Budd Amfleet I Replacement Discussion

[mtuandrew]

RRSpatch: I have read that the AX usually runs with only one power car online for that reason.

If Amtrak ends up getting MUs for the Corridor, I expect they’ll get married or articulated quads. If it were up to me, I think I’d order coach-coach-coach-business articulated MUs (about 70’ car bodies) with walk-through cabs and matching 85’ trailer cafe cars to couple into the center of the consist. I’d also spec conventional Type H Titelock couplers; Amtrak has a big fleet nowadays, and it’s worth keeping backwards compatibility for baggage cars, extra coach trailers, possible NEC sleeper service, and locomotives for short off-Corridor drags.

[east point]

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.

It may be Amtrak hopes to prevent CAT waves by placing the hangers from cross beams closer on the constant tension CAT replacements ? The problems of high speed EMUs running with too many pans causing CAT waves may preclude EMUs being bought. There is too much variable tension CAT NYP - WASH. Maybe in 30 years when constant tension is installed on all the high speed portions NYP - WASH ?

[mtuandrew]

Re: sine waves in catenary, Amtrak already has NJT Arrows and SEPTA Silverliners running daily on the NEC (I think they’re limited to 80 mph now, but have run as fast as 100 mph in regular service.) They’ve also had their own Metroliner MUs running at 125 mph in the past. If destructive waves are an issue, Amtrak will spec cars with a different distance between pantographs than the vibration wave length.

Shouldn’t be a problem with careful design.

[Matt Johnson]

I've been up to 95+ aboard SEPTA between Trenton and Philly. I believe the Silverliner IVs are authorized for 95 mph, and the Vs 95 or 100.

[Tadman]

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.

They said that in England for decades. Despite the repeated failure of the ECML franchise, they’re not anywhwere close to declaring privatization a failure.

Can’t you see a guy like Sir Richard, who owns a passenger train company, and a guy like President Trump cooking up an idea like this at election time?

[David Benton]

The British Rail franchise system is in for a shake up, even the Tories campaigning on it .
viewtopic.php?f=149&t=170698

I wouldn't put Richard Branson and Donald trump in the same sentence.

[gokeefe]

What are the fleet maintenance costs, across a lifetime, between locomotives/trailer cars and multiple units each with independent power...diesel or electric?

Col.,

Maintenance costs over the life of an EMU fleet might be higher however the cost-benefit analysis would need to take into consideration savings related to improved operational reliability.

EMU based trainsets would not have the same failure rate as unpowered trailer trainsets. In some cases a single unit might fail but the rest of the train can still run, thus saving lost time and a crew for the spare power. There's a significant labor cost savings there which shouldn't be discounted. Additional savings could come from reduced passenger reimbursements for travel cancellations.

If improved acceleration allows for tighter time keeping and results in a greater utilization rate (for example an extra leg WAS-NYP) each day then that should be taken into consideration as well.

Another consideration for EMUs would be ease of changes to the trainset. With cabs on both ends of everything it's not a big deal if one pair of cars has to be switched out. You don't even need a switching crew to do it because the cars are powered.

Even a trailer trainset with a cab car on the end would still need a powered switch engine to move cars out of the consist in certain circumstances.

There are definitely complications to Amtrak's current operating practices. How to accommodate Business Class and a Cafe Car is one of them. Another would be deciding whether or not to provide space for baggage and bike service. If you can fit Business Class and a Cafe along with baggage, bike racks and control cabs on each end in a single married pair this "specialty" pair could provide the answer everyone is looking for to other concerns about modal flexibility.

[BandA]

Can the EMU/DMU be designed to be easier to inspect? Then a 92-day inspection isn't as big a deal. And if you can reduce the cost & time to couple/uncouple/brake test cars then an EMU/DMU would have a strong advantage.

OTOH, they could buy smaller/cheaper/energy-efficient locomotives (or de-rated older locomotives) to pull short trains and saving the more powerful locos to pull the long consists / trains with lots of stops.

[David Benton]

https://www.railway-energy.org/static/M ... ins_23.php

Does not specifically address vehicle maintenance, but lists infrastructure costs as unchanged.

Given Amtrak's apparent problems with proven technology like the Siemens Sprinters, I would think increased inspection requirements would be no bad thing.

[WhartonAndNorthern]

Can the EMU/DMU be designed to be easier to inspect? Then a 92-day inspection isn't as big a deal. And if you can reduce the cost & time to couple/uncouple/brake test cars then an EMU/DMU would have a strong advantage.

184 day inspections on anything modern with microprocessor-based on-board diagnostics. (49 CFR 229.23(b) since someone's going to ask)

[gokeefe]

Well that certainly helps.

[gokeefe]

Having taken a look through what's out there right now it would appear that the British Rail Class 444 (Siemens Desiro) is probably one of the closest MU configurations that would meet Amtrak's needs for an Amfleet replacement.

[Ridgefielder]

There are definitely complications to Amtrak's current operating practices. How to accommodate Business Class and a Cafe Car is one of them. Another would be deciding whether or not to provide space for baggage and bike service. If you can fit Business Class and a Cafe along with baggage, bike racks and control cabs on each end in a single married pair this "specialty" pair could provide the answer everyone is looking for to other concerns about modal flexibility.

The New Haven and New York Central figured out how to do this 80+ years ago with MU equipment.

https://images.app.goo.gl/9VAjrumQBWcevPSM6

https://images.app.goo.gl/WbQSHPKSnFQv7bnJ9

https://images.app.goo.gl/VQVFrgWNSCbDKQ9q7

And as for combining baggage and a "cafe" there's a huge amount of precedent for that. The heavyweight 20th Century Limited, for instance, carried a combination baggage/lounge instead of a straight baggage car.

[gokeefe]

British Rail Class 802 which are long distance dual mode ("bi-mode" in the UK) multiple unit trainsets could be very close to a perfect fit for Amtrak. There are some significant disadvantages but there are other major advantages. Thankfully due to the long history with the Cascades Amtrak will have some idea of how this could be different in diesel territory.

It's difficult to overstate the potential benefits from reduced dwell time at engine change points.

[Ridgefielder]

British Rail Class 802 which are long distance dual mode ("bi-mode" in the UK) multiple unit trainsets could be very close to a perfect fit for Amtrak. There are some significant disadvantages but there are other major advantages. Thankfully due to the long history with the Cascades Amtrak will have some idea of how this could be different in diesel territory.

It's difficult to overstate the potential benefits from reduced dwell time at engine change points.

Going back to what someone said up-thread-- would the FDNY be comfortable with this equipment running through the North River and East River tubes?