark (DE) and Aberdeen could still be serviced from one or two cars.
3. You provide the perfect response to #3 in your own post.

1. Never-the-less, it can be done. Maybe losing two, or possibly four seats for larger baggage racks might be all that's lost. See 4 below over capacity between the different types of cars....
2. Shouldn't Regional trains on the NEC platform at every station? Majpr stations isn't sufficient.
3. Never-the-less, with a 12 car train, you might have to walk through 6 cars to reach the sole food service car. With an 8 car double level train, you might have to walk through 4 cars to reach the cafe car. Isn't it a toss up?

4. More data....
Amfleet I coach seats 72 passengers. (regional configuration)
Surfliner coach seats 90 passengers. (regional configuration)
NJT Multilvel coach seats 132 passengers. (commuter configuration with restroom)
127 (cab car); 132 (trailer car with restroom), 142 (standard trailer car)
Go Bilevel coach seats 136 passengers. (136 and 162 commuter configuration)
You would have to remove 42 seats from a Multilevel car to match an Amfleet I coach. At 4 seats per row, that's 10 to 11 rows in total, or 5 rows of seats per level. Even if Amtrak follows the seating arrangements of a Surfliner shooting for a goal of 90 seats, there's still 18 seats more than an Amfleet I, 5 more rows of seats.
For comparison purposes only, at 72 seats an Amfleet I coach has 18 rows of seats. So an additional 5 to 10 more rows of seats per car is a significant gain in car capacity.

The mezzanines in the MLV have either 10 fold-up seats, or 2 fold up seats and a bike tie down rail & bathroom, or 5 seats & the cab equipment lockers. That's where the differing numbers come from.

There are no luggage racks next to the bathrooms, however there is one above the seats at the cab ends.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnyZWLS5iCE&feature=plcp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7_p1XFV ... ure=relmfu

As you can see with the second video the stairs would be an issue for some.

We've had this discussion in past threads, but whos to say the Multilevels would be Multilevels?

There obviously is no bigger car that can be used on the NEC. Thats it, you cannot get any more interior room out of a passenger car on the NEC than you can on Bombardier Multilevels.

However, they would be VERY roomy single level cars. Plently of room under the floor for the appliances/wiring HVAC/etc, and that might even free up MORE room in other parts of the car, as the mechanical cabinets wouldn't need to be so large in the mezzanine level of the car, as some of that might be able to be moved to under the floor down to the "lower level" and safe from the elements under there too.

Probably wouldn't happen, I can't see Amtrak using MLs in their current two story configuration, but why not as a large single level car. Might as well get every inch possible?