Railroad Forums 

  • Economy of observation cars

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #1266334  by Desertdweller
 
Greg,

I miss those cars, too. The operating drawback for domes was always overhead clearances on eastern lines. I don't know how close those clearances were, but I do know both B&O and C&O had low-clearance dome cars built for operating in low clearance tunnels and under catenary.

The Milwaukee Road had both tunnels and catenary, and ran tall Superdomes under them. Maybe their clearance standards were extra generous.

Domes were a big draw on the trains that operated them. It seems to me that they could justify their non-revenue space by attracting more riders. To me, it is just as interesting riding in a dome through a big city as it is through a river valley.

The Superliner lounge cars are almost as good as riding in a dome, but those cars are only used on routes that could support conventional domes. In my opinion, the best domes to ride were the short domes. They afforded both forward and aft views. The full-length domes lacked good forward and aft viewing, affording a view much like the Superliner or Santa Fe Hi-Level lounges, which I have also ridden.

I liked to ride the Denver Zephyr at night, looking forward from the first dome. It was fun to watch the signals change from green to red. Decades later, I would be getting the same view from the engineer's seat.

It would be nice if AMTRAK would specify domes on some of the next generation of conventional height cars. Maybe even better, imagine what it would be like to ride a dome car on a HSR train? HSR trains will need non-revenue space, too. Might as well put some "upstairs".

I was riding a Superdome on a Hiawatha when the train slowly pulled past the flour mill in Red Wing, MN when it was on fire. It was surrealistic. One could feel the heat through the windows, as small chunks of burning material fell on the glass.

One of the neatest experiences for dome riders was riding through a thunderstorm at night, lightening criss-crossing the sky, rain pouring down in sheets. I have rode several times through southern Iowa during these, and enjoyed every one. Much better than trying to drive through it.

Les
 #1266638  by Literalman
 
Thunderstorms from the dome, yes! Back in the early 1980s, I was riding Amtrak from Chicago to New Orleans and sat in the dome at night as a thunderstorm blazed across the sky.
 #1266651  by mtuandrew
 
Desertdweller wrote:It would be nice if AMTRAK would specify domes on some of the next generation of conventional height cars. Maybe even better, imagine what it would be like to ride a dome car on a HSR train? HSR trains will need non-revenue space, too. Might as well put some "upstairs".

Les
I think that would be great, even if Amtrak could only have the vertical clearance for a Viewliner Sightseer. Amtrak seems to be flush with cafés, but once the current cafe cars start to get removed from service, perhaps we would see Sightseers on eastern lines?

And yes, I got to watch a nighttime thunderstorm from a Sightseer on the Southwest Chief, somewhere in Kansas. Heck of a sight.
 #1267002  by Milwaukee_F40C
 
The height clearance on the Milwaukee Road Pacific Extension was very generous. They even conducted a project to increase tunnel heights to clear autoracks, by undercutting the tracks.

The single level Amtrak cars are only being ordered for routes that can't accommodate the height of Superliners, which probably rules out domes, unless they could get one to fit in the dimensional envelope of a new splitlevel commuter car. Developing such a car would probably never pass fiscal considerations, though. It would require a different car body design (and design costs for only a small production), with a depressed floor under the dome level, and those modifications reduce revenue floor space. Full domes are the worst at the ends of the car, under the dome and over the trucks where the main floor can't be depressed.
 #1267081  by mtuandrew
 
Domes under B&O (Reading) wire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strata-Dome" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Not short enough for PSNY though, nor for the tunnel south from Washington Union Station. Figure that the maximum profile for an NEC-capable dome would be about that of a Metroliner, and at that point there's no room for a second floor. It might work as a gallery-dome with two rows of seats elevated over a low-headroom section below, or like the MP70 up-and-down "blimps" from the LIRR. But, would it really be worth it for just 1+1 seating in the dome?

With all those difficulties just to shoehorn a dome into the North River Tunnels, a non-domed "dome" Viewliner Sightseer sounds pretty good.
 #1267208  by Milwaukee_F40C
 
I just looked up all these diagrams. Strata Domes are about 15.25 feet, and NJT multilevels are 14.5 feet (lower than a Budd Metroliner). An Amtrak Viewliner is 14 feet. A multilevel "Viewliner" dome car could be done at 14.5 feet, but with very little forward or rearward visibility. It would be like looking out of armored car windshields. More visibility could be gained with a 14.5 foot dome height above standard streamliner roof height, at about 13.5 feet, or Amfleet roof height just under 13 feet. The extremely low profile dome structure is not unprecedented considering the TEE panorama dome cars, with 2+1 seating in the dome.

I still don't think the design and production costs for a handful of cars would be practical for a public agency. Superliner Sightseers and the theoretical Viewliner Sightseer use the same basic carbody design as the standard counterparts, but lowering the floor and strengthening the walls of a Viewliner would result in an entirely different car. Then the dome structure would have to meet all current strength requirements while still allowing forward and rearward visibility, which is the whole point of a dome versus a non-domed Sightseer. And the view would be partially blocked by adjacent 14 foot Viewliners.

Another interesting concept would be a Superliner dome car (16 foot roof height), with a dome height under the Automax height (20 feet). Three levels wouldn't happen, but the upper floor could be bumped up in the dome. Some crazy touristy outfit might try it some day.
 #1267230  by electricron
 
VIA operates three panoramic single level dome cars today, similar cars could be used on Amtrak's east coast long distance trains configured as single level lounge/cafe cars. I'll admit looking forward would be unnecessary because the car will be the same height as those fore and aft of it. But with that much glass, or plastic, who needs to look forward or backwards?
http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhot ... l#35875155
http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-rail ... omed-coach
 #1267290  by mtuandrew
 
Milwaukee_F40C wrote:Another interesting concept would be a Superliner dome car (16 foot roof height), with a dome height under the Automax height (20 feet). Three levels wouldn't happen, but the upper floor could be bumped up in the dome. Some crazy touristy outfit might try it some day.
Sounds like the Rader/Colorado Railcar domes - two full floors high, with the first floor at the same height as adjoining single-level cars. See this picture for some idea of that car. AFAIK, no other carbuilder or railroad has seriously proposed or built such a car, not in the modern era anyway.

Still not economical in the normal sense, but at least there's immense room for a full revenue coach or sleeper section, diner, cafe, or bar/lounge. It fits serious amounts of square footage onto only six axles, where the equivalent in two cars would have to be on eight axles.
 #1267786  by ExCon90
 
mtuandrew wrote:Domes under B&O (Reading) wire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strata-Dome" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Not short enough for PSNY though, nor for the tunnel south from Washington Union Station. Figure that the maximum profile for an NEC-capable dome would be about that of a Metroliner, and at that point there's no room for a second floor. It might work as a gallery-dome with two rows of seats elevated over a low-headroom section below, or like the MP70 up-and-down "blimps" from the LIRR. But, would it really be worth it for just 1+1 seating in the dome?

With all those difficulties just to shoehorn a dome into the North River Tunnels, a non-domed "dome" Viewliner Sightseer sounds pretty good.
I don't know that the domes ever operated on the Reading. The May 1955 Official Guide shows them running only between Washington and Chicago (as did the diner and most of the sleepers, including the obs.). Running them to Jersey City would have required 3 cars, since the eastbound and westbound trains met somewhere between Jersey City and Philadelphia. I've also wondered about the Howard St. Tunnel, and the Art Museum Tunnel in Philadelphia -- I've never known what their clearances are (or were at that time).