Passenger Trains > Amtrak Capacity Issues, Followup to Beech Grove Wreck Status Post

Friends, 

In a prior post, the group was having a discussion about Amtrak capacity asking specifically about the number or cars not in service at Beech Grove, specifically wreck damaged cars. 

Several years ago in Meridian, MS at the Rail Passenger Association national meeting, an Amtrak fleet management nice person made the comment "Contrary to popular opinion Amtrak just Doesn’t have a lot of excess equipment sitting around."  (Paraphrased)

In aggregate I suspect he is correct...but if you thin slice/segment the data into the above categories, I think what we may find is that Amtrak Right now doesn't have excess capacity sitting around in any category except for the Viewliner fleet, and based upon some very useful data posted by JP1822. (Below at the bottom)

The challenge is that all the excess capacity is made up of sleepers/dorms and diners, with no long distance coaches. What follows are broad brush strokes thoughts only (without objective data or numbers) and I'd value anyone's thoughts to help me see it more clearly... 

What we as advocates can actually influence is limited, but there actually may be a couple.  I'll think that through later but would additionally value your thoughts on that.  But different issue.  First frame the issue, then try to influence policy. 

BIG PICTURE: My sense is that Amtrak has 5 equipment problems right now. I think there are ways forward for each in creative ways short term, but this will only be a stop gap for especially the long distance trains.  This may explain why Amtrak is now entertaining both long distance trains for the east and west.  
1) Lack of Superliners for the long distance trains in the west (axle count issues, capacity for California service, but also the fleet has just gotten smaller over the past now nearly 50 years due to wrecks, damage, etc, and the cars require more maintenance as they age)
2) Possible lack of long distance single level long distance coaches in the east. I don't have the numbers on this as to whether there are any of these that can be rebuilt or put back into service.  These are also now getting old and the fleet is shrinking.
3) Lack of short(er) distance equipment for the regional/state supported network (esp with Horizon corrosion issues)
​4) Lack of capacity for Acela, compounded by trainsets aging out, operational delays, and the Avila delays which was supposed to be the fix.5) Reliability issues with locomotive fleet (whether through maintenance/aging, or teething problems with the Chargers)

ANALYSIS: 

1) The aging and shrinking Superliner fleet is the hardest problem to address...the new Western long distance equipment optimistically is 10 years out, so this is where to Focus the most.  
2) Long distance single level coaches for the eastern trains is the Amfleet II fleet, and I think this is why Amtrak is looking at a simultaneous proposal to build process for the Eastern LD trains too.  
3) Short distance capacity with be addressed when the new Aeiro trainsets start to come on line, and should provide a lot of excess Amfleet equipment over the next. 
4) The Acela capacity will only be addressed by the new Avila train sets.  They will eventually come on line. I don't see any interest in keeping that equipment for any reason, so suspect they will all be scrapped. 
5) The locomotive fleet reliability issues are just what they are.  I suspect over the long haul, Amtrak will figure out the Chargers.  Most new equipment has teething problems, to include locomotives. Obviously Amtrak needs to improve this.  

ANALYSIS: Other than the reliability issues with locomotives, besides the Superliner replacement, most of the other issues will be addressed by the Avila and Aeiro trains coming on line. Thus most of the Short term strategy is focused on providing stopgap measures for the Superliner fleet to address capacity. 

SHORT TERM STRATEGY: 

