Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, Amtrak67 of America, Tadman, gprimr1

east point
Posts: 1351
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by east point » Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:15 pm

DMUs may require many more fuel stops ? Getting diesel fuel out west in the boonies would cost much more if possible. In some places out west fuel costs for aircraft are 10 to 20 cents + a gallon more for transportation. That of course depends on distance ?

rcthompson04
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by rcthompson04 » Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:15 pm

electricron wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:05 pm
Didn't Anderson suggest having 4 Amtrak products on the NEC?
Acela 2
Fast Regional
Slow Regional (all stops)
Long Distance

Couldn't the existing Sprinters be use on two products, and EMUs be used on the other two?
Obviously, Acela 2 would be a EMU type trains, but couldn't either the fast or slow regional be the other?
Meaning Sprinters would be used on the long distance trains, and the other regional product.
Acela 2 - EMUs
Fast Regional - Sprinters
Slow Regional - EMUs
Long Distance - Sprinters

The odd ball would be something like the Keystone. I would prefer to mix the Keystone up and go with a slightly more frequent service with smaller EMU sets on off peak and Sprinters with 5 cars on peak.

David Benton
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:29 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by David Benton » Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:11 am

Matt Johnson wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:32 pm
David Benton wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:22 pm
In England, probably 80 -90 % of trains are DMU/EMU, or a hybrid of. Virtually all trains are fixed consist.
And generally not as roomy or nice as American rolling stock. The Voyagers were meh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH06o7nNKJQ
I'm sure they can build oversize/ overweight ones for America. :wink:
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.

frequentflyer
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:28 am

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by frequentflyer » Fri Dec 13, 2019 9:56 am

njt/mnrrbuff wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:10 pm
Where will all of the Sprinters go? I don’t see all of the Amtrak NEC Regional trains ever being MUs. Last I heard, Amtrak was looking into getting a dual catenary/diesel locomotive to eliminate the engine changes.
Amtrak would have no problem finding homes for what amounts to CPO Sprinters with factory support with the commuter agencies up and down the NEC for immediate delivery.

Tadman
Posts: 9711
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:21 am

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by Tadman » Fri Dec 13, 2019 9:58 am

A country the size of the US could do a good "lessons learned" process on recent Brit rolling stock procurements. Especially if there were to be 2-3 competing TOC's rather than just Amtrak.

For example, the 800 is very cool looking but the seats suck and the engines are spotty. The food service on GWR is pretty darn good, far better than Acela First.
Dig the new rr.net Instagram account: @railroad_dot_net

User avatar
Matt Johnson
Posts: 4230
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:57 pm
Location: Hazlet, NJ

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by Matt Johnson » Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:21 pm

The Brightline trainsets look seriously nice, and I hope they set the bar and Amtrak doesn't order anything less nice than the Viaggio Comfort USA coaches.

njt/mnrrbuff
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:33 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by njt/mnrrbuff » Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:26 pm

Yes, Amtrak should seriously consider buying Viaggio coaches and cafe cars and of course cab cars. Just a FYI, while MUs would work great on the Amtrak trains that make every single stop on the NEC schedule, bear in mind that if Amtrak were to order both locomotive hauled and multiple unit trainsets for use up and down the NEC, chances are that the equipment assignments will be rotated. There could be times when a MU would cover a faster Northeast Regional while a locomotive hauled train would cover a local. In my opinion, for Northeast Regional trains as well as the long distance daytime trains that use the NEC, locomotive hauled sets would be the way to go. The Amtrak Sprinters pretty much just started running, all of them nonetheless.

RRspatch
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by RRspatch » Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:11 am

The ACELA 2 is NOT an EMU. It has two power cars at either end bracketing non powered coaches. I'm not sure if the first and last cars share a truck with the power cars. Having all cars powered would require a 25Kv roof line buss cable and jumpers between the cars. The FRA will not allow that.
Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel
Is just a freight train coming your way

No leaf clover ~ Metallica.

JimBoylan
Posts: 3334
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 2:33 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by JimBoylan » Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:34 am

RRspatch wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:11 am
Having all cars powered would require a 25Kv roof line buss cable and jumpers between the cars. The FRA will not allow that.
How does Connecticut Department of Transportation get away with bus lines on their Electric MU cars?

JimBoylan
Posts: 3334
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 2:33 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by JimBoylan » Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:39 am

RRspatch wrote:
Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:02 am
Amtrak moved away from the Metroliner EMU's because they were fixed consists of either 4 or 6 cars.
When the Roving Resume who said that was working elsewhere, Amtrak and PennCentral did run 2, 3, 5, and 8 car trains of Metroliner MU cars.

WhartonAndNorthern
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:06 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by WhartonAndNorthern » Sat Dec 14, 2019 7:39 pm

JimBoylan wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:34 am
RRspatch wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:11 am
Having all cars powered would require a 25Kv roof line buss cable and jumpers between the cars. The FRA will not allow that.
How does Connecticut Department of Transportation get away with bus lines on their Electric MU cars?
They're part of a married-pair (semi-permanently coupled). For the record though, I've never seen much mention of voltage or electrical restrictions in the CFR. A few if it's over 150V it's high voltage and needs to be marked.

east point
Posts: 1351
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by east point » Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:42 pm

If there are any restrictions it would appear that it is only for full length bus bars or cable ? All EMU connections I have observed are just close end of one car to close end of the married pair car ?

John_Perkowski
Posts: 4914
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:12 pm
Location: Off the Q main near Parkville MO

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by John_Perkowski » Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:24 pm

Tadman wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 9:58 am
A country the size of the US could do a good "lessons learned" process on recent Brit rolling stock procurements. Especially if there were to be 2-3 competing TOC's rather than just Amtrak.

For example, the 800 is very cool looking but the seats suck and the engines are spotty. The food service on GWR is pretty darn good, far better than Acela First.
The odds of Congress authorizing a second operating company are somewhat less than 0.000001, with 1.0 being certainty, and 0.0 being absolutely NWIH.
~John Perkowski: Moderator: General Discussion: Locomotives, Rolling Stock, and Equipment
Assistant Administrator: Railroad.net/forums
Jeff Smith & Greg Primrose now own railroad.net!

John_Perkowski
Posts: 4914
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:12 pm
Location: Off the Q main near Parkville MO

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by John_Perkowski » Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:29 pm

What are the fleet maintenance costs, across a lifetime, between locomotives/trailer cars and multiple units each with independent power...diesel or electric?
~John Perkowski: Moderator: General Discussion: Locomotives, Rolling Stock, and Equipment
Assistant Administrator: Railroad.net/forums
Jeff Smith & Greg Primrose now own railroad.net!

RRspatch
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

Post by RRspatch » Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:23 am

east point wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:42 pm
If there are any restrictions it would appear that it is only for full length bus bars or cable ? All EMU connections I have observed are just close end of one car to close end of the married pair car ?
Exactly. That's the point I was making. A buss bar or cable running the length of the train. You could power all car with only two pantographs up or even one up at the rear. No need to have multiple pantographs up. Many railroads around the world run with only the rear pantograph up on high speed trains to avoid catenary bow waves.
Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel
Is just a freight train coming your way

No leaf clover ~ Metallica.

Return to “Amtrak”