High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program (USA)

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Thank goodness that won't be reality.

It will live on, but only as a render:


It looks like they were intending to run 6-car trains. Illinois will be getting 88 of the new Siemens cars, meaning that they could have 14 trainsets of six cars each with two spares (most likely cab-cars), or they could run 12 trainsets of seven cars with 4 spares.
They also have 33 Charger locomotives, meaning that at any given time half about half of the Chargers will be pulling 'Heritage' cars, which isn't terrible:


Does anyone know if the Heritage cars will be repainted to the 'Midwest' scheme of blue dots? I'm assuming the Heritage cars will continue to use the 'Cabbage' units on the opposite end of the locomotive.

And since the bi-levels and the Heritage cars could never have mixed, I'm assuming the plan is still not to mix-and-match the single-level cars? It would look kind of silly to have one of the old cars mixed in with the otherwise all-Siemens trainset.

[electricron]

Not all the Midwestern order for railcars will be running by Illinois.
Michigan and Missouri have also contributed to the Midwestern order.
Looking at the previous BiLevel distribution, 88 were for the Midwest and 42 were for California.
Illinois/Midwest – 88 Railcars (46 Coach, 21 Cab-Baggage, & 21 Café-Business Class)
California – 42 Cars (34 Coach, 3 Cab-Baggage, & 5 Café-Lounge)

The Midwest needs around 17 train sets, so 21 cab-baggage and 21
Business-cafe cars means there will be 4 sets as spares.
Missouri needs 2 sets to run the SL to KC Services; Michigan needs 5 sets, 3 for the Wolverine and 1 each for the Blue Water and Pere Marquette; Illinois needs 10 sets, 1 set each for Illini, Saluki, 2 sets for Quincy and Rock Island, and 4 sets for Lincoln services. So i’m Looking at 4 car train sets; 1 cab-baggage, 1 Business-cafe, and 2 coaches per set - with at leas 4 more coaches to add to sets as needed, additionally the 2 coaches for the 4 spare sets (8 more coach cars) available for use.

Since the Midwest order didn’t change number wise with the change to single level cars, the breakdown on cars will probably be the same. It is difficult to figure out what California will be doing with 7 more cars heading its’ way. I’m thinking they are going to need 2 more cab-baggage cars to match the business-cafe at a minimum, and possibly 5 more coaches?

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by Hatman

Does anyone know if the Heritage cars will be repainted to the 'Midwest' scheme of blue dots?

I hope the dots go away entirely. Why the incessant need to "jazz up" a perfectly good form with obnoxious paint schemes? And as obnoxious paint schemes go, those silly dots are quite lame. It would have looked so much better just solid blue or red with a simple wordmark identifying the service in a tasteful restrained manner. Take a cue from DB or the fantastic GWR livery:


_


or East Coast livery:


_

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by electricron

The Midwest needs around 17 train sets

So, clearly the 88 new cars won't be able to completely replace the current equipment. I hope that the old and new equipment can be kept relatively separate, just because it will look nicer. But whatever really; the important thing is that more trains run and that more people ride them.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Why the incessant need to "jazz up" a perfectly good form with obnoxious paint schemes?

I've always thought it would be great to standardize the cars that Amtrak uses, but allow the locomotives to wear unique paint schemes. The cars could be the famous 'Phase III' scheme, or even straight silver like the old streamliners:




If I were emperor of Amtrak when it was first created, I would have ordered Amtrak to buy only the passenger cars, then ordered the freight railroads to pull them around with their own locomotives and crews. The idea would be to get the freight railroads more involved in the success of Amtrak; passenger trains would be considered clients, not a pesky intruder. There would also be real corporate pride involved in getting the train to operate on-time, since everyone would know who's fault the delays were.

But I digress, yes, the dots are about as bland and uninteresting of a paint scheme that ever was created.

[Busy Bee]

Locos-cars: I agree. That would be sharp

Early Amtrak freight RR operation: That would have been a nearly impossible sell, considering the railroads were begging to get out of the business. I doubt they would have wanted any arrangement that continued their involvement providing passenger service beyond the NRPC arranged access rights, even if it was only to haul the train just like any other. There may be a few exceptions outside the NEC like Rock Island, Milwaukee Road, etc.

[M II A II R II K]

Washington state governor calls for high-speed rail to Vancouver

http://vancouversun.com/news/politic...l-to-vancouver

.....

- Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee says it’s time to seriously consider a high-speed rail link between Seattle and Vancouver. Inslee told MLAs at the B.C. legislature Tuesday his state will soon release the results of a $1-million study into a rail line that would cut transportation time between the two cities from three hours to one. Inslee’s office began the cost-benefit analysis earlier this year of the “ultra high-speed” rail line with trains at speeds of up to 400 km/h.

.....

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by Hatman

However, I'm very worried that any attempts to build cab cars to a North American crash and safety standard will result in more 'Mater' designs, like what the Cascades service currently has to suffer:

That would be severely disappointing.

I thought the FRA modified regulations in late 2016 to more closely align with European regulations on crash standards?

[electricron]

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

I thought the FRA modified regulations in late 2016 to more closely align with European regulations on crash standards?

Yes, and no. The regular FRA compliance regulations remained basically the same. What they did was allow an alternate set of compliance rules that allows crash energy management implementation with the latest EU standards. It only modifies the crush standards - other FRA regulations have remained the same. And the alternate compliance changes isn’t set by a specific set of numbers as much as it sets rules by a process. Trains being built under Alternate compliance rules must jump over many hurdles to prove the CEM designs work - something Stadler has been successful at where Nippon Sharyo failed.

