I wanted to start a thread regarding design likes, suggestions, and complaints regarding the present Viewliner design as Amtrak prepares to build new models. My personal experiences on the Viewliners has generally been positive, but to discuss with other passengers their ideas and observations may prove to be interesting. So here goes:
The basic car design is great. The dual sliding end doors work well. The flared car side offers a little additional elbow room in the bedrooms and creates a more open walkway in the aisles. With the additional windows up above, the cars are not claustrophobic at all but very bright and airy.
The surface materials are clean, modern, and bright. The headroom is exceptional, and the high storage areas are satisfactory but make it difficult to get heavy baggage stored.
The many windows in the bedrooms are most welcome. Both the upper/lower combo on the outer wall and the additional aisle-side ones create a very pleasant environment.
The first time that we rode in a Viewliner, I was astounded that there was no place to stow baggage that could not be fitted into a bedroom. As I recall, most of the lightweight sleepers had such a place.
How do you quiet a rattling ladder? I cushioned it with a towel. How do you stop the partition from rattling (a Superliner fault, also)? with anything that you can stuff between the partition itself and the wall.
The Mattresses on the old 10-6 sleepers were thicker and the sheets were crisper. Amtrak had the Viewliners designed by committee something I’ve always found leads to failure. The 10-6s had a better ride and from what I understand the trucks in the old cars were easier to maintain and less costly. My personal view is I really wish they would look for a new design. I see no reason the new double deck NJT cars cannot be built as sleepers and Diner-Lounges giving more bang for the buck in the same car length and able to negotiate all eastern routes.
And, Al, those Pullman mattresses were real mattresses with springs in them. Granted, except for my last year in graduate school, I did not sleep on an innerspring mattress regularly until after I married, and we bought a new bed. They are more comfortable than the pads Amtrak uses (at least, Amtrak does not use corn-shuck mattresses). As to the sheets, I really prefer the feel of the old cotton sheets to that of the synthetic fiber sheets.
A question: how many who have read this thread have slept in a Viewliner at least once (we have slept in a bedroom twice and “roomettes” twice; the first time we had one “roomette” and the second time we each had a one)?
Johnny I have traveled eight times in Viewliners and came away less than impressed every time. Granted I have never ridden on the new NJT cars that operate the ACE service to Atlantic City but they seem like they could be an ideal fit to Amtraks needs. They can operate into New York and the entire eastern system and being double deckers they can be built with very similar interior design configurations to the western Superliners. That alone should save money. The eastern trains need Baggage and dining cars and additional sleepers. How about the NJT cars built as Baggage -Dorm, Dining-Lounge, Sleepers and coaches. A single P-42 should be able to handle about an eight car consist without any trouble and the passenger capacity would be half again as many as todays eastern trains. That could be one Baggage Crew Dorm, three Coaches, one Dining Lounge Combo and three sleepers, or four coaches and two sleepers. That should handle most of the single level long distan
One thing I’ve noticed with both the Viewliners and Superliner Sleepers is the ratio of Bedrooms to Roomettes. The times I’ve tried to book a train, I noticed the Bedrooms sell out far in advance of the Roomettes. When I rode, I noticed there were several empty Roomettes, but rarely an empty Bedroom. I’m not sure if the design allows for easy change out from Roomettes to Bedrooms. The Bedroom takes up about twice as much car floor space as a Roomette, but the additional fare is about twice as much, so the net income will be about the same if all spaces are filled. If my few observations are indicative of the average fill of the cars, they’d come out ahead with more Bedrooms available.
I agree with a lot of what you say here. My original question stems from the fact that Amtrak is building new Viewliners and I wanted to get other riders’ opinions about the present design.
As far as using NJT type cars as low-profile Superliners, I feel that would be the most efficient design possible. Even more so if Amtrak designed a car with one end with a mid-level entrance (as the current NJT design which is necessary due to platform variations around the system) and the other end with a second level diaphragm (as in the current Superliners). This would create a car with a mid-level entrance leading to a dead-end lower level and a pass through upper level. Cars could be arranged in pairs: coach/bag-coach, coach-coach, lounge-diner, sleeper-sleeper, etc.
Certainly low-profile Superliner coaches and coach/baggages would work fine even if an entrance-level luggage rack was necessary to hold larger pieces if the overhead racks are too shallow. Low-profile Superliner diners would work well with the kitchen below and the table sitting above, and double-deck lounges should be no problem.
