New Superliners

[Tadman]

ehh no unless they buy and pay the company secrets are safe.

That's just not true. You can have plenty of other reasons to disclose. These reasons can include an outright leak, shareholder suit, boardroom shakeup, palace coup, or just plain good PR.

Also, if the design is owned by the railroad (as some Amtrak designs are ) it is already public before manufacturing engineering begins.

I agree with others, something really fishy happened. Sumitomo was just too good of a builder to walk away for no good reason. They've built something like 1000 cars for this market with no problems, and then they up and leave? Versus all the other dumpster fire builders that make far bigger errors and they keep coming back for more?

Something is up here.

[David Benton]

My hunch has always been that it is something to do with the 125 mph requirement. Going to the Brightline style cars conveniently helped with the Charger lawsuit , as Siemens were been challenged over the ability to haul the double deckers to 125 mph . So they would have been happy to takeover.

[Tadman]

Now that is interesting. You could be on to something here.

I have heard rumors that the Charger overheats after a while on long hauls. No idea if it's true, but perhaps Siemens feels better hauling their own equipment than random superliners.

[Backshophoss]

Remember the IL Chargers are middle distance units at best,they did run on the SW Chief route,nothing went wrong
on those test runs reportedly.
Desert to deep freeze over Raton.

With Nippon-Sharyo "fell on the sword",then bailed out of Rochelle,did they destroy the failed shell at that time?
As to hide the reason?

[mtuandrew]

I’ve suspected that even though Nippon Sharyo could have built a compliant car, they and Sumitomo were in a dispute over who was going to pay for the re-engineering. By firing N-S as their subcontractor, Sumitomo could cut their losses, perhaps cash in a performance bond (common practice for general contractors to require such a bond from its subcontractor), and find another sub willing to substantially meet the guidelines so they (Sumitomo) didn’t lose their shirts. Nippon Sharyo got left holding the bag and likely had to sell off their US assets to cover their own loss.

By failing a regulatory 800,000 lb crush test at 798,000 lb, N-S was in a world of trouble. Even though they could have raised the crush strength to 800,001 lbs and passed the FRA regs, the next body shell out the door might have only been good for 799,999 lbs. If I’d been at Sumitomo, I wouldn’t have considered accepting any of these cars until N-S met 800,000 lbs + 10% (crush at 880,000 lbs), and then only at a substantial discount which would cover future liability. Preferably I’d have specified 800,000 lbs + 20%, with a bonus for +25% (1,000,000 lb crush strength.)

[DutchRailnut]

sad part is Budd exceeded 1000 000 lbs crush load on both M-1 and M-3 , so why except marginal.

[Tadman]

I’ve suspected that even though Nippon Sharyo could have built a compliant car, they and Sumitomo were in a dispute over who was going to pay for the re-engineering. By firing N-S as their subcontractor, Sumitomo could cut their losses, perhaps cash in a performance bond (common practice for general contractors to require such a bond from its subcontractor), and find another sub willing to substantially meet the guidelines so they (Sumitomo) didn’t lose their shirts.

Despite the fact they are legally separate companies, they are very closely linked and have been partners for almost 40 years here, and who knows how long in Japan. Sumitomo probably falls squarely into the definition of "kereitsu", which is a bit of a conglomerate with interlocking holdings and directorates with many other companies. Other examples of such include Mitsubishi, Fuji, and Kawasaki. I have not done any research and it may be down-low, but I bet Sumitomo and N-S own a more than a bit of each other's stock and share directors.

[bostontrainguy]

Regarding moving back to single level for national commonality: No, no, and no.

You guys are just patently wrong and I've explained it before.

I recently read about the potential problem that Amtrak may have with the new Acela II to conform with new ADA requirements which require enough space so that a wheelchair can rotate inside the restrooms and that each coach must have one ADA bathroom. Since these take up such a huge amount of space now, they could only put one in each coach. Yes I know that those cars are slightly shorter due to the articulation design, but that may not work very well for a new LD single-level coach either.

