New Amtrak Equipment: Options

THE X2000 TRAINS

Each X2000 formation consists of one 4400hp power car, powered at 15kV ac. Each unit can be made up of up to 16 intermediate vehicles with a maximum capacity of 1,600 passengers, but a typical train will only have five intermediate trailers.

The secondary routes are served by a second generation of X2000, the X2-2.

While the current network is geared for 200km/h (125mph), there are long-term plans for upgrading to allow 300km/h operation.

Each X2000 trainset is mounted on 'soft' bogies, which adjust automatically on curves and mean a train can run up to 40% faster without exerting extra stresses on the track.

For info the X2000 has more wheel problems than Acela.
some wheels even came off.
as for ICE they have had their share of problems.
as far as ACELA it seems the train problems are pretty much solved, now if only the track problems were solved so the truck problems don't repeat.

Mr DutchRail...

I think you will find quite a few of Pullman-Standard, Budd, and ACF patents are well past expiration. Thus, they are in the public domain.

BTW, what is that pile of plans and erection drawings at the Illinois Railroad Museum?? Bird cage floor covering? Those designs may not be the most modern on the planet, (heck, they're overengineered until the cows come home) but they are readily available.

Absolutes belong to the hard sciences, Faith, and ethics. Everything else has wiggle room.

only outdated patents are cars no longer complying with FRA rules.
Bombardier was smart enough to renew their patents for cars like Comets - Superliners-Amfleet.

Realistically the next equipment Amtrak buys is likely to be switchers. So I'd guess we'll see some MPI GP15D's. Who knows . . .

Christopher

Now, it has been indicated that Bombardier has let the patents possibly run out on the old Pullman/Budd/ACF plans (for 1950s and earlier stramline-era cars), that are no longer FRA compliant.

If this were the case, could someone like Amtrak build those designs and make new versions compliant without working with an organization like BBD?

This is pretty interesting,

Nobody "lets" patents run out. Patents expire after 17 years. Bombardier had no say in the matter. No way to extend them. Once a patent expires it goes into the public domain and anyone can use the technology.

First, to Mr Conrail 4014...

Pullman-Standard, long ago, communicated to the Illinois Railroad Museum an incredible number of erection drawings. How big this pile is I truly do not know.

Second, I'm going to check the forward going history of both Pullman-Standard and Budd. I think we shall find that the Superliner plans were communicated from P-S to Amtrak to Bombardier ... as a "build to specification" run. If true, that means Bombardier does not own SL.

Third, please tell me when ACF and SLCC merged into Bombardier?

Fourth, as Mr W2KB states, once you choose to protect technology with a patent, you have a limited time before the technology moves to the public domain.

Fifth, I think the biggest problems of the streamliner era cars were:
- Physical age. The cost of structural rebuild was approaching that of a new car.
- Plumbing design: Tough to retrofit to retention toiletry.
- Only 3d is FRA rules. I've not seen any engineering modeling or destructive testing studies that match either a standard weight or a streamline line haul car to the FRA standards set. Care to point me in the right direction??? It'd be instructive to see if the older designs cut the mustard.

In the meantime, there is always this matter of a capital appropriation. If Amtrak gets operating $$$ from Congress and no or few capital $$$, there won't be an equipment buy in FY05. If they do, there might/will be...

Didn't Alstom build the California car fleet? It is my understanding that those are Superliners with some interior modifications and an extra set of entry/exit doors on the lower level for faster station work.

I would say no to Alstom without a doubt. Nothing they build is reliable! They designed propulsion systems (jointly with Rolls) for ships, and those ships have been the most troublesome in recent memory! I don't think Bombardier will get the order either.
I'd like EMD or GE to come out with something that can compete in the high-speed market. But, that's just what I'd like, and not what's likely going to happen.

NJTfan, who likes to buy American.

NJTfan wrote:I would say no to Alstom without a doubt. Nothing they build is reliable

Not even the TGVs? Wow, for unreliable trains, they are logging millions of miles in greatly uninterrupted service.

Sorry for the overstatement. Next to nothing they make is reliable. And don't forget how long they've had to work the bugs out.

<<<<"Fifth, I think the biggest problems of the streamliner era cars were:
- Physical age. The cost of structural rebuild was approaching that of a new car.
- Plumbing design: Tough to retrofit to retention toiletry.
- Only 3d is FRA rules. I've not seen any engineering modeling or destructive testing studies that match either a standard weight or a streamline line haul car to the FRA standards set. Care to point me in the right direction??? It'd be instructive to see if the older designs cut the mustard.">>>>


Isn't it safe to presume that the operator of virtually every privately-owned streamliner car in America has successfully solved these "insurmountable" problems? If they haven't, my guess is that their vintage cars wouldn't be allowed to operate on public rails at all.

Sure, many of the old Heritage cars were rustbuckets. But they certainly didn't start out that way when they first rolled out of the factory during the 40s, 50s, and 60s.

If a car maker is ever contracted to build a new Amtrak sleeper based on the blueprints of a Slumbercoach or a Budd 10/6, it too will be a brand new car with a presumably 40 to 50 year lifespan, retention toilets and all.

Not that it's likely that Amtrak will ever order a 21st century re-creation of an old Budd, Pullman-Standard, or ACF car design. We're a nation addicted to the often dubious notion of progress -- even if progress often spawns inferior "improvements" like the Viewliner or New York's Penn Station.

older cars are Grandfathered till they are constructivly rebuilt, at that time they would need to be made in compliance.
same with older locomotives.
Newer cars have a much higher buff strenght. see CFR49 section 238:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/wais ... 38_02.html

I just called the good folks at Illinois Transit.

Their experience is that modern (Amfleet forward) cars are engineered with computer modeling and JUST MEET Federal crashworthiness standards. After all, additional metal=additional $$$$$.

Older cars (even including Budd and P-S stuff of the 50s) relied on slide rule calculations, as well as less well developed metallurgy. Additional material compensated for possible error. His experience: Many of the current wreck photos he's seen of Amfleet and Superliner would be salvageable from older Streamliner cars. Further, heavyweight era cars may have had even less damage.

Thoughts.

John,

What is the likelihood that the streamline and Heavyweight designs might make current buf strength standards with their existing engineering, or possibly be adjusted for current crashworthiness without extensive changes?