Acela Replacement and Disposition Discussion

$1 Billion for 40 diesel locomotives and 176 rail cars per that link.
How realistic are those prices? Let’s review some recent State subsidize Amtrak orders for brand new equipment.
Siemens SC-44; $225 million for 32; $7+ million each; x 40 = $280+ million.

SEPTA received the following bids for 45 BiLevel railcars this year;
$137.5 million from CRRC, $171.5 million from Bombardier, and $184.7 million from Hyundai-Rotem. That’s $3+ million per car, $3.8 million per car, or $4.1 million per car respectively. Since VIA will be ordering single level cars vs BiLevels, let’s use the price of the lowest bidder. Therefore, $3 million x 176 = $528+ million.
The total would be $808 million USA. Converting that to $ Canada, the exchange rate today suggests $1,008,100 Canadian

How much money could VIA save buying 120 Acela railcars for $1 million each. Math = 528 - 120 = $408 million. That’s more than half of 808. But they would be 56 rail cars short. Bombardier could build those extra 56 railcars for $168 million, Or $180 million for 3 more cars for all 20 sets (60 more rail cars). That still leaves a savings of near $228 million. Suppose they could get the used Acela cars for half a million each? Is is worth considering buying used vs all new?

I'd ask VIA that. But they're saying in all the officialest documentation like their 2016-20 Corporate Plan, and their CEO has been screaming it from the top of his lungs for a year now: they get a better deal cleanrooming it all new rather than buying used or piecemealing it with continued Corridor fleet fragmentation. I'm inclined to believe them when they say that's their most convincing business case, high up-front cost be damned, because they know their own numbers better than anyone. But it also doesn't matter what I or any other bystander thinks they should so, because that's what their own leadership thinks they should do...and they think it strongly enough to have codified it into a Fleet Plan. They're buying new; they can't state that any more clearly than they have.

I am not sure of the history of the Acela vehicles, but assume that they need to be refurbished.

In 2009 VIA started the refurbishment of the LRC cars - that cost $1 million per car.

If one assumes the Acela equipment needs the same sort of work then that changes the financial outlook significantly - at your $1 million per car purchase cost you are now at 2/3 cost of new and only saving $108 million. Even if we allow for a $0.5 million purchase you are at half the cost of new.

Yes, saving $100 to $200 million isn't nothing, but looking at the total cost estimates it is only 10% to 20%. But for that saving, at the end of the day you are still ending up with equipment that is already 20 years old. And we aren't talking about 20 years like say the 1960s to the 1980s. Technology and design has changed dramatically in the last 20 years and what you buy today, while superficially looking the same, will be quite different underneath and in the smaller details, like disability accommodation (something that VIA has been repeatedly losing at in the courts / tribunals). Some of that could be dealt with in a refurbishment, but not all of it.

The wildcard in all of this of course is the Ontario government, and more specifically the result of the next election in June 2018. The Ontario government is currently working towards high speed rail west of Toronto, and if the next government continues that process then anything VIA does will be compared by the customers with whatever those trains end up being if it continues.

Mr. Mdvie, without myself having been near an Acela since 2003, we have sufficient reports here that the equipment gets periodically refurbished.

This is Amtrak's best foot forward; Acela allowed Amtrak to become the dominant carrier in the Corridor. Elected "Pols" and their appointed underlings as well as high ranking Civil Servants ride them regularly.

Apparently, they are maintainer's nightmare; but to keep 16 of the 20 sets needed to maintain the weekday schedules is "first and foremost". For the "good of Amtrak, what must be done will be done".

I'm assuming VIA as a Canadian government entity has the ability to borrow money for capital projects at very low interest rates, in virtually unlimited amounts, depending on politicians.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:...Apparently, [Acela] are maintainer's nightmare; but to keep 16 of the 20 sets needed to maintain the weekday schedules is "first and foremost". For the "good of Amtrak, what must be done will be done".

Will Amtrak be able to keep them going until the replacements arrive?

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr. Mdvie, without myself having been near an Acela since 2003, we have sufficient reports here that the equipment gets periodically refurbished.

Certainly wasn't trying to imply that they are in bad shape or dirty, but rather just the reality that they (when the new equipment enters service, and Amtrak is confident enough with the new equipment to be willing to release the original equipment) will be 20 years old, and won't be having any major work that is not immediately necessary done to them given the reality of their limited lifetime left on the NE corridor.

In the hypothetical being discussed, where Amtrak would be willing to sell them on for relatively nothing or scrap value, Amtrak isn't going to spend any money on the bodies or other equipment that isn't necessary for keeping them clean and running until that changeover date.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: Apparently, they are maintainer's nightmare; but to keep 16 of the 20 sets needed to maintain the weekday schedules is "first and foremost". For the "good of Amtrak, what must be done will be done".