Maybe that fact alone will necessitate a new Superliner III design but I guess there are a lot of questions here since I have read lots of different opinions in this matter.

Would an ADA seating area and restroom on the lower level of a coach be satisfactory anymore?

Do you have to permit passage of a wheelchair through all of the cars (now impossible).

Do you have to permit a wheelchair passenger to access the second floor (even though there would be no real place for the person to go)?

Do you have to allow access to the diner? How about the lounge?

How could you possibly permit passage through a sleeper?

I can't see how it would be possible to allow complete access to an entire LD train without making the train very financially inefficient.

Maybe there really is a strong case to rebuild the Superliners since they are grandfathered in? Maybe at least the sleepers?

[bdawe]

Between the ADA and the steady proliferation of 48" trains and platforms west of Chicago

[Backshophoss]

Believe the "Rocky Mountaineer" has 3rd gen cars with elevators to reach the 2nd level,along with
outside porch on one end of the car.

[bdawe]

I'd be curious about clearances, as I believe they're the tallest passenger cars in the world

[Tadman]

I'd be curious about clearances, as I believe they're the tallest passenger cars in the world

That is a good question and I suspect the real questions is "are they taller than double stack?". If not, then they can go anywhere out west within reason.

Believe the "Rocky Mountaineer" has 3rd gen cars with elevators to reach the 2nd level,along with
outside porch on one end of the car.

I had no idea. If the gangway is upper level between cars, you could conceivably get away with 1-2 elevators per train rather than every car.

[bdawe]

That is a good question and I suspect the real questions is "are they taller than double stack?". If not, then they can go anywhere out west within reason.

I had no idea. If the gangway is upper level between cars, you could conceivably get away with 1-2 elevators per train rather than every car.

RE clearance, is Amtrak wholly doublestack cleared out west? is the Ex-Rio Grande and Moffat tunnel so cleared? What about terminal station tracks?

RE accessibility - the gangway is lower level. Part of the reason that they are so high is that they are essentially super-gallery cars, with high floors and a whole extra level on top, rather than the partial lower level depressed between the trucks that you see on Superliners or BBD Bilevels (I think the older ones might actually be just converted gallery cars). As such, they have a lot of steps that would take a lot of the low-platform benefits of superliner-type equipment away

Furthermore, the Rocky Mountaineer cars are run on a landcruise, and they don't ever get up past probably 50 mph, and probably never take much of any curve at speed. Instead they're limited to the speed of the nearest coal train. I'd be curious what sort of cant deficiency they're comfortable to ride at on the upper deck

[bostontrainguy]

I'd be curious about clearances, as I believe they're the tallest passenger cars in the world

That is a good question and I suspect the real questions is "are they taller than double stack?". If not, then they can go anywhere out west within reason.

Believe the "Rocky Mountaineer" has 3rd gen cars with elevators to reach the 2nd level,along with
outside porch on one end of the car.

I had no idea. If the gangway is upper level between cars, you could conceivably get away with 1-2 elevators per train rather than every car.

No they are only about 18 feet high (18' 1.3").

The images I have seen have a lift from the bottom floor to the top floor. It appears a person in a wheelchair can reach the top level in this way but can't go anywhere once they are up there.

This allows access to the dining room and ADA restroom which is NOT like the enormous new ones Amtrak went with which allow complete rotation inside. These are on the lower level.

Stadler-Rail_Goldleaf-carriage_Floorplan.png

(73.79 KiB) Downloaded 1030 times

Some Ultradomes have a pass-through on the upper level and some on the lower level. Going through some of the Alaska cruise trains require you to go up and down stairs a few times.

The interesting thing is that if Amtrak ever went with this design for their new "Superliner" it would gives you two complete floors to work with and possible passage through cars at both levels. It would certainly be the most efficient railcar design out there for new LD cars.

Max speed is 110 mph.

[west point]

The only clearance problem I know of is CHI Union Station. any auto rack cleared route would allow them. Now other stations unknown?