New Superliners

[eolesen]

Tadman, the reason nobody complains about Megabus or flying is because that's private enterprise. Government owned/operated services don't have the same flexibility to do no more than the bare minimum that laws dictating what private business need to comply with. And no, I'm not advocating for more regulations. It drives me nuts every time I go to Florida and see the swimming pool lifts that every hotel had to purchase and install. Whenever I ask staff if they get used, the responses are almost always "not since it was tested after installation"....

High level boarding only seems to be a concern for the NEC crowd... the rest of the country seems to do just fine with low level boarding, including disability lifts that are either station operated or integrated into the trainset...

[mtuandrew]

Hopeful that a new Superliner if purchased will have two straight staircases finally, like the California Cars. It’s worth giving up a few inches of legroom for that, especially if they have chair lifts installed in the stairways.

A Gallery design makes a lot of sense for a Superliner coach and lounge replacement, especially one that shares most of its mechanical components with either the Siemens car or the Viewliner. I haven’t figured out a way to effectively use the space in a Gallery to reach Superliner-levels of sleeper capacity though.

[Arborwayfan]

Tadman: The basic idea of the ADA is that public facilities should be accessible to everyone who can walk or roll into them, and those people should be able to use them as fully as possible. A bus and a plane don't have a bunch of places to do other than your seat, so just getting someone into a seat and maybe to the bathroom is plenty. That's all any passengers do. Having an inaccessible second deck identical to the first, I'm guessing, doesn't bother people so much as having a diner and a sightseer lounge just out of reach. I assume a similar argument applies to double-level commuter rail cars; I think I remember something along those lines from earlier in the thread. On the other hand, I have also thought that regulators seemed to be particularly picky about rail. As I recall, the interpretation of the law to require full-length level boarding for new stations came out under Bush II at the same time the administration was trying to cut Amtrak and commuter rail funding. Maybe coincidence, maybe not.

Mutandrew: straight stairs with lift does sound better.

[John_Perkowski]

As I recall, the law does not require perfect access. Coach and sleeper attendants are required to fetch items from other cars. That’s called reasonable accommodation.

[eolesen]

I haven’t figured out a way to effectively use the space in a Gallery to reach Superliner-levels of sleeper capacity though.

If you dispense with compartments, and went with airline-style fully-flat recliner seats, it might work. There's a middle ground that Amtrak's missing out on between a coach seat and a sleeper seat. You could have up to 21 sleeper seats with 60" pitch, and maybe up to 14 upstairs if the aisle were offset vs. centered...

[electricron]

If you dispense with compartments, and went with airline-style fully-flat recliner seats, it might work. There's a middle ground that Amtrak's missing out on between a coach seat and a sleeper seat. You could have up to 21 sleeper seats with 60" pitch, and maybe up to 14 upstairs if the aisle were offset vs. centered...

Another response suggesting Amtrak use lay flat seats, but at least you got the number of seats closer to reality.
You totaled 35 lay-flat seats on a BiLevel. A typical Superliner coach being replaced has 74 seats. A typical Superliner sleeper can accommodate up tp 44 passengers in 21 rooms or roomettes.

If you look at the earning capability per car and wish to keep revenues per car equality, the total fares from each car should be the same. How do you intend to charge a medium fare between coach and sleeper with a lay-flat business coach when it has less capacity than a sleeper?
Let's assume the following using average fares on a particular train.
Coach = $40 fares x 74 seats - $2960 per car
Business with lay-flat seats = $2960 / 35 seats = $84.57 fare per seat
Sleeper with beds double occupancy = $2960 / 42 = $70.47 fare per bed
Sleeper with beds single occupancy = $2960 / 21 = $140.95 fare per bed

Of course, that is not how Amtrak charges fares for sleepers, they charge a roomette or room charge in addition to a normal coach fare.
So, a double occupancy room or roomette would have gave Amtrak $80 for each, and Amtrak has already collected $10 more per each before they started to charge the fees for the room or roomette than they needed to break even.
With a single occupancy room or roomette, subtracting the $40 fare from the break even point leaves them short around $100 before they charge the fees for the room or roomette. I don't think it is usual for Amtrak to charge less than $100 fees for them on average. So a sleeper car usually returns more revenues than its break even point - that is until you consider the costs of supplying food to them.
Getting back to lay-flat seats, to break even with the regular coach, Amtrak would have to charge more than twice the regular coach fares to break even on average. If drinks and food services are added for the business class service, tripling the fares might be needed to just break even. Where are the extra profits to be gained with lay flat seats?

If you're goal is to provide a middle service between coach and sleeper service, the business class car is going to have to have a lay-flat seating capacity between 42 beds and 74 seats, to be exactly in the middle I would suggest around 58 seats. 35 seats just isn't enough!

[mtuandrew]

There’s a thread elsewhere about lie-flat seats and “pod” sleepers so I’m not getting back into that. Specific to gallery cars as a S-x replacement on multi-day routes, you must offer a bedroom because the Superliner isn’t just a car replacement, it’s also a hotel replacement. You could get away with less privacy on some of the eastern LDs, maybe.

The best I can imagine so far is a layout with a bathroom/shower, three bedrooms, two family/accessible rooms split by the center vestibule, and three more bedrooms bookended by another shower/bathroom. What I’d like to figure is how to install 12-16 upstairs lie-flat or crossways single roomettes without taking all the headroom in the lower cabins.

