Passenger Trains > Transition Cars For Amtrak

if the freight railroads are investing in ARROW wind deflectors for their stack trains maybe Amtrak should be looking into transition cars for better fuel conservation ...

Santa Fe had transition cars on El Capitan...

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

MojaveBill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Santa Fe had transition cars on El Capitan...

yes they did ... that's what made me think of it ...

The transition cars for the Sanata Fe Hi-levels  was basically shrouding on one end of a baggage car. Now that baggage cars flow all over the country, I do not see them doing that. Fuels is not a big portion of operating budegt anyway.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The transition cars for the Sanata Fe Hi-levels 
> was basically shrouding on one end of a baggage
> car. Now that baggage cars flow all over the
> country, I do not see them doing that. Fuels is
> not a big portion of operating budegt anyway.

for a company that supposedly wants to penny pinch on everything little thing fuel conservation should be priority portion of their budget ... any cars so outfitted would just be tagged to any superliner consists 

Fuel expenses are a huge portion of Amtrak's costs.  At Albuquerque, the Eastbound and Westbound Southwest Chiefs are fueled by a contract tank truck.  The driver estimates they put 1500 to 2000 gallons on each train between the two engines.  At $3.00 per gallon (estimated delivery price), that's at least $10,000 a day!  The trains are also fueled at Kansas City, and of course, at origin and destination Chicago/Los Angeles.  Would it be safe to assume that the fuel costs on trains 3 & 4 exceed $25,000 per day?  That probably exceeds the train and engine crew costs ( conductor, assistant conductor, engineer and asst. engineer).  If the average caoch fare is $180.00 per person, it takes 138 passengers to pay for just the fuel.  When one thinks of this in these terms, it looks grim, no?

TIOGA PASS

Norman Orfall
Helendale, CA
TIOGA PASS, a private railcar

< Fuel expenses are a huge portion of Amtrak's costs. >

Your back of the napkin analysis does not hold up very well to the facts stated in the 2014 Annual Report page 25.
8.47% (363/4284) for Fuel, power, and utilities does not fit my definition of "huge".

Total Operating Expenses (in millions) Year Ended September 30, 2014

• Salaries, wages, and benefits $ 2,105.8 
• Train operations 223.9
• Fuel, power, and utilities 363.0 
• Materials 203.2 
• Facility, communication, and office-related 190.6 
• Advertising and sales 96.4
• Casualty and other claims 58.7 
• Depreciation and amortization 759.0
• Other 416.2 Indirect cost capitalized to property and equipment (133.2)
• Total operating expenses $ 4,283.6 

Do some cost/benefit analysis on retrofitting a bunch of baggage cars to cut drag forces, then add back some inefficiency to restrict them from most East Coast train. Unlikely to be worth it.   



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/15/16 16:24 by joemvcnj.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The transition cars for the Sanata Fe Hi-levels 
> was basically shrouding on one end of a baggage
> car. Now that baggage cars flow all over the
> country, I do not see them doing that. Fuels is
> not a big portion of operating budegt anyway.

NOT a baggage car. The transition cars used on the El Capitan were Baggage-Dorms.

I suppose it is all a matter of perspective.  After all, if the fuel for one transcon train amounts to over nine million dollars a year, I suppose some might consider that a lot of money.  I do.  If I recall correctly, the Southwest Chief's annual revenue is about 40 million a year, so 25% of the costs of the train are just for fuel.  I consider that significant.

Norm

Norman Orfall
Helendale, CA
TIOGA PASS, a private railcar

this is all just thinking out loud stuff ... if any mods were to be done to the new viewliner baggaage cars and bag/doem cars wouldn't conform because because their outside profile doesn't match that of the superliner cars ... any transitions cars would have to be new cars that match the superliner cars ..

What if it were a shrouding built into the Superliner style transdorm instead of on a baggage car. Then the bags could remain unchanged and be able to still be used anywhere on the system. Retain maybe 5/8s or so of the upper level, then an angled shrouding (maybe with the stairs inside) to the single level end of the car. You would lose maybe 4-6 bedrooms max in the space allotted, but that's not really that much, especially if the transdorm were to be used as a full revenue car in conjunction with a Viewliner bag-dorm and traditional baggage car. Adds 1 car to each train, but it's not really that much when you think about it. Or skip the bag-dorm and keep the transdorm as a crew car, but have a bedroom or 2 on the lower level while either downsizing or doing away with the crew lounge currently there.

Brody Wyrick
Reno, NV