Passenger Trains > Acela II's

Anyone have any inside scoop as to when Amtrak will announce a date for the start of Acela II's?  We'll be in DC next month and are hoping to ride one up to NYC.  

Don't hold your breath. It could be by Christmas, but I am not sure which year. :-)

Not anytime soon.

How long have the Acela II's been waiting to be placed in service-?  What are the issues-?

cozephyr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How long have the Acela II's been waiting to be
> placed in service-?  What are the issues-?

The trains are too high tech and are having trouble managing the antiquated infrastructuur on the NEC. This is a very common problem in Europe with new trains.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/25 06:12 by DutchDragon.

The fact that AmManagement has kept maximum secrecy on the
Acela-2 problem for 4 years--tells me they are hiding something terrible.

Nobody keeps silent for 4 years about  keeping railroad equipment out of service.

Google says each Acela-2 trainset cost $800 Million--total cost of the contract is $1.2 Bullion.

How can AmManagement get away with keeping silent about spending $1.2 Billion--and not
using it for 4 years?--without a word of explanation?
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/25 07:14 by ronald321.

we may know something once qualifying runs for the crews take place.  that happens after qualifying runs (3 round trips per set?)  on the train sets takes place.

so, not anytime too soon.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Google says each Acela-2 trainset cost $800
> Million--total cost of the contract is $1.2
> Bullion.
>
>  

The total contract value with Alstom was $2 billion for the trainsets and 15 years of support and spare parts. With 28 sets ordered, the cost per set is about $71.5 million.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The fact that AmManagement has kept maximum
> secrecy on the
> Acela-2 problem for 4 years--tells me they are
> hiding something terrible.
>
> Nobody keeps silent for 4 years about  keeping
> railroad equipment out of service.
>
> Google says each Acela-2 trainset cost $800
> Million--total cost of the contract is $1.2
> Bullion.
>
> How can AmManagement get away with keeping silent
> about spending $1.2 Billion--and not
> using it for 4 years?--without a word of
> explanation?
>  

My grandmother had a saying “no news is no good news “.

Posted from iPhone



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/25 08:13 by Jonny_Chi.

prr60

I can't vouch for Google numbers -- I can only assume they are correct.

Where are you getting your numbers?

Regarding your number that the total cost is $2B -- Google also reports that  in
August, 2016, Amtrak borrowed $2.4 Bullion from the DOT to purchase his equipment

This makes the situation worse -- 9 years oi silence, without a word of explanation.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The fact that AmManagement has kept maximum
> secrecy on the
> Acela-2 problem for 4 years--tells me they are
> hiding something terrible.
>
> Nobody keeps silent for 4 years about  keeping
> railroad equipment out of service.
>
> Google says each Acela-2 trainset cost $800
> Million--total cost of the contract is $1.2
> Bullion.
>
> How can AmManagement get away with keeping silent
> about spending $1.2 Billion--and not
> using it for 4 years?--without a word of
> explanation?
>  

THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING!

You know, sometimes it's not the infufferable igorance you see with some TO posters, but the pride shown in not taking 10 minutes to learn or research any particular issue.  Has Amtrak been less than super communicative about the issues surrounding the deployment of the Acela II fleet?  Most assuredly!  But there is ample evidence out there about why the fleet has been delayed.  Amtrak's own OIG report in 2023 (attached) explained issues with procurement, as well as problems encountered with testing.  The latest news was that one or more sets would see service this "spring".  That remains to be seen, but I would hope that  a site that claims to include knowledgeable fans and railoaders alike would be useful and informative for the $ we pay, 

https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-A-2023-013%20%28REDACTED%29_v2.pdf
 

caprr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know, sometimes it's not the infufferable
> igorance you see with some TO posters, but the
> pride shown in not taking 10 minutes to learn or
> research any particular issue.  Has Amtrak been
> less than super communicative about the issues
> surrounding the deployment of the Acela II
> fleet?  Most assuredly!  But there is ample
> evidence out there about why the fleet has been
> delayed.  Amtrak's own OIG report in 2023
> (attached) explained issues with procurement, as
> well as problems encountered with testing.  The
> latest news was that one or more sets would see
> service this "spring".  That remains to be seen,
> but I would hope that  a site that claims to
> include knowledgeable fans and railoaders alike
> would be useful and informative for the $ we
> pay, 
>
> https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/
> OIG-A-2023-013%20%28REDACTED%29_v2.pdf
>  

