Brightline (All Aboard Florida) Orlando - Miami FL FEC fka Virgin Rail

electricron wrote:Another youtube video of a presentation meeting with the Indian River Drive Freeholders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3yYjaba6qw
Some responses worth noting...
Down to two unnamed vendors for the trains, one located in NY (CAF?) (Bombardier?) and the other in CA (Siemens?)

Technically, Kawasaki Rail Car Inc. is located in Yonkers, New York.

D.Carleton wrote:

electricron wrote:Another youtube video of a presentation meeting with the Indian River Drive Freeholders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3yYjaba6qw
Some responses worth noting...
Down to two unnamed vendors for the trains, one located in NY (CAF?) (Bombardier?) and the other in CA (Siemens?)

Technically, Kawasaki Rail Car Inc. is located in Yonkers, New York.

And CAF is in Elmira, and Bombardier is in Plattsburgh; so I missed one( ?) possibility. Two out of there ain't bad.

electricron wrote:And CAF is in Elmira, and Bombardier is in Plattsburgh; so I missed one( ?) possibility. Two out of three ain't bad.

Isn't there a song like that?

At any rate, all of the above are occupied with obligations for other carriers. Will they have the room to build ten sets of equipment for AAF in the next two years? Full order books; where's Budd when you need them?

D.Carleton wrote:

electricron wrote:And CAF is in Elmira, and Bombardier is in Plattsburgh; so I missed one( ?) possibility. Two out of three ain't bad.

Isn't there a song like that?

At any rate, all of the above are occupied with obligations for other carriers. Will they have the room to build ten sets of equipment for AAF in the next two years? Full order books; where's Budd when you need them?

Since AAF isn't using federal funds, they should be able to order railcars from overseas. I suppose all manufactures have a backlog of orders. If AAF is buying off-the-shelf equipment, it shouldn't be difficult to pick up other agencies "options", which might cut them in ahead of others waiting. I expect delivery dates will be important section of a contract for any AAF orders.

Whereas I believe AAF is sincere about requiring 10 train sets to provide hourly headways, do they really need all 10 at startup, or do they need hourly headways at startup?

There are two Talgo train sets idle in Wisconsin AAF could lease while waiting on their new equipment to be built.

electricron wrote:Since AAF isn't using federal funds, they should be able to order railcars from overseas.

Is anyone overseas currently building anything that meets FRA crash-worthiness standards? I thought this was a big issue.

Ridgefielder wrote:

electricron wrote:Since AAF isn't using federal funds, they should be able to order railcars from overseas.

Is anyone overseas currently building anything that meets FRA crash-worthiness standards? I thought this was a big issue.

Talgo is capable of building train sets meeting existing FRA standards overseas. Nippon Sharyo, CAF, and Bombardier can as well. Stadler's GTWs built overseas have already successfully attained a waiver allowing concurrent operations with fully FRA compliant trains. There are rumors that the FRA will extend this waiver for all trains meeting the latest European crash standards by 2015. If the rumors are true, most European trains would be available to AAF as they will be starting service after 2015.
Just because train manufactures haven't built FRA equipment overseas before doesn't mean they can't do so.

If the Desert Xpress was killed when Sec. La Hood said that, if you take fed *loans* you're subject to fed "buy American" provisions, isn't this going to similarly entangle FEC/AAF...forced to chose between Fed loans and the ease/affordability of buying overseas?

Arlington wrote:If the Desert Xpress was killed when Sec. La Hood said that, if you take fed *loans* you're subject to fed "buy American" provisions, isn't this going to similarly entangle FEC/AAF...forced to chose between Fed loans and the ease/affordability of buying overseas?

Yes, FEC/AAF might have to make that choice. The difference between Desert Xpress and AAF is the amount of the potential loan, several billions of dollars vs several hundred millions. It should be easier for AAF to raise enough money privately, they may not need federal loans.

I think AAF will not face the problems Dxprs did wrt buy America, as electricon mentioned the loan amounts are vastly different (so far its been a loan through the RRIF program, which has been utilized by freight carriers in the past). Also, AAF is seeking locohauled passenger cars for its service which can be relatively easily built at any of the aforementioned stateside plants, while the locomotives that will will push/pull them will be from an American builder. OTOH DesertXpress was seeking "off the shelf" European spec. emus to keep costs down, likely sourced from one of Bombardier's plants in Europe.

Ridgefielder wrote:

electricron wrote:Since AAF isn't using federal funds, they should be able to order railcars from overseas.

Is anyone overseas currently building anything that meets FRA crash-worthiness standards? I thought this was a big issue.

No, not really an [technical] issue. You can build an FRA acceptable vehicle in your garage... if it's large enough and your engineering satisfies the specs in 49CFR238. Talgo went through the trouble of designing a FRA Tier 1 compliant vehicle only to be burned by the State of Wisconsin. All of the other European builders have heeded the warning and not stepped forward with similar investment.

AAF is bringing cash to the table, not some vague political promise of possible payout. Even so they have said publicly that they are buying sets made domestically. I would think that, like any shrewd business looking to save money and time, they would go for something that already exists instead of reinventing the flanged wheel. We shall have to wait and see who and what they contract for.

D.Carleton wrote:No, not really an [technical] issue. You can build an FRA acceptable vehicle in your garage... if it's large enough and your engineering satisfies the specs in 49CFR238. Talgo went through the trouble of designing a FRA Tier 1 compliant vehicle only to be burned by the State of Wisconsin. All of the other European builders have heeded the warning and not stepped forward with similar investment.

AAF is bringing cash to the table, not some vague political promise of possible payout. Even so they have said publicly that they are buying sets made domestically. I would think that, like any shrewd business looking to save money and time, they would go for something that already exists instead of reinventing the flanged wheel. We shall have to wait and see who and what they contract for.

Oh yes, I didn't think there was a technical issue, just that it was a question of supply & demand: that no European or Japanese company had bothered to sink money into designing a product for the US market as demand was so iffy.

It will be very interesting to see what sort of a design they wind up going with. Have there been any renderings in the publicity materials?

Naive question: I have lost track of Wisconsin Talgos but aren't there both 2 to 4 train sets and some unused manufacturing capacity available?

Arlington wrote:Naive question: I have lost track of Wisconsin Talgos but aren't there both 2 to 4 train sets and some unused manufacturing capacity available?

I think it's highly unlikely they would pick Talgos. There are only 2 Wisconsin trainsets, not enough for the frequency of service AAF proposes. I think the plant is probably closed because all the orders have been completed. I don't know if they are still in a position to reopen it in the unlikely event more orders come in.
AFAIK, AAF was planning to use high-level platforms, which would rule out Talgos. But they could still change that if low-floor trains are picked, since the stations haven't been built yet.

Mr.T wrote:

Arlington wrote:Naive question: I have lost track of Wisconsin Talgos but aren't there both 2 to 4 train sets and some unused manufacturing capacity available?

I think it's highly unlikely they would pick Talgos. There are only 2 Wisconsin trainsets, not enough for the frequency of service AAF proposes. I think the plant is probably closed because all the orders have been completed. I don't know if they are still in a position to reopen it in the unlikely event more orders come in.

Obviously the management of the FEC is confident this project will succeed. However, I think it would be unintelligent not to plan in some way for the potential of failure. In my book, that would mean avoiding purchase of equipment as specialized as the Talgos in favor of something with a more conventional configuration that could be leased or sold to another carrier in the event the service flops-- meaning you'd want standard height single-level equipment that will work with high- and low-level platforms and can operate on the NEC, etc.