Amtrak says there’s a Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac, I mean request for proposals.
http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/65/789/Amtrak%20Seeking%20New%20High-Speed%20Trainsets%20ATK-14-070.pdf
I suspect this is the individual order after cancelling the joint order with California High Speed Rail.
It says Amtrak wants to increase capacity from 304 to 420. If they simply used a more modern design such as the Siemens-Bombardier (Class 407) Velaro D with eight EMU cars, instead of Acela’s two non-passenger locomotives plus 6 coaches, they could carry 460 passengers.
Has anyone found a link to the actual RFP ?
By schlimm on July 3, 2014 It says Amtrak wants to increase capacity from 304 to 420. If they simply used a more modern design such as the Siemens-Bombardier (Class 407) Velaro D with eight EMU cars, instead of Acela’s two non-passenger locomotives plus 6 coaches, they could carry 460 passengers. IIRC FRA regs prohibit passengers in the lead vehicle on HSR operations, anyone know for sure?
A RFP is not a bid, its a request for Proposal. in other words its asking manufacturers what have you got that we might want, send us your proposal. in railroad terms it means nothing…
In the spec in the joint RFP with CHSRA, Amtrak was looking for a nominal 425 seats. No reason to think that has changed in the new RFP. If the bidder offers a trainset with 450 total seats, that is a plus for their proposal.
Many documents from the joint RFP were posted on the Amtrak procurement portal and the CHSRA website. This time, there are no new documents so far on the Amtrak procurement portal RFP listing. Since Amtrak knows who the potential qualified bidders are, it appears that the documents are being sent directly to them. Again, there is no reason to expect there have been any major changes in the new RFP except to strip out all the CHSRA requirements and material.
The new bids are due on October 1, 2014 so Amtrak is turning around pretty quickly from the decision to break up on the joint order with the CHSRA.
There are numerous documents, amendments, question responses from the joint procurement attempt still available on the CHSRA website here. The new RFP from Amtrak should be pretty close to the Amtrak part of the joint RFP for the specs and requirements.
Disposition of Acela-1s ?
-
As soon as 6 or so Acela 2s are unconditionally accepted then additional trips can be scheduled.
-
Since BOS - NYP is running very full now expect them to start there replacing Acela-1s on those trains ? Then the replaced 1s can operate more NYP - WASH. If the problem of the limitation of 39 trains on BOS = New Haven can be resolved maybe even more trips there ?
-
The lower capacity 1s can be scheduled on trains that have a lower booking. Also as the en route times on NYP - WASH comes down the smaller capacity 1s can be used for super expresses further reducing en route times ?
-
It all depends on future passenger wishes that cannot be predicted now. Look at France .
-
Good back up in case some problem with -2s occurs.
Forbes has an article about new Acela orders but with several items no longer effective. Most glaring one is statement that Amtrak might buy additional cars for the present Acella1s. Another is plans for disposition of 1s as none have been announced. Leave to others to find more misinformation.
“Forbes has an article about new Acela orders but with several items no longer effective. Most glaring one is statement that Amtrak might buy additional cars for the present Acella1s. Leave to others to find more misinformation.”
The article is an interview with Mr. Yachmetz, Amtrak’s guy in charge of fleets. Are you sure you read the same article? It does not say anything about adding cars for the current Acelas.
“Amtrak is also looking to add approximately 120 seats to the new Acela model, but without increasing the 205 meter overall length of the trainset. Amtrak will accomplish this by moving from “concentrated power” to “distributed power.” Essentially, this would eliminate the leading and trailing engines of each trainset, and replace them cars capable of carrying passengers. With this model, each car produces power individually, much like a subway train. This enables the train to carry additional passengers while not increasing the overall length. The train will still have the styled front and back cars for aerodynamic reasons, but there will no longer be dedicated engine cars.”
This is what I suggested earlier, but someone claimed this design is not allowed under FRA rules. That contention appears to be false.
Schlimm: was looking at the table. Missed it the first time around ( figure 22 is obsolete )
What table are you referring to? You referred to the inaccuracies of the article in Forbes.
From FRA’s High Speed Passenger Rail Safety Strategy Novemember 2009 page 17, part 2b. “FRA’s regulations for Tier II operations … Requires that the power cars at the ends of the train exclude passengers”. However Tier II covers up to 150 MPH FRA notes the possibility of using higher speed EMU sets that might include occupied end vehicles. FRA goes on to state that “there are no simple answers to the question of whether passenger seating in cab cars is appropriate. The answer will require careful research and full consideration of the operating environment where the transit operates.” There is no record in the FRA searchable data base indicating that Amtrak has been given a waiver from the Tier II requirement. The Amtrak press release says they are looking to add 40% more seats to the new train sets. That ain’t going to happen holding the train length constant and putting people in the end cars.
So it says it right there:
"New standards or guidelines could also address circumstances under which the use of
passenger‐occupied lead units may or may not be acceptable. FRA=s regulations for Tier II
operations, which covers passenger trains that operate up to 150 mph, requires that the
power cars at the ends of the train exclude passengers. This is the current arrangement of
the Acela trainset on the Northeast Corridor. One HSR operation that will be constructed
on a dedicated right‐of‐way has proposed a 150 mph service with passenger seating in the
power cars (cab cars). Another HSR operation has proposed a 220 mph service and has
also included passenger seating in the power cars (cab cars).
FRA realizes that some of the more modern HSR train sets used overseas eliminate the
conventional power car and use an electrical multiple‐unit c