1) Pursue Superliner and single level long distance equipment orders ASAP (supposedly this is happening, and this is the long term fix, but until then the following.  * Based upon Lackawanna484's thoughtful comment I will add "Don't reinvent the wheel"...there are good COTS options out there.  Instead of reinventing them, modify to meet specific needs.  I wonder for example if the new LD single level equipment could do just that.  The equipment that Siemens produces for Brightline is super. The Midwest cars appear to be the same. (The seats were not a Siemens or Amtrak issue, that is what the contract specified...that's on the Midwest guys.  I appreciate the order, but the seats are the weak spot). 
2) Develop a fix for the locomotive reliability issues. While Amtrak in theory may have enough locomotives, the reliability issues causes both operational issues, but also means you need to have more locomotives in reserve, or add an additional one to a consist in case one fails mid route. Some teething issues (with Chargers) are to be expected...most new engines have equipment issues.  Because the Chargers seem to have much better reliability in Brightline service (I get that it is Florida and not freezing winter weather) I suspect at least a significant part of the problems are tied to the Amtrak maintenance strategy.  There are several options, and I'm not the expert so defer to folks who know more, to include : either a) Contract out maintenance by a third party and have pay for performance built in b) Purchase a maintenance contract from Siemens (not sure if this is possible now they are out the gate, but money talks c) Fundamentally change Amtrak maintenance strategy towards enhanced reliability (again not the expert, but there are maintenance models that deliver more reliability ... the Europeans for example are far more into scheduled preventive maintenance, and years ago Amtrak brought in guys from outside (I met a retired Navy guy who was brought in to it turns out very successfully manage some part of the fleet based upon a preventive and proactive model that works.  The last option d) is some combination of hope or doing more of what isn't working and expecting a different outcome.  That is a non-starter.  So I'd suggest one of the first three. 
3) IF (a big if) there are any Superliners that can be rebuilt of course do that first.
4) Reclaim any Superliners from other services (I am not sure what the fix is for axle count issues on CN, and I suspect the California leases are not a short term fix).
5) Get the Viewliner equipment back into service ASAP starting with Viewliner II.  Rebuilding/updating the Viewliner I equipment is important of course...it looks really ratty, but that is not a capacity issue...however they should be rebuilt if possible to be the same as Viewliner II so that everyone gets the same nicer ride...I'm tired personal of sleeping next to the toilet.  Done this for now almost 30 years on the Viewliner, especially since 19/20 are the trains I ride most). 
6) Shift another long distance Superliner train (or two if needed) to a single level consist.  The logical one would be 58/59 first, but I think that only gets you 3x7 car trainsets. (21 cars...maybe that's enough?)  To preserve the coach seating for 3 Superliners would require 4 Amfleet coaches per train set, or 12 total.  The lack of LD Amfleet II coaches is a potentially significant capacity issue.
7) Rebuild some Amfleet 1 single level equipment to Amfleet II compatible long distance equipment.  (Can be done either as the Aiero equipment comes on line whenever, which sucks, or shifting a few coaches out of the NEC pool, which also sucks.  If even a few of the Horizon cars can come back on line, this will be much easier as neither of the other options is good.). Obviously the rebuild to Amfleet II compatible will take mods...some easy (seat spacing and replacement) some more complex (modify restrooms, etc).  The slit windows of course won't be great, but such is life.
8) Avila is the short medium and long term fix to Acela capacity problems.  Other than that I've got nothing for you. 

LIMITATIONS: 

1) None of these ideas actually allow the fleet size to grow, they only preserve status quo and maintain existing service. 
2) Status quo has no national capacity for new routes or new service models (which may or may not be run by Amtrak)
3) Most of these strategies address capacity issues, not maintenance for amenity or trip quality issues.  While related, and certainly new equipment will improve the passenger experience, the existing equipment (especially Superliner sleepers and coach bathrooms, Viewliner I equipment) is really starting to look dated and grungy.  Fix those issues, but those are not capacity issues. 

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS: 

1) Keep the Amfleet I equipment fleet, at least the best of it, intact. Don't sell it or scrap it.  
2) Use that additional fleet as a national capacity which can be used to provide a repository of equipment that can be rapidly rebuilt to allow for new routes.  This lowers the bar of entry for all new route expansion, whether Amtrak or other service provider.  We do not have that anymore.
3) This repository could be used to provide a fleet capacity for a new operator in new service delivery models.  When Amtrak showed up, there was a lot of excess capacity out there that Amtrak didn't take over. Some of this was used to start new service delivery models for scrappy and innovative startups.  Autotrain was the best example...and while in the end it failed as a stand alone business due to a variety of reasons, to include capitalization, a misdirected expansion and a wreck, it provided a new service model that Amtrak took over a year later and that has been a winner for the last 45 years now.  Another example north of the border was the Rocky Mountaineer, which took the cast off equipment from Via and the historical Canadian route east to Banff, and grew into the leisure experiential cruise train model, now exported to the US.  There were other examples such as the Reno Fun Train and other experiments that may have enjoyed short term success, but didn't succeed as well as the Auto Train or Rocky Mountaineer, arguably the two most successful and sustaining services.  
4) Because maintaining the Amfleet fleet intact is a national level priority that transcends just Amtrak fleet requirements, this may be a place that could be a supplemental Federal investment in passenger rail as a line item away from the Amtrak budget.  Once you lose the Amfleet fleet, its gone.  
5) When the Superliner fleet replacement and single level fleet replacement fleet is finally coming on line, we can make the same argument about not scrapping that equipment, but rather rebuilding it for surge capacity (again in the 1970s Amtrak had the capacity to run new routes and have second sections of trains when demand was high) or to augment the replacement fleet with extra capacity beyond the new cars.  
6) For any new equipment order, develop options like the Chargers and Aiero, good!) but also once the initial order has been built a small ongoing order (2 cars a month or something like that) that keeps the line open and provides the ability to spin it back up quickly and cheaply. 

