Nippon Sharyo bilevels for Amtrak corridor trains

Does anybody realize the link provided by the OP is to a two year old document (a proposal)?- you would think any subsequent input from the public and advocacy groups would (ideally) address concerns over ergonomics.

Snide remarks aside, a change like this would fall under the concept of a "change order". The entire car does not need to be redesigned, as most public transportation today has what's known as unitized seating. In other words, the fittings on the floor to which the seats are affixed are of a standard design, so that different seats can be affixed or more seats can be added overall. Further, it's not likely that the seats are under manufacture yet, as the cars aren't due for quite some time. A change order in the seats at this time is quite feasible.

Fun fact: many Amtrak seats are made by a subcontractor along the Illinois Prairie Path in Bellwood, which is the former CA&E and CGW right of way.

Tadman wrote:Snide remarks aside, a change like this would fall under the concept of a "change order". The entire car does not need to be redesigned, as most public transportation today has what's known as unitized seating. In other words, the fittings on the floor to which the seats are affixed are of a standard design, so that different seats can be affixed or more seats can be added overall. Further, it's not likely that the seats are under manufacture yet, as the cars aren't due for quite some time. A change order in the seats at this time is quite feasible.

Fun fact: many Amtrak seats are made by a subcontractor along the Illinois Prairie Path in Bellwood, which is the former CA&E and CGW right of way.

Yes, the link actually mentions that no business car is needed, all they need to do is plop in business seats at slightly wider spacing, so they can have as much or as little as they need.

In my opinion the Nippon Sharyo bilevel design with the slightly wedged front and vestibule door per that rendering looks a hell of a lot better than those Hyundai-Rotem cab cars. Those Hyundai-Rotem cab cars have got to be the ugliest and most un-inspired design ever to ride on American rails! I know it's all about crash worthiness but the proportions and scale are just very awkward.

At least the Nippon Sharyo design has a sort of simple utilitarian beauty. However, I do think it wouldn't hurt to dress the design up a little more and also enlarge the forward facing cab windows for better visibility. Maybe give the face of the cab an aesthetic treatment similar to the R143 & R160A subway cars in New York with the darker fields flanking the vestibule and giving the arrangement of cab windows, head/tail lights, and signage boards a more unified appearance. I know for bi-level cars it can't be exactly the same but Nippon Sharyo's designers should be able to figure something out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NYCSu ... L_line.jpg

The seats in the existing cars don't recline because most of them can't recline separately. Meaning, there is a plastic panel behind the seat that forms the fold down trays for the seats behind you. Also the current armrests fold up and can't be noticed if you want to lay down or lean over. Also, why would the whole car interior have to be redesigned if the design already exists? Since the seats are one unit, you would have to replace the entire seat at once. And 40 extra square feet of fabric doesn't cost much when replacing or reupholstering two seats at once.

This is off topic, but if California was smart, and transportation is the one smart thing the government does do, they should just keep the refurbished superliner cars for an SF-LA run. The Superliners are already more spacious than the California cars that run with the Superliners.

Is this the same order as the Nippon Sharyo order? As I recall, that was a joint order between the Midwest alliance and Cali.

Yeah.

PS, does a cab car use air from the brake line to blow the horn or is there a compressor powered off the HEP?

Amtrak has one F40-NPCU that has been fitted with a HEP-powered air compressor. Otherwise, I'm not aware of any others with such.

The vital functions on cab cars (horn, bell, equalizing reservoir, control air, etc.) are usually fed off of a second trainline (main reservoir air). Amtrak's NPCUs cannot function in lead without MR air, even with an intact brake pipe. Other equipment might be set up differently - i.e. to "borrow" air off the brake pipe when necessary - I don't know.

Up until now, their cars have had a fairly utilitarian look. I think the wedged front end in the concept is simply steel plate welded between the doorposts and edge of car, giving it a wedged look due to the angle. You can see the doorposts in this pic quite well.



I think the small operator windows aren't a bad idea - big windows allow the greenhouse effect on a hot day and are just more glass to shatter when a punk throws a brick at the train. Also, you're functionally limited in operator window size. If you look at the below pic, you can see the top and bottom are constrained by the operator controls and the inner edge is basically up against the door post. The visibility is no worse than a yard goat or early geep.

They're not sexy by any means, but hopefully they'll be safe. I'm not a huge fan of push-pull operation on 110 mph routes that are full of grade crossings, however.

Tadman wrote:The visibility is no worse than a yard goat or early geep.

Not exactly a selling point ... but as long as the visibility is no worse than what is needed for safe operation of the train.

The new electric cars have cameras above the doors so the operator can see what is immediately in front of the train. The view out the window helps with distant objects/conditions but the camera and in cab monitor are needed to see what is close to the train.

At least these cars do not have to be run "long nose forward".

Matt Johnson wrote:They're not sexy by any means, but hopefully they'll be safe. I'm not a huge fan of push-pull operation on 110 mph routes that are full of grade crossings, however.

The Michigan Route uses engines at both ends of the train now that they are running 110 MPH. Not a bad idea. The benefit of push pull without cabbage or cab cars.

I dont understand the flat fronts at all. Surely thats not good for fuel economy?

kaitoku wrote:Could there be more coming? Cryptic references to a possible future order for Amfleet (?) replacement:

Has Bombardier bid on any Amtrak project since the Acela? I was under the impression that the two entities had basically told eachother off after the lawsuits that resulted from Acela issues, meaning Bombardier won't be bidding on any Amtrak orders. Seems as though that's becoming a bigger and bigger mistake on Bombardier's part....

jamesinclair wrote:I dont understand the flat fronts at all. Surely thats not good for fuel economy?

The frontal area remains the same, so the real considerations relate to manufacturing costs and aesthetics.

jamesinclair wrote:I dont understand the flat fronts at all. Surely thats not good for fuel economy?

In case you want to couple more of them together.