First rail car specs approved for High-Speed Rail Initiative

Business Clarksville ^ | Wednesday, September 01, 2010

[Willie Green]

“This clears the tracks and provides strong direction so Amtrak
and states can move forward with modern bi-level equipment
designed with updated passenger comfort, conveniences, and
safety features to meet the ever-increasing demand for more rail service.”

— Amtrak President and CEO Joseph Boardman.

Washington, DC: The first specifications for bi-level coach, dining, baggage, and business class rail cars to be constructed under the government’s High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program have been approved. At its Executive Board meeting today in Washington, DC, the Next Generation Equipment Committee gave the green light to specifications for a bi-level passenger rail car that can be used up to speeds of 125 mph. Bi-level cars have room for passengers on two levels.

“This decision,” said the Committee’s Chairman Bill Bronte, rail director for the California DOT, “is an important first step towards creating a pipeline of passenger rail equipment that will be needed over the coming decades. By providing a generic specification for rail equipment, the Committee is creating a level playing field for U.S. manufacturers and creating a strong incentive for the expansion of the U.S. rail equipment manufacturing industry.” California currently operates earlier models of the bi-level car on three intercity rail corridors in the state.

U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said of today’s milestone, “As part of the Obama Administration’s focus on maximizing manufacturing opportunities, these first-ever uniform standards will provide an unprecedented opportunity for manufacturers in the U.S. – from rails to wheel bearings, to final assembly – to build a strong, stable manufacturing base.”

“This clears the tracks and provides strong direction so Amtrak and states can move forward with modern bi-level equipment designed with updated passenger comfort, conveniences, and safety features to meet the ever-increasing demand for more rail service,” said Amtrak President and CEO Joseph Boardman.

The Committee was established by Congress in January to “design, develop specifications for, and procure standardized next-generation corridor rail equipment.” Any state using federal funds for its high-speed and intercity passenger rail program must use equipment that meets these specifications.

The specifications approved today were recommended by the Technical Subcommittee of the full Committee, which included many representatives of rail equipment manufacturers. Members of the Executive Board include 11 state departments of transportation, the Federal Railroad Administration, and Amtrak. AASHTO is acting as the secretariat for the Committee on behalf of the state DOTs. By law, the Committee is a collaboration of states, the Federal Railroad Administration, Amtrak, rail equipment manufacturers, and others in the rail industry.

The Committee began its work in January and set as its first-year objectives completing specifications for a bi-level car, a single-level car, and a diesel-electric locomotive, all qualified for speeds up to 125 mph. The Committee will next address specifications for higher-speed equipment, and the development of a procurement strategy to be used by the states and Amtrak that will link the demand and supply. This would guarantee that equipment is available at the best possible price and that the equipment manufacturing industry will have the dependable market to justify investment for long-term production.

The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) provided $8 billion in funding for high-speed and intercity passenger rail. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) authorized $1.9 billion over five years for grants to states and required that states develop a comprehensive rail plan for both passengers and freight. It also required the FRA administrator to develop a long-range national rail plan. Additionally, federal funding in both FY 2009 ($2.9 billion) and FY2010 ($2.5 billion) was allocated for high-speed and intercity passenger rail programs.

The final specifications and additional information on the Next Generation Equipment Committee
(also referred to as the Section 305 Committee from the PRIIA legislation) can be found at
http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/Section305Committee.aspx.

For more information on the High-Speed Rail program, go to http://www.highspeed-rail.org.

[ILS21R]

Speaking of trains, did you hear about that nutcase at the Discovery Channel Building?

[Dem Guard]

And here it is!

[DuncanWaring]

The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) provided $8 billion ... The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) authorized $1.9 billion ... Additionally, federal funding in both FY 2009 ($2.9 billion) and FY2010 ($2.5 billion)

Oh, goody.

Another $15.3 billion extorted from the American taxpayers and their great-grandchildren.

[Redleg Duke]

This will allow the transport of twice as much empy volume!

[Redleg Duke]

That is “empty” volume.

[GonzoGOP]

these first-ever uniform standards will provide an unprecedented opportunity for manufacturers in the U.S.

It the fact that the manufacturers are US based and owned part of the law, or is that just a throw away line. If we are going to spend the taxpayers money I don't want to see it going to China.

[WOBBLY BOB]

"last train to brokesville"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up1GujDyeJY

[NonValueAdded]

reinventing the wheel? what was wrong with current specs for other high-speed rail systems? can’t they spell C-O-T-S?

[Wuli]

Since the government is involved, you can be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN of one thing and one thing alone:

that the government mandated standard will mean passenger rail cars that will be unnecessarily more costly to manufacture.

A second result of the government imposed rail car standards will be that behind the scenes dealings will have made sure that certain elements of the standard were included because they favored certain rail car manufacturers.