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by electricron

Yes, and no. The regular FRA compliance regulations remained basically the same. What they did was allow an alternate set of compliance rules that allows crash energy management implementation with the latest EU standards. It only modifies the crush standards - other FRA regulations have remained the same. And the alternate compliance changes isn’t set by a specific set of numbers as much as it sets rules by a process. Trains being built under Alternate compliance rules must jump over many hurdles to prove the CEM designs work - something Stadler has been successful at where Nippon Sharyo failed.

Gotcha, thanks. Once those hurdles have been cleared successfully a number times by a group like Stadler does that create a precedent whereby other groups can essentially follow the same process and easily get approved?

Also, from my understanding, the crush standards were by far the most onerous regulations and really were the ones that prevented the use of European rail cars. Would you say that's accurate?

[electricron]

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

Gotcha, thanks. Once those hurdles have been cleared successfully a number times by a group like Stadler does that create a precedent whereby other groups can essentially follow the same process and easily get approved?

Also, from my understanding, the crush standards were by far the most onerous regulations and really were the ones that prevented the use of European rail cars. Would you say that's accurate?

Yes and no. The crush standards vary at different points on a rail car; couplers, end frame, corner posts, etc. More than one data point was involved that prevented use of EU rail cars in the past, although many points could and did get exemptions of one type or another.

[Pedestrian]

The present passenger system:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...graphics-story

[CastleScott]

^ Well it will be interesting to watch as the new cars roll out of the plant here (its just a 20 minute drive from my home), I'll try and get some pics but some of the sets leave at night and plus the Siemens plant's fence is tall and covered which also adds a bit of a challenge.

[Randomguy34]

^ it's quite sad how Indiana used to have so many interurban lines. Although highly unlikely, hopefully one day all the old ROW are converted back to active rail lines throughout the state.

[Busy Bee]

This could change, but as of right now news reports of the radio transmission from the engineer seems to suggest the train entered the curve too fast. Yet another humiliating American train derailment because PTC was not installed. Several dead. What a freaking DISGRACE!


Let's keep all Cascades derailment discussion here please instead of starting new thread.

[202_Cyclist]

Amtrak selects Baltimore Penn Station redevelopment team

By Stuart Chirls
Railway Age
Dec. 15, 2017

"Amtrak has selected Penn Station Partners to negotiate a master development deal for Baltimore Penn Station.

The team is comprised of Beatty Development Group, Armada Hoffler Properties, Cross Street Partners, Gensler, WSP USA, Network Rail Consulting and Mace Group, among others.

“Baltimore Penn Station is the eighth busiest station in our national network and this important step underscores Amtrak’s continued efforts to significantly enhance the station experience and amenities for all travelers,” said Bart Bush, Amtrak Vice President of Real Estate Stations and Facilities..."

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/...tml?channel=54

[Hatman]

Some new information about the single-level cars ordered from Siemens for both Illinois and California, but from behind a paywall of Trains Magazine:

• California has ordered enough equpiment for seven trainsets, including seven cab-cars.
• Illinois has purchased no cab cars, but will run their trains between two Charger locomotives.
• California will run their equipment as semi-perminently coupled trainsets - just as Brightline does - while Illinois has opted to use their cars as individual units so that they can mix and match their consists to match demand.
• Wheelchair lifts will be built into cafe cars - not cab cars - making at least one door per trainset accessible.
• The seating arrangement will be the same as on the BrightLine, with narrower seats and wider isles, allowing wheelchair-users to have full acess to the entire train.

My speculation:
I think California will use all seven of their All-Siemens trainsets on the San Joaquin corridor, and not on the Capitol Corridor or the Surfliners, since those corridors are busier and dwell times are very important for schedule-keeping. There are already two single-level trainsets in use on the San Joaquins, so clearly single-level equipment will not slow down service along that route. This will leave five trainset's worth of bilevel equipment to be redistributed on the Capitol Corridor and Surfliner routes (I'm assuming full replacement of their two comet-car consists), allowing Amtrak to run consists of all-matching equipment again on those routes instead of adding a Superliner into every train, as they currently do.

In Illinois, I would hope that the new equipment is kept separated from the old Hermitage equipment, but I really see no incentive for Amtrak or IDOT to do so. I think it would be really cool to have the equivalent of BrightLine consists zipping along the Lincoln Service (at the same speeds as Brightline!) and have the Hermitage cars and P-42's assigned to slower services, but I realize that would require much more discipline in equipment management that really doesn't benefit Amtrak or IDOT in any real way.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

[Busy Bee]

Hermitage equipment? Ha!

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Hermitage equipment? Ha!

Sigh.

[Busy Bee]

Score

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Hatman

[*]Illinois has purchased no cab cars, but will run their trains between two Charger locomotives.

TBH, this seems like an attempt by IDOT to get that sleek MU look, as Brightline is doing. Why commit two locomotives to each train when a cab car is much, much cheaper? That extra locomotive adds a metric shit ton of extra weight to pull, also...

The answer is because you want it to look like European or Asian high-speed rail, not like a frumpy commuter train.

In Illinois, I would hope that the new equipment is kept separated from the old Hermitage equipment, but I really see no incentive for Amtrak or IDOT to do so.

If they are going for a sleek look, it would be counterproductive to mix in Heritage fleet.

I assume the new cars will go to Hiawatha and Lincoln Service while all other corridors continue to run the Heritage. Maybe Wolverine, too.