Yea, that is certainly not "silence" or "9 years of not saying anything".   

caprr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know, sometimes it's not the infufferable
> igorance you see with some TO posters, but the
> pride shown in not taking 10 minutes to learn or
> research any particular issue.  Has Amtrak been
> less than super communicative about the issues
> surrounding the deployment of the Acela II
> fleet?  Most assuredly!  But there is ample
> evidence out there about why the fleet has been
> delayed.  Amtrak's own OIG report in 2023
> (attached) explained issues with procurement, as
> well as problems encountered with testing.  The
> latest news was that one or more sets would see
> service this "spring".  That remains to be seen,
> but I would hope that  a site that claims to
> include knowledgeable fans and railoaders alike
> would be useful and informative for the $ we
> pay, 
>
> https://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/
> OIG-A-2023-013%20%28REDACTED%29_v2.pdf

Please, do not confuse the conspiracy theorists here on TO with facts.

I know a few "usual suspects" on here love to
critize and call their fellow fans names (quite often, directed at me).

I consider them very naive folks, who think they have all the
answers--but, really don't know any more than the rest of us,
as to why Acela-2's are 4 years late.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/25 14:32 by ronald321.

Considering that the essential battle seems to be that the track and overhead don't meet the standards set in the specifications, and the trains reportedly can't handle the infrastructure irregularities and have had to be modified after first testing, the fact that this hasn't completely disintigrated into  a complete contractual and  legal breakdown is commendable.  Somehow they are still getting it done.

I'm just not a big fan of articulated trains, we got over that after the Zephyr, and unless you have a maintenance contract like the Talgos, wonder how you keep up reliability in the US environment of 'fix it when it breaks', the Horizon cars being the latest casualty.

AND, you have the FRA a whole lot more involved in the certification process than most people recognize.   It's a process.

I was so disgusted by the 2017 Washington wreck, because in order to qualify for the federal funding grant to the DOT, they had to be running by a certain date.   And they rushed it.   NTSB didn't really dwell on that (biting the hand that feeds you), but it's very real.  They were under HEAVY pressure to put the equipment and bypass into service by a specific hard date.  And that did not go well.  So given the alternative, I don't mind them getting this right.  We can't afford wrong.   The inability to extend the grant date when it just wasn't ready was a contributing factor in my opinion.

 

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> prr60
>
> I can't vouch for Google numbers -- I can only
> assume they are correct.
>
> Where are you getting your numbers?
>
> Regarding your number that the total cost is $2B
> -- Google also reports that  in
> August, 2016, Amtrak borrowed $2.4 Bullion from
> the DOT to purchase his equipment
>
> This makes the situation worse -- 9 years oi
> silence, without a word of explanation.

Amtrak borrowed $2.4 billion for the high speed rail upgrades - equipment and other infrastructure upgrades like maintenance facilities. Of that, $2 billion is the Alstom contract - trains, parts, support. 

I assume you typo'd the $800 million per trainset. With 28 sets, $800 million each would be $22.4 billion total. That actual cost per set is per set is $71.4 million.

Source



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/25 17:53 by prr60.

prr60

Yes, that was a typo.  Google said each set cost $80M--not $800M
(I should have caught that--good God, they should cost $800M)

Also, these are 2016 dollars.  I hate to think what inflation has done to these costs.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know a few "usual suspects" on here love to
> critize and call their fellow fans names (quite
> often, directed at me).
>
> I consider them very naive folks, 


Wouldn't calling someone naive also be calling "their fellow fans names"?

Typhoon

As usual--you're playing "Gotcha!" with me.

I don't CALL my fellow fans naive--but I consider some to be exactly this.

Some guys hate it when I criticize AmManagement, or Elon Musk, or Frt. Railroads.
When they look at Amtrak---they see only Blue Skys overhead.  I CONSIDER this naive.

You have called me names in the past--but, I can't remember them at the moment.



 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/25 12:30 by ronald321.