Sleepers would probably be the most challenging perhaps, but doable with some creative design work. I would think that there would be no overhead bunks in most rooms, but a couple on the middle-level at the entrance (such as an ADA room) could have overhead bunks. The rest would probably have just lower beds, but there would be the possibility of a big “Family Room” at the dead-end of the lower level (something missing in the Viewliner configuration). I would think such a design would have more rooms than a Viewliner, but might have less actual beds (since overhead bunks might not be possible). However assuming that Amtrak doesn’t sell out every bed on every Viewliner, the botto
Last year, we wanted to travel between Chicago and Washington on the Cardinal. Coach class was outof the question, for personal reasons. On the day that we planned to go east, there was no sleeper space avaialble. On the day that we planned to go west, there was one roomette available–and it cost more than the bedroom that we did use on the Capitol Limited–and we planned the trip three or four months in advance! This year, we were able to get a bedroom westbound, (eight months’ advance planning) and it cost more than a bedroom would have on the Capitol Limited.
I wonder why it was decided that two, plus the “accessible” bedrooms was deemed sufficient. A least one more bedroom, at the expense of two roomettes, would probably be sold. I did not check the occupancy of the roomettes when we went from Washington to Chicago this year, but all three bedrooms were occupied.
As much as I like your suggestion it worries me that we will get the "it hasn’t been invented here at AMTRAK".I hope not but the cutback of capital funds by Congress does not bode well. Anyone know how long its been since the California cars were first proposed and now finally they seem to be the choice of AMTRAK for the midwest corridors.??
I personally ride the Amtrak California cars four or five times a month and enjoy every trip on them. They are quiet, comfortable and the upper level provides good views of the passing scenery. In fact I enjoy them more than Superliner Coaches, I always take a RR book with me to read and am generally fast asleep within twenty minutes of boarding. The other thing in there favor is there is a waiting factory ready to start turning them out. High Speed they are not but on the Surfline they hit 90 and the ride is extremely comfortable. Even in business class on the Surfliners they are great. Those short midwestern routes will be in for a real treat if Amtrak purchases these cars.
As to your comment about it hasn’t been invented here at Amtrak, that is precisely what is wrong with the Viewliners they were invented by Amtrak employees trying to justify there jobs to the
Let me begin by saying that I’d like to compare the Viewliners with their predecessors, the “Heritage” sleepers Amtrak inherited from the railroads, built by Pullman-Standard, or whomever, largely in the 1950’s. Let me state it here, from untold hours of personal experience in both types of cars: In every way, the Viewliners are inferior to the Heritage fleet.
If we start with the door on the Heritage fleet cars, we’ll notice it’s solid and has a full length mirror on the inside. Some V’s have a shade that lifts up and down, not too bad of an idea. Most, however, have a curtain which seldom stays in place, is not opaque, and is very off-putting for those desiring privacy, especially women. Those males in Viewliner roomettes who wish to urinate have non-working curtains which allow them to smile at those passing in the aisle while they attend to nature’s call.
Especially in the bedrooms, the sinks are intolerable compared with the Heritage sinks. Pullman-Standard used stainless steel fold-down sinks that lowered over the toilet, provided generous, unimpeded space above the sink to really wash and shave, and emptied in a flash when lifted up. The sinks on the V’s are the worst imaginable; one cannot wash even one’s hands without dripping water, often lots of water, onto the carpeted floor, the most walked-on surface in the room. The sink would be inadequate in size for a small child, let alone an adult; some take hours to empty. When standing upright one always bangs one’s head on the mirrored arrangement over the sink.
The suggestion of a flat screen TV made me smile. These V’s had them when new! They lasted
Let me begin by saying that I’d like to compare the Viewliners with their predecessors, the “Heritage” sleepers Amtrak inherited from the railroads, built by Pullman-Standard, or whomever, largely in the 1950’s. Let me state it here, from untold hours of personal experience in both types of cars: In every way, the Viewliners are inferior to the Heritage fleet.
If we start with the door on the Heritage fleet cars, we’ll notice it’s solid and has a full length mirror on the inside. Some V’s have a shade that lifts up and down, not too bad of an idea. Most, however, have a curtain which seldom stays in place, is not opaque, and is very off-putting for those desiring privacy, especially women. Those males in Viewliner roomettes who wish to urinate have non-working curtains which allow them to smile at those passing in the aisle while they attend to nature’s call.
Especially in the bedrooms, the sinks are intolerable compared with the Heritage sinks. Pullman-Standard used stainless steel fold-down sinks that lowered over the toilet, provided generous, unimpeded space above the sink to really wash and shave, and emptied in a flash when lifted up. The sinks on the V’s are the worst imaginable; one cannot wash even one’s hands without dripping water, often lots of water, onto the carpeted floor, the most walked-on surface in the room. The sink would be inadequate in size for a small child, let alone an adult; some take hours to empty. When standing upright one always bangs one’s head on the mirrored arrangement over the sink.