[electricron]

There’s a thread elsewhere about lie-flat seats and “pod” sleepers so I’m not getting back into that. Specific to gallery cars as a S-x replacement on multi-day routes, you must offer a bedroom because the Superliner isn’t just a car replacement, it’s also a hotel replacement. You could get away with less privacy on some of the eastern LDs, maybe.

The best I can imagine so far is a layout with a bathroom/shower, three bedrooms, two family/accessible rooms split by the center vestibule, and three more bedrooms bookended by another shower/bathroom. What I’d like to figure is how to install 12-16 upstairs lie-flat or crossways single roomettes without taking all the headroom in the lower cabins.

Why use Galley cars to replace Superliners? Nippon Sharyo, who built them last, has left the USA market, they are not around anymore! A not so better solution would be either Bombardier double level designs- MultiLevel or BiLevel - or something similar to them with a third middle level at the vestibule. Their disadvantage will be walking from one car to the next in the train, requiring the climbing of stairs.

At least the old Galley cars allow a single lower level throughout the train, but at the same time requiring high level platforms for level boarding. A major difficulty for long distance trains considering Chicago's Union Station - one of the largest ridership station on most Superliner trains, having mostly low platforms.

Meanwhile, Superliner like trains placing most facilities within the car on the lower level, allowed level boarding from low platforms with an attendant powered ramp. Level car to car movement was done on the upper level - the only difficulty left was changing levels while on the train - with many unimplemented solutions available.

[mtuandrew]

The flat walkways between cars is what I’m after, as that was a big red flag for the ADA compliance folks. It also allows mixed trainsets with no need for transition cars. As for low boarding, Metra and VRE seem to do fine on a daily basis, and as far as I know the modern versions of these cars have wheelchair lifts installed. They’re also more compatible with the mini-high platforms popping up around the country.

N-S has been one major supplier of gallery cars, but it’s an old enough design that any modern car builder could handle it.

Again, it is a thought and one that has many pros as well as cons. One thing I think most of us can agree on though is that if you have the loading gauge available, a bilevel car makes more sense operationally than a single level car.

[frequentflyer]

The last rumor I read on this subject was that Amtrak was looking at Siemens bilevel product sold in Europe. I saw the car up close last week in Europe.

[David Benton]

I would think the argument that buses and airlines don't have to do it , so why should Amtrak, can be turned around.
Mobility is a huge and growing issue, not just for people in wheelchairs. You have the elderly, the sick,the obese, parents with young children, all who could make a decision which mode to use, (or to make the journey at all) based on accessibility. Amtrak has the space , and can lever government funding , to provide good accessibility. Its actually a huge marketing advantage, with a growing number of older people who are still very active. It is a human rights issue (hence ADA), with isolation due to losing ones drivers license a big issue for elder and sick/disabled people.
Be interested to know the Amtrak website stats for searched on Accessibility.

[Greg Moore]

I don't know why the Superliner is under fire for "accessibility problems" when nobody says a word about Megabus, A380, 747, et al being double deck. No talk of elevators, no talk of level boarding for buses. You get helped to a seat and you sit down and never leave that seat other than bathroom breaks until arrival. This includes very long bus rides and trans-ocean plane rides. Far longer than many Superliner rides where "we have to have a diner n stuff".

Firstly, as others have pointed out, on airliners and buses there's really no place to go. There's no dining car or observation car. And yes, as long as I can access the diner, I'd prefer my friends in a wheelchair have an opportunity to do so.
Secondly, LOTS of people who do ride those items DO discuss accessibility issues. Even accessing the bathroom in some cases can be a huge issue for some. So you may not hear a word about it, but I've certainly seen people in wheelchairs "say a word" about such accommodations.

[Backshophoss]

Wheelchairs now are somewhat wider for some people,"the one size fits all" era is gone.
Bathroom grab bars are not always placed in the right location due to size constraints.
The "stall" may not be wide enough to get beside the "throne" in a wheelchair.

[mtuandrew]

Can confirm Mr Moore’s commentary. I’m guessing Tad doesn’t cross paths with many disability advocates though, being neither in his field of work nor in his general political realm*.

Also, I don’t know the last commercial bus ride I took where we didn’t have a gas station or rest stop every two or three hours to stretch and use an accessible bathroom. That isn’t how Amtrak works.

Edited to remove inflammatory content -mtuandrew

[eolesen]

Political realm?.... you really don’t want to go there.

I have a disabled daughter. I’m also a conservative, and find your comment both divisive and insulting. I’ve been a moderator on other forums for over 20 years. Maybe the definition is different here, but my impression is that you are supposed to keep the peace and not use inflammatory language, and yet that’s exactly what you’ve done above. That’s really disappointing.

Reasonable accommodation is indeed a slippery slope, and in the three decades I’ve had to be an advocate for my daughter, I can honestly say that the disability advocacy community will never be satisfied with what anyone has to offer. They will always want more.

I already mentioned those ridiculous disability lifts mandated by Florida for hotel pools. Millions of dollars spent for very little actual need or benefit.

I see no reason why Amtrak should be burdened with any more unnecessary expense than they already are.

Amtrak should be held to the same standard that the ACAA dictates for airlines. No more, no less.