Compared to 1950s Budd fluted-design coaches, how much less, if any, did Metroliner coaches weigh?

Trains Magazine Passenger
1

I’m assuming the Metroliner coaches did weigh less because they seem to encapsulate less interior room than previous generations of coaches, even if “fluted”. This is coming from someone with good memories of pre-Metroliner varnish and found the Metroliner and its drop-down lamps just a little claustrophobic, also today’s “Amfleet” shell based on Metroliner design. Or maybe I’m just prejudiced.

Also, am I correct to assume that the 1950s Budd coaches (at that time called “lightweight”) were built on the priciple of a rectangle (roof, side, floor, other side), where the Metroliner and its descendant coaches are famously “egg-shaped”? I am disallowing the extra weight from electric works in the cab, since previous Budds had a separate loco: usu. the GG-1.

As to what extent, if any, was the new design for 1960s Metroliner coaches (which I believe Budd also created) advantageous over the 1952 Budd and similar coaches?

– saved weight, therefore fuel?

– lowered center-of-gravity, allowing for higher speeds and (perhaps) thinner sides?

– cheaper to build, allowing for inflation and disallowing R&D costs?

– I’ve also heard that the Metroliner project was insisted on by Lyndon Johnson, thinking the new design would excel over the Japaese Tokkaido HST? Is that partially factual or just plain paranoid?

I’ve already stated my prejudices and may be making wrong assumptions all over the place. But I am anxious to learn mo

2

By the mid 1960’s Rhode Island Senator Claiborne Pell authored legislation for a Northeast Corridor Demonstration project of improvements to passenger train service in that region.

In the 1950’s Robert Young (the financier and later railroad tycoon, not the actor) pushed his way into the industry, as it were, in order to impose reforms on railroading and especially the passenger business. He acquired control over C&O and later the New York Central, and installed a youngish Alfred Perlman as CEO, and had grand plans. Robert Young was an industry outsider to a very insider-promoting and operated business – it is perhaps hard to draw an analogy, but maybe De Lorean making an “ethical sports car” was the automotive equivalent. John De Lorean’s fall from grace was a drug arrest for a desparate scheme to raise cash for his car venture; Robert Young took his own life in the late 1950’s.

Out of the grand plans to straighten out the passenger train deficit that was dragging down NYC came the idea of “corridors” – that trains were not going to compete with jets on long trips, but that trains on short enough “hops” would be cost and time competitive with airlines, especially when factoring in door-to-door times. Senator Pell had in mind using a little bit of federal help to grease the skids, and what better corridor than what was then called Megalopolis – the almost continuous stream of urban centers from Boston through New York, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Washington D.C…

The idea was that the then Pennsylvania and New Haven railroads would operate the trains, but the Federal government would provide the R&D money and starter capital grant for a “demonstration project” to kick start a rennaissance of American passenger travel on a corridor. The three elements of the demonstration were 1) a lightweight turbine-powered train for the curving Shore Line to Boston, 2) a high-speed electric M

3

Thank you, Paul; you answered all of my questions and then some! Terrific narration of events.

I am somewhat comforted that other fellow fanners also believe that a Metroliner coach seat was not in the realm of comfort and space of the 1952 streamliners. And there were (and are) a heck of a lot of people who didn’t care if the train cruised at 85, 90 or 110 mph.

IMHO the Metroliner was the very embodiment of disposable Sixties thinking: that anything new had to be better; and you can’t hinder Progress. And now we are stuck with legions of Amfleets cars on trains that aren’t even allowed to break 80 mph.

Thanks again, al smalling

4

Great post, Paul!

I’d like to add on a bit.

The Metroliner, as bad as the equipment was, was transformative. By the late 1960s, the conventional fleet of coaches was a rotten, rusting mess. You couldn’t count on the trains being clean or the HVAC system working well, or even at all. The early Amtrak “refurbishments” were like putting lipstick on a pig.

The Metroliners were new and, as you pointed out, emulated the icon of the jet age with that airliner shaped body. They looked and felt “modern”. I remember, as a young teen,bragging to friends that the Metroliner was “just like a jet.”

