Passenger Trains > new equipment for Pacific NW does not mean more trains

At least not yet:

http://crosscut.com/2011/11/11/transportation/21548/More-trains-for-NW-may-mean-no-more-service/

I was amazed to read that the two new Talgo's will be delivered "next June".

As I remember, these trains were caught up in the "return the money" fiasco in Wisconsin, and the new plant in Milwaukee just opened recently (?). Can they build two train sets in a year and a half? Just wondering.

Also, it doesn't really surprise me that these new train sets will just sit around in the weeds and "act as spares" as the WSDOT states in the article. Amtrak did the same thing with 7 sets of Acela equipment being held out of service as a "back up pool" for several years. I remember John McCain saying at the time, that if the Military utilized equipment in this fashion, someone would be court marshaled.

Maybe this won't happen to the Talgo's. Maybe Illinois or Wisconsin will offer to use them for Chicago-Milwaukee or Chicago-St.Louis. We can only hope.

Joe

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe this won't happen to the Talgo's. Maybe
> Illinois or Wisconsin will offer to use them for
> Chicago-Milwaukee or Chicago-St.Louis. We can
> only hope.

If I recall, Chicago-Milwaukee is getting two Talgo sets to cover that service and the states involved with the other Chicago corridors have received grants for new equipment. Maybe if we can find a sugar daddy that will fund a doubling of service ....

I don't think the article was very well researched or written. The December 2008 Middle Range Plan by the Washington State Department of Transportation discusses how the two additional trainsets will be used. The new trainsets will be 14 cars, whereas the existing trainsets are 12 cars. The plan is to replace one of the existing trainsets with one of the new ones. Then the older set can be taken apart to add two additional cars to each of the other older sets, thereby increasing seating capacity without adding trips to the schedule. The other set will not be "sitting in the weeds," since it will be needed as each of the older sets goes through major overhaul. By the time that is completed, hopefully the Point Defiance bypass in Tacoma will be completed, eliminating a major bottleneck. It is my understanding that BNSF will not allow additional round trips until that is done.

Wow.!! Facts. Thanks.

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...it doesn't really surprise me that these new train sets will just sit around in the weeds and "act as spares" as the WSDOT states in the
> article. Amtrak did the same thing with 7 sets of Acela equipment being held out of service as a "back up pool" for several years. I remember John
> McCain saying at the time, that if the Military utilized equipment in this fashion, someone would be court martialed.

============================================================================

Drifting off topic a bit, about the Acela situation mentioned by FloridaJoe:

Originally the utilization of the Acela sets was appalling. Amtrak and Bombardier, jointly involved in Acela maintenance, couldn't do anything
about it. Finally Amtrak decided to look outside for a solution. It came from...THE MILITARY.

Amtrak got the US Navy expert in Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) to come aboard. Working with Chief Operating Officer Bill Crosbie, he
implemented RCM for Acela with plans to expand it to the rest of the system. It worked wonders for Acela and satisfied the FRA, which had
been critical about the issue; Acela trainset availability increased from fourteen to sixteen sets running every day. In one year, Acela tilt-system
delays, which were a major cause of trouble, declined, with the monthly average going from 160 to under 40. Average distance between tilt
system failures TRIPLED. Acela train annulments declined by over 2/3; an estimated 72 annulments were avoided in the first fifteen months that
RCM was in effect on Acela.

RCM even started to make inroads on the poor state of affairs with the diesel locomotive fleet based in Chicago.

That was then...this is now:

Boardman fired Crosbie. For a short time this resulted in one less level of management at Amtrak as Crosbie's VPs reported directly to Boardman but
that couldn't last (Boardman, an administrator, understandably does not have a grasp of technical and operational issues), so a new VP position in
between Boardman and the rest of the VPs was created and filled.

That Reliability Centered Maintenance expert from the US Navy? His program has been terminated and he will probably be leaving, soon.

Time to call John McCain?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/11 17:20 by GenePoon.

While greater train frequency, Portland - Seattle, is a great goal. Adding capacity to the existing
trainsets is really needed and will have immediate payoffs. Good purchase in my opinion. Arlen

sactobob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think the article was very well researched
> or written. The December 2008 Middle Range Plan
> by the Washington State Department of
> Transportation discusses how the two additional
> trainsets will be used. The new trainsets will
> be 14 cars, whereas the existing trainsets are 12
> cars. The plan is to replace one of the existing
> trainsets with one of the new ones. Then the
> older set can be taken apart to add two additional
> cars to each of the other older sets, thereby
> increasing seating capacity without adding trips
> to the schedule. The other set will not be
> "sitting in the weeds," since it will be needed as
> each of the older sets goes through major
> overhaul. By the time that is completed,
> hopefully the Point Defiance bypass in Tacoma will
> be completed, eliminating a major bottleneck. It
> is my understanding that BNSF will not allow
> additional round trips until that is done.

This is all correct and the last I was told, this is still the current plan, scheduled for August/September 2012. Also, a few (4) of the P40/P42 fleet will become a "permanent" fixture to the Cascades as to maintain time keeping, they will need to use 2 locomotives instead of the single locomotive that is the current SOP. September 2012 - September 2013 is the tentative date for the F59PHI's to go through their rebuild program at Progress Rail, which will be equipped with the newer 710ECO engines and other electronic upgrades.

I don't foresee Union Pacific allowing a trial/pilot Seattle - Portland - Boise passenger train anytime soon. The improvements on the line, while would benefit the Union Pacific greatly, would not be a cost effective route to take. As much as I would love to have the service, even if it was just Portland - Boise, the time it would take since Union Pacific will not allow the increased speed that benefit the Talgo, again, would be pointless.

Seattle - Pasco via Yakima (Stampede Pass) is also not a viable route because of the amount of of work needed to bring it up to a suitable "comfort" level. Talgo's are quite harsh on jointed rail (Anyone that has ridden Seattle to Vancouver BC can attest to this) In short, 70+ miles of CWR and CTC/PTC along the entire ROW (currently has signal islands at sidings) and I am sure BNSF would want the tunnel lowered along with other improvements.

Seattle - Vancouver BC is also in the same "boat" as above, however the improvements are looking at over a billion dollars, which 80% of the improvements on the Canadian side of the border.

Seattle - Spokane seems to be the most realistic "new" train that would require the least amount of overhead (read, major improvements before said train could be ran), this of course can change as BNSF's freight traffic increases as the economy improves.

Regardless of how it looks, a heavy investment will have to be made and that is something Washington, Oregon, or Idaho states can afford to lay down, even with the benefits of the freight/port improvements, without some sort of money, there isn't much that can be done at this time.