The suggestion of a flat screen TV made me smile. These V’s had
I forgot to mention one of my biggest complaints about the Viewliner bedroom. When the bed is set up, you can’t stand in front of and use the sink. Another reason to put the sink inside of the bathroom.
The same fault exists in the Superliner bedroom. I hadn’t thought of this, but the Renaissance bedrooms have one redeeming feature; you can use the basin when the berths are down.
At a meeting for the new “Viewliner 2” order of 130 cars on July 23-24, interested parties included Alstom, Kawasaki, Nippon Sharyo, Sumitomo, CAF, and Bombardier.
Okay, so both Kawasaki and Bombardier are interested in this bid. How about if they both submit bids for the “Viewliner 2” cars as requested by Amtrak but also submit alternative bids for their double-deck car shells to be used for satisfying Amtrak’s equipment needs. It might not take much for these suppliers to present a convincing bid that shows a strong economic advantage for using their “off-the-shelf” car shells to provide a much more efficient and cost-effective solution. Would be interesting at least to see their design concepts.
Don All Via Rail cars including the old Budd cars used on the Canadian and even the two RDC schedules that still operate are equipped with holding tanks. If the Canadians could do it to there Budd cars and the ones they purchased from Amtrak then I see know reason that we could not have done the same with ours. It was the boy geniuses at Amtrak that could see nothing but Viewliners that pushed for the far to early retirement of the Budd cars. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you but I was waiting for the confirmation from Via rail Canada just to be on the safe side. That means that the Manor series and Chateau series sleepers that offer everything from Sections with upper and Lower Berths, Duplex Roomettes, Roomettes, Bedrooms, Compartments, and Drawing Rooms all with toilet facilities are fully equipped with holding tanks. These cars were also retrofitted with showers at the time the holding tanks were installed of course some space was lost accommodating the showers equipping there cars with the Canadian equivelent of ADA compliance. That means that Canada found it was cheaper to go with rebuilding the Budd passenger cars than reinventing the wheel like we did here and I’ll bet they saved alot of money doing it there way over the costly error that Viewliners have proved to be. The Via Budd cars will be receiving a second rebuild soon that will add another 25 year life extension. So why did we not do the same with our Budd cars, instead we retired ours and sold many to Canada where they were rebuilt and still operate today and will fof many years to come.
Don, Full retention tanks and they are emptied in the Canadians case in Toronto, Capreol, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Jasper, and Vancouver. This includes all shower water and dish water as well. Canada is much more enviromentally friendly then we are. Possibly this might have something to do with the trains liesurely pace as it crosses the country. The longer stops for the pump out when it is a thirty car Canadian. Although having just talked to someone about five minutes ago who just traveled from Toronto to Vancouver there train was only 21 cars in length. He enjoys travelling by train with his wife and they have made numerous trips across the US and this was there first trip on a Canadian train.
First impressions his very words spotlessly clean, best crews he has ever experienced and dining was superb. They can’t wait to book a repeat trip next year and go east this time. The one thing he would have liked to see more of was dome seating. Train was all stainless steel except for the power a pair of diesels he doesn’t know one from another so I would guess F40s. He guesses they changed diesels in Winnipeg where they had the option to get off the train for a really long stretch before reboarding and continuing to Vancouver. I asked him if there were any rattles in the bedroom at night and he said it was dead quiet. That sure sounds better to me than more Viewliners.
My wife and I agree. We have gone between Vancouver and Toronto twice in each direction (one trip each way included a stopover in Jasper). Our last trip was this spring, when we were able to travel in drawingrooms all the way from Vancouver to Moncton. I recall very little, if any, noise. The Renaissance equipment seemed to be tight, also, but we really felt cooped up in the bedroom–there is not as much room as there is a a Budd bedroom (especially if you have room F; we had an F from Jasper to Toronto on our first trip).
As to domes, there is a standard procedure in place. The coach (Economy) passengers have one dome to go with the two coaches. The standard lineup for first class on the Canadian is three Manor sleepers, a dome lounge, a diner, and three Manor sleepers. This is repeated as traffic dictates, and the last car is, of course, a Park car which also has a dome. When we went on to Moncton from Montreal this spring, there was one dome lounge car, which was open to both classes. We were assigned a drawingroom in car 1439 (Park car) when we planned the trip, but when we were in Montreal our ticket was changed to give us a drawing room in a Chalet car, and the Chalets