 |
Re: New Cars for Amtrak California?
Author: SP5103
Date: 08-31-2017 - 09:58
> i'd would be more interested in how
> a proven design was deemed unacceptable?, what
> criteria was
> changed and why?
I don't think it was a "proven design" by any means, and I believe they were being designed from scratch and the issue was meeting the current crush/collision stadards, which I believe were updated after the Metrolink vs UP head on.
Since the order has stayed at 130 cars, the question is how seats this money is buying because I assume the bi-level design had more seating. As pointed out, an advantage of the bi-level design (whether standard or high pass through) is that the lower level is fairly easily handicap accessible especially with an 8" platform height.
Back in the day, you had Pullman, Budd and others continuing to improve their designs and compete for orders from the railroads. Now there are very few builders to compete according to government bidding standards, the government agencies (and their consultants) tend to write their own unique specification requirements, not to mention government safety standards that now seemingly change every 5-10 years often requiring substantial redesign and re-certification. There isn't a real steady flow of orders split between the builders, so they are having to absorb the drawn out bidding and design process not to mention the buyer's funding cycles, so it has become a feast or famine business of building custom rail cars in limited runs, despite agencies trying to combine orders to save money.
Imagine the locomotive market if EMD or GE only got a 500 engine order every few years? On the commuter side, that is exactly what is happening. What has GE built since the P40/P42? EMD can barely get the F125 into service which so far only has one buyer. Even MPI which had little trouble selling their fairly standardized MP36/40 line is now fighting for every commuter engine order.
> a proven design was deemed unacceptable?, what
> criteria was
> changed and why?
I don't think it was a "proven design" by any means, and I believe they were being designed from scratch and the issue was meeting the current crush/collision stadards, which I believe were updated after the Metrolink vs UP head on.
Since the order has stayed at 130 cars, the question is how seats this money is buying because I assume the bi-level design had more seating. As pointed out, an advantage of the bi-level design (whether standard or high pass through) is that the lower level is fairly easily handicap accessible especially with an 8" platform height.
Back in the day, you had Pullman, Budd and others continuing to improve their designs and compete for orders from the railroads. Now there are very few builders to compete according to government bidding standards, the government agencies (and their consultants) tend to write their own unique specification requirements, not to mention government safety standards that now seemingly change every 5-10 years often requiring substantial redesign and re-certification. There isn't a real steady flow of orders split between the builders, so they are having to absorb the drawn out bidding and design process not to mention the buyer's funding cycles, so it has become a feast or famine business of building custom rail cars in limited runs, despite agencies trying to combine orders to save money.
Imagine the locomotive market if EMD or GE only got a 500 engine order every few years? On the commuter side, that is exactly what is happening. What has GE built since the P40/P42? EMD can barely get the F125 into service which so far only has one buyer. Even MPI which had little trouble selling their fairly standardized MP36/40 line is now fighting for every commuter engine order.