OTHER CONSIDERATION: By 2035 one may argue that this equipment is both too old and the design is so dated it doesn't make sense. The Superliner I fleet from the late 1970s was based upon the Santa Fe Highlevel Fleet designed in the 1950s, while the Amfleet I fleet built in the 1970s was based upon the Metroliner design from the 1960s, so I am open to having the argument that it is all just too old. 

Viewliner I Sleeper - Approx 20 are Reserved/Stored/Unassigned**Viewliner II Sleeper - Approx 12 are Reserved/Stored/Unassigned**
Viewliner II Diner - 10 are Reserved/Stored/Unassigned
Viewliner II Dorm/Baggage - 4 are Reserved/Stored/Unassigned (if the Crescent is still operating with them)

**Based on the assumption that the Silver Meteor is operating with three train sets, rather than four based on recent reports (e.g. same day turn at NYC).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/25 11:32 by DocVooDoo.

Reinventing the wheel for each equipment order is a concern. BrightLine coaches have been running since 2017 (?) and still seem fine.

Had Amtrak and the states just ordered 200 of them in 2021, we would not be having this concern.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reinventing the wheel for each equipment order is
> a concern. BrightLine coaches have been running
> since 2017 (?) and still seem fine.
>
> Had Amtrak and the states just ordered 200 of them
> in 2021, we would not be having this concern.
>
> Posted from Android

Completely agree with all. But fundamentally that isn't going to address the capacity issue specifically on the Long Distance Superliner fleet which was what I was trying to address.  With your thoughtful comment I'm going to go back and modify the post as what you say is important. 

submit this to amtk.  You are preaching to the choir here.

Maybe add some color pie charts and a nice cover page and include an invoice for 100K for a study.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/25 11:54 by pdt.

Great analysis! Very little in it which I would take exception to.

The Chargers are problematic. Regardless of what is done to improve their performance, they still will need daily attention. Thus they are not well suited for the Western LTDs.

Nice job but the Charger issiues'll get squared away in the long term, don't bet on it, they canceles The Builder gor 11 days last winter, that tells me they're still Lemons!

Posted from Android

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice job but the Charger issiues'll get squared
> away in the long term, don't bet on it, they
> canceles The Builder gor 11 days last winter, that
> tells me they're still Lemons!
>
> Posted from Android

I can't imagine anyone would feel too comfortable behind two (three?) Chargers in 20 below temps on the High Line.

Here's a modest proposal for Amtrak locomotive issues.

Spend some money to rebuild stored freight locomotives.  Put HEP in them.  Visually modify them to look like FP45s, or (really crazy) look like Alco PAs, the better to spur public interest, as well as giving TO membership something to chase.

If needed, persuade the EPA to dump Tier IV standards for our AmFrankenMotors.  Let them meet lower standards as "good enough" to get reliable power to passenger trains.

The crazy thing is -- the Class Is are having to put their locomotives on the point of Amtrak trains to keep their railroads clear.

Metra has several rebuilt SD70 units in passenger service.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nice job but the Charger issiues'll get squared
> > away in the long term, don't bet on it, they
> > canceles The Builder gor 11 days last winter,
> that
> > tells me they're still Lemons!
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> I can't imagine anyone would feel too comfortable
> behind two (three?) Chargers in 20 below temps on
> the High Line.