[Mr. Lucky]

Not only has Congress appropriated the money, they’ve apparently repealed the laws of physics if they think they’re going to build bi-level “high speed” rail cars.

[N. Theknow]

Not only has Congress appropriated the money, they’ve apparently repealed the laws of physics if they think they’re going to build bi-level “high speed” rail cars.

Their idea of high speed is to build these cars for 125MPH.

Which is 15MPH faster than what my Grandfather used to run his steam loco in the '30's and his diesel loco in the '40's and '50's.

[Dem Guard]

Thanks WB. I haven’t seen that before! :-)

[Dead Eye Lane]

Lol!

[GonzoGOP]

Not only has Congress appropriated the money, they’ve apparently repealed the laws of physics if they think they’re going to build bi-level “high speed” rail cars.

Actually a French TGV-Duplex holds the record for high speed rail at 574.8 km/h.

Getting them to go fast isn't the problem. Getting them to be affordable is.

[Mr. Lucky]

I think you’ll find the TGV train setting the record didn’t have duplex cars in its consist. The French cars are not high level; they still have to fit under the catenary and are more like conventional cars only with the passengers really crammed in. The US cars are high level and won’t fit under catenary.

[GonzoGOP]

I think you’ll find the TGV train setting the record didn’t have duplex cars in its consist

Well here is a picture of the train setting the record. And it is a duplex.


And as for American multi level trains not fitting under catenary the former IC electric lines on METRA do it every day. They may have to raise the wire on the East coast lines to operate them, but I would think that the limit would be tunnels and stations rather than the wire itself.

[Mr. Lucky]

How much higher is the duplex car than the conventional coach? The “gallery cars” used in Chicago are hardly comparable to the cars Amtrak uses which, don’t fit under the catenary.

[Mr. Lucky]

Sorry about #18, I hit post before I was finished.

To raise the catenary in tunnels would seem to be a wholly unwarranted waste of money.

In any event, Amtrak's bi-level cars have a high center of gravity. They are essentially modernized versions of the old Santa Fe high level cars from the El Capitan (some of their cars are he old Santa Fe cars as I recall).

[Grizzled Bear]

Be aware that when you disagree with Willie, he will resort to personal insults and verbal abuse. This is because Willie lacks any substantial rebuttal; therefore he rotates five basic arguments.

1 - Race Card. If you don’t agree with his imbecile AMTRAK boondoggles you’re an antiurban racist.

2 - “Shut up, Noob!” I’ve seen him use this within the last four months against a FReeper with a 2003 sign up date.

3 - “I’ve posted more articles than you!” This is reminiscent of the elephant arguing it is more intelligent than the dolphin because it produces a higher volume of excrement. To be fair, Willie certainly posts a lot of crap.

4 - The “Teresa Heinz Kerry.” When John Kerry ran for the presidency, Teresa argued that if you disagreed with her husband’s health care plan you were “stupid.” Similarly, Willie says you’re stupid if you don’t like railroad boondoggles.

5 - Baloney. Oddly enough, this is the closest thing Willie has to a coherent argument.

[Grizzled Bear]

Well here is a picture of the train setting the record. And it is a duplex.

Your "Train" is a single car. Do you have a picture of five or more cars reaching and maintaining the same speed?

[GonzoGOP]

The French cars appear to be similar to the METRA cars, but with a lower level sunk between the articulated trucks rather than perched above the main level as in the Chicago cars. That keeps the CG very low and doesn't add as much to the height of the car.

To raise the catenary in tunnels would seem to be a wholly unwarranted waste of money.

Like I said in my first post it is not a problem of making them go fast, it is a matter of making it affordable. High speed passenger rail is rarely if ever fails for engineering reasons. It is much harder to justify from an accounting standpoint.

[Grizzled Bear]

High speed passenger rail is rarely if ever fails for engineering reasons. It is much harder to justify from an accounting standpoint.

That's why the feds gotta rape the taxpayers.

[Mr. Lucky]

The French cars sound a little like the cars built by Edward G. Budd for the Pennsylvania's Keystone back in the '50s. They were bi-level not because an "upstairs" was added as on the Amtrak cars, but because the center of the car was dropped to just above track level. I never rode on one, but apparently they were stable at high speeds, just not popular with passengers.

[riri]

These things infuriate me.

Our lifestyle does not comport with this type of transportation.Yes, in Europe where the average workday is four hours for what probably averages three days a week, they have the time to mess around with trains. Not so much with American way of life.

I lived in Stockholm last year and relied on public transportation. Many times I had to take a bus to get to the train to take another bus to get closer to where I was going. Not only was it demeaning, it was a huge PITA and time drain. But I wasn't working so I had the time and patience to mess with it. I can't even imagine it with my American lifestyle, a lifestyle I LOVE btw.