Warts and all, the Metroliners started winning back business travellers, even in an age where the air shuttles were “walk-on, walk-off”. In the Northeast, EVERYBODY knew what a Metroliner was and it kept the notion of intercity rail travel alive in the minds of the public and gave Amtrak an identity. This is no small point.

As unsuccessful as the Metroliner MU equipment was, Amfleet was that successful. Now, the coach traveller could get clean, comfortable surroundings, with seats that worked - with drop-down tables, yet. Amtrak’s Mech. Dept got a fleet of cars they had a chance at maintaining - 492 identical cars that generally were laid out for ease of maintenance. And, compared to the Metroliners, they rode great. (adding the tread braking in the mid 80s to keep the wheel profile from developing a “false flange” really improved the high speed ride)

The 6 car AEM7-hauled “Metroliner Service” trains running over the smooth, newly installed concrete ties and rails in the early 80s completed the turn around of public opinion about trains in the northeast. These trains were so successful that Amtrak managed to really start jacking up the fares.

Were the Amfleet cars perfect? No. But, here they are nearl

5

I can’t speak to any of the technical questions, but as a regular Amtrak customer in the 1970s, I have a couple of observations.

During my school daze I rode overnight in coach on the Coast Starlight between home and a boarding school. That was before Superliners, so I had the joy of riding the inherited streamliner coaches. They were generally quite clean and very comfortable.

In 1976 my mother and I took a trip to the east coast, and we rode the Metroliner from DC to Boston, with stopovers in NYC and Philadelphia. There was much familiar in the Metroliner coaches. The general configuration was the same. The footrests looked and functioned much the same. But the whole train felt cramped. The windows were too small, the armrest in the center felt confining, and the rounded ceiling felt less spacious. My overall impression was that if this was the future of Amtrak, it was going to be an unpleasant one. My first impression of Superliners with their lower ceilings and smaller windows and horrible rest rooms was equally negative.

I’m glad the Metroliners have held up well, and they do look great on the outside. I’ve since gained some appreciation for the Superliner design (except the toilets!). But I must say nothing I’ve ridden in on today’s Amtrak comes close to matching the comfort of the streamline era (a.k.a Heritage) coaches.

6

Hmm? Amfleets operate at 125 mph every day on the NEC and have done so for about three decades. Superliners are in the majority on Amtrak.

As for cars with fluted sides, one of the most successful types has to be Sweden’s X2000, which was one of the trainsets tested on the NEC. Thus far, the Acela Express can only dream of performing anywhere close to what this train is capable of.

If there really were, then the railroads would not have experienced the kind of decline they did in terms of intercity travel. So it can’t be all that many.

What are you trying to say, that the USA has been self-destructive since the 60s? Don’t get me started on their allowing foreign car companies to “compete” and all that jazz.

I don’t believe you have a point by that mention, other than to verify the position of many rail advocates that the government institutes all sorts of corrupt games to make passenger rail development in the USA unworkable. Glad you agree with us on that score; but it doesn’t justify your plane-worship.[;)]

IINM, they were about 45 tons empty (tare).[q

7

Plane-worship? Whatever gave anyone the idea that I had anything for the airline industry or for air transportation? No one who has taken more than two trips anywhere on a jet is under any delusions regarding air travel being “fun” or “exciting.” I think there are those in the ranks of foamers who think there is something “fun” or “exciting” about train travel. Commuting to work on C&NW gallery cars along with frequent weekend trips between Chicago and Detroit on Amtrak during a period the family was moving disabused me of that notion.

But some of the carping about how airplanes are “cattle cars” and that all of the train designs since the 1950’s streamliners have been substandard, listen folks, I have ridden the Tokyo-Osaka Shinkansen line, and you are in the same 5-across high-density seating configuration as a DC-9 airliner, and you get all of the same pressure ear popping too on that ride on account of the mountain tunnels, and if we get trains back as a cost-saving energy-saving time-saving mode of transportation when the oil runs out, the experience will be more like current-day jet airliners than the Guilded Age private car experience some people think the government should throw money at to provide.