And that's why I don't buy the claim they're better than the GEs, until they can hande the cold on 7 and 8, that claim doesn't hold water!

KurtBWNews Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's a modest proposal for Amtrak locomotive issues.
>
> Spend some money to rebuild stored freight locomotives.  Put HEP in them. . .
>
> If needed, persuade the EPA to dump Tier IV standards for our AmFrankenMotors.  Let them meet
> lower standards as "good enough" to get reliable power to passenger trains.

That's about the only thing that would enable a quick fix.  You'll need a lot of heavyweight political support to waive the Tier IV requirement, though.  But it would shut up the "you can't do that" crowd that comes out every time someone suggests Amtrak copy the Metra SD70MACH experiment.  (Which is working quite well, and they look good, too.  A further argument in favor:  every major railroad's mechanical forces know how to fix SD70s.)

What does it take to re-gear a freight loco to run at 80 MPH vs 70 MPH ? 

My solution to the locomotive reliability problem is to use HEP generator cars -- then use off-the-shelf freight locomotives (yes at lower speeds) for power.

-John

illini73 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> KurtBWNews Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here's a modest proposal for Amtrak locomotive
> issues.
> >
> > Spend some money to rebuild stored freight
> locomotives.  Put HEP in them. . .
> >
> > If needed, persuade the EPA to dump Tier IV
> standards for our AmFrankenMotors.  Let them
> meet
> > lower standards as "good enough" to get
> reliable power to passenger trains.
>
> That's about the only thing that would enable a
> quick fix.  You'll need a lot of heavyweight
> political support to waive the Tier IV
> requirement, though.  But it would shut up the
> "you can't do that" crowd that comes out every
> time someone suggests Amtrak copy the Metra
> SD70MACH experiment.  (Which is working quite
> well, and they look good, too.  A further
> argument in favor:  every major railroad's
> mechanical forces know how to fix SD70s.)

There is literally nothing stopping Amtrak from ordering SD70MACH locomotives.

DutchDragon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> illini73 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > KurtBWNews Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Here's a modest proposal for Amtrak
> locomotive
> > issues.
> > >
> > > Spend some money to rebuild stored freight
> > locomotives.  Put HEP in them. . .
> > >
> > > If needed, persuade the EPA to dump Tier IV
> > standards for our AmFrankenMotors.  Let them
> > meet
> > > lower standards as "good enough" to get
> > reliable power to passenger trains.
> >
> > That's about the only thing that would enable a
> > quick fix.  You'll need a lot of heavyweight
> > political support to waive the Tier IV
> > requirement, though.  But it would shut up the
> > "you can't do that" crowd that comes out every
> > time someone suggests Amtrak copy the Metra
> > SD70MACH experiment.  (Which is working quite
> > well, and they look good, too.  A further
> > argument in favor:  every major railroad's
> > mechanical forces know how to fix SD70s.)
>
> There is literally nothing stopping Amtrak from
> ordering SD70MACH locomotives.

Except federal laws, regulations and policies.

Haven't those Chargers been "in service" for two or three years now?  How long does "teething" take?

longliveSP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Except federal laws, regulations and policies.

Amtrak's recently acquired, rebuilt GP38-3 units have been used in passenger service on the Downeaster.

I assume a Federal grant for a specific purchase of engines like  the Charger would have the Tier 4 requirement, but Amtrak should be able to find a way to get the SD70MACH locomotives especially if it does it through its operating funds.

Right now, such an acquisition is a matter of survival.

Superliner solution.
Cancel some very unprofitable long distance services. Sunset.
Replace Superliner with single level cars. Texas Eagle. 

Amtrak wants the Sunset to go seven days a week but the question is when that will happen. It's probably going to happen when Amtrak has the appropriate amount of rolling stock to cover the daily Sunset Limited service. 

GN1969 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Superliner solution.
> Cancel some very unprofitable long distance
> services. Sunset.
> Replace Superliner with single level cars. Texas
> Eagle. 

I'd extend the Crescent to Houston, making it a two night train. That should help with sleeping cars load factors. The whole Texas Eagle / Sunset situation needs a fresh look as you suggest.