And a second reading of your post brings up this point, if they are a nightmare to maintain then why, for the sake of a 10 to 20% saving, would VIA (or anyone else) want them?

It's always sad to see stuff scrapped. You want it to find a second home where it makes financial sense.

mdvle wrote:

Gilbert B Norman wrote:And a second reading of your post brings up this point, if they are a nightmare to maintain then why, for the sake of a 10 to 20% saving, would VIA (or anyone else) want them?

Well, exactly: No operator is likely to want them. A few may go for static display at museums, and the rest will be scrapped.

But it is the nature of this forum that "what ifs" and "if only" bubble along for many more bytes of text than "its over" and "can't afford it" and "who'll pay?" can muster.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr. Mdvie, without myself having been near an Acela since 2003, we have sufficient reports here that the equipment gets periodically refurbished.

This is Amtrak's best foot forward; Acela allowed Amtrak to become the dominant carrier in the Corridor. Elected "Pols" and their appointed underlings as well as high ranking Civil Servants ride them regularly.

Apparently, they are maintainer's nightmare; but to keep 16 of the 20 sets needed to maintain the weekday schedules is "first and foremost". For the "good of Amtrak, what must be done will be done".

What about the Acela trainsets are a maintenance headache?
Is it the power cars? VIA wouldn’t be using them.
Is it the tilt mechanisms? VIA could disable the. Just like they did on the LRCs.
Is it the lighting systems? VIA could replace them with LEDs.
Is it the HVAC systems? Golly, all HVAC systems can be headaches to work on.

If VIA was really seriously considering buying brand new replacements, where is the RFP?
Who’s going to build them, and where will they be built?

Arlington wrote:

mdvle wrote:

Gilbert B Norman wrote:And a second reading of your post brings up this point, if they are a nightmare to maintain then why, for the sake of a 10 to 20% saving, would VIA (or anyone else) want them?

Well, exactly: No operator is likely to want them. A few may go for static display at museums, and the rest will be scrapped.

But it is the nature of this forum that "what ifs" and "if only" bubble along for many more bytes of text than "its over" and "can't afford it" and "who'll pay?" can muster.

I haven't heard much talk of them being unreliable. Seems to me that they are working fairly well now. Perhaps they do require some extra maintenance but I guess the question is what requires the bulk of that maintenance. Is it the power cars? If it's mostly the tilting mechanism, then the coaches could certainly have a second life doing something for Amtrak if the tilt mechanisms are removed.

A good example is Boston to Maine. All high-level platforms and it makes sense since they could be maintained in Boston. Also, how about Springfield to New Haven? That might also be a good candidate also with upgraded tracks and high-level platforms.

The cars are not compatible with the rest of the fleet and have an internal coupling setup that only works with the power cars and other Acela
cars. The only "normal" couplers are on the A end(front)of the power cars.

BandA wrote:Will Amtrak be able to keep them going until the replacements arrive?

Bigger question is if there are any delays to the Avelia Liberty replacements, will the new trainsets arrive before leases are up on the existing Acela sets, and they are returned to the lessor.

I know there has been speculation that Amtrak has/will buy out the Acela leases, but unless someone can point to a reliable source confirming that, Amtrak can't sell equipment it doesn't own.

Seriously, we covered all this c. page 59 of this very thread. Everyone (which includes VIA, Amtrak, and anybody Amtrak would run them for), has known since the Acela-1 "extra coaches" order was cancelled that no real buyer and no reuse, and no refurb of the Acelas was ever going to be found. Had it existed, we'd know about it by now. The "why" comes down to:
- anyone who wants a train that fancy wants it lighter weight
- anyone who'd take a train that heavy, wants it to have common parts (with their own fleet or some larger market)
- anyone who'd take a fleet that small, can cut themselves a better deal on a new unicorn (Talgos), or, like Brightline, choose an emerging standard
- anyone who'd refurb a fleet that old, would rather a standard with greater parts/fleet commonality
- anyone who wants low-boarding or higher-density has good reasons for not wanting level-boarding single levels

It is fancy, heavy, small-fleeted, level-boarding, unicorn-parted, and old. Like the Concorde and the Space Shuttle, it will be intensely used right up until the moment comes for it to never move again.

Landmark, iconic, and much-fetishized. just like its Concorde and Space Shuttle counterparts, the love of fans will not save it once its useful life ends, and particularly not if superior world-standard replacements are readily at hand.