Talking about “corrupt games” that make “passenger rail . . . unworkable” is ignoring Napoleon’s dictum “Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence.”

My father worked for GATX (you know, the private tank-car company) back in the day when they

8

Another great post, Paul!

Having been “loaned” to the government for a few years to manage a very expensive railway program, I gained deep exposure to how the government works, and it’s depressing. The goals handed down to the program manager are inherently contradictory and cannot be resolved, such as “get the best project for the money” but “make sure group X, which is well known as a builder of junk, is employed to build the project, because we need their votes, or we need this to demonstrate our committment to Goal Y which is totally unrelated but so what.” The civil service, regulatory, and procurement systems are easily gamed by the venal and clever for their own gain, and the owners – the public – fall into two groups, those who are carefree about what’s going on, or avidly trying to corrupt the project for their own gain, in effect, trying to steal money from the other owners. The ratio of people I met in government who are actually trying to work for benefit of the public instead of for their paycheck or constructing a sinecure, is maybe 1 in 10. However, and this is a point few understand, I don’t think that ratio is any different than in private business. The difference is that in private business the owners don’t put up with that forever; they are usually in consensus about their goals (making money) and usually reasonably willing to respect each other’s private property, whereas in government the owners are rarely in consensus and have many bizarre ideological goals, and are often trying quite hard to impoverish and destroy the other owners.

[quote]
But some of the carping about how airplanes are “cattle cars” and that all of the train designs since the 1950’s streamliners have been substandard, listen folks, I have ridden the Tokyo-Osaka Shinkansen line, and you are in the same 5-across high-density seating configuration as a DC-9 a

9

Oh, only a couple of posts where you extol the virtues of aircraft versus passenger trains, and go on about how “efficient” they are by contrast. I can dig them out, if you like; but I wasn’t referring to them out of spite.

We hate slow trains too. That’s why we want to speed them up. (Your use of belittling terms does nothing to bolster your argument, BTW.)

For my part, I’m sick to death of having to drive everywhere, and I’m not even in my 40s yet. I’d like to have the choice of being able to take a train to NYC or Allentown or Philly, which were choices that the Poconos used to have when there were far fewer people living here. Buses can’t make it up the grades of some of these roads, and especially not with the snows we customarily are afflicted with. (Not to mention, the bus service is quite anemic, especially Philly-bound, and it cannot circumvent road traffic.)

[quote]
some of the carping about how airplanes are “cattle cars” and that all of the train designs since the 1950’s streamliners have been substandard, listen folks, I have ridden the Tokyo-Osaka Shinkansen line, and you are in the same 5-across high-density seating configuration as a DC-9 airliner, and you get all of the same pressure ear popping too on that ride on account of the mountain tunnels, and if we get trains back as a cost-saving energy-saving time-saving mode of transportation when the oil runs out, the experience will be more like current-day jet airliners than the Guilded Age priv

10

I don’t know how we could measure that claim objectively, but in my subjective experience, working side by side with policy makers, planners, and engineers in those modes for the last few years on a variety of national, regional, and foreign projects and plans, I think if anything they’re even more “designed by committee” than passenger rail. They do have a lot more money thrown at them, though, and money papers over a lot of sins.

The only biases I have observed in government – and this is from working for an officer who reported directly to the secretary of transportation – are biases toward personal self-aggrandizement, personal career advancement, and personal accumulation of power, and when those tasks were complete, helping your buddies along too. Government isn’t capable of having a bias much less a conspiracy; that would require consensus and planning!

RWM

11

I agree with you about the cramped Metroliner feeling and wonder why the designers felt constrained to mimic the very worst aspect of passenger-jet airline cabins, right down to the claustrophobia-inducing reading lamps. The Metroliner / Amfleet trains are handsome in their way, but every time I see one up close the coach seats seem so low-slung to me, relative to the high platforms of the NEC.

Last year we saw the NB Silver Meteor just as it was getting close to dark in Folkston, GA. Obviously the rolling stock was