Amtrak OIG tackles the boarding conundrum

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Moderator note:

the posts that were in the Chicago Metropolitan Lounge thread were moved to this more inclusive boarding procedures thread.
 
Throughout my Amtrak career, the concept of safety was beat into my head daily.

I didn't read the whole thing. Skimmed through about 20 pages before I came across the first mention of the word "safety", and that was in the context of the employees' safety briefing. Since I skimmed, I guess I could have missed something. There were lots of references to communication, passenger convenience, and efficiency, and I guess safety is implied throughout. But implication isn't enough. New policies will not be very helpful if safety isn't the VERY FIRST CONCERN of everybody involved in the process, whether it's the same as before, or some new scheme.

This looks a lot like it was produced by somebody who is trying to produce a document so he can say he produced it. It reminds me of the Governor's line from Blazing Saddles: "We've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs!"

I'd like to be wrong. Maybe I just became too cynical over the years. Sad to say, I never was very convinced that the OIG was staffed by people who understood Amtrak in the first place.

Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Misunderstood Moderator's moving "only" the general boarding remarks from the Chicago Metropolitan Lounge to this topic. I deleted my comments.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chicago was described as a model station because of the use of the great hall as a waiting area for pax. There was no discussion of the lack of communication between the metropolitan lounge and the people by the gates.

The other strange part was asking, encouraging ticket agents to go to gate areas to help pax.
 
How did they board trains before Amtrak? It seems to have worked well then-do it the same way today and eliminate these senseless studies about how to simply get pax from the waiting bench to the train.
 
The simple matter is that the major city stations need more space. With the destruction of the head house at CUS and the complete demolition of NYP station Amtrak is left with cramped basement boarding corridors. Add in the commuter crowd during rush hour and you can't move down there. In NYC the refurbishment of the old post office will be the solution but at CUS there doesn't appear to be much of a solution. Chicago still has two old RR stations that are now not utilized for passenger rail. Its a long shot but if overcrowding continues they may need to be reopened for train service.
 
Personally I like the European system. On German platforms you will see a diagram which each IC/EC/ICE train that stops on that track and a diagram of which cars are at which location. So you place yourself where you either have a seat reservation or where you want to ride.

I also think being allowed to wait on the platform definitely helps speed things up.

When I went up to visit my ex at Clemson, SC. Every evening we would spend it at the Amtrak station. So I sort of made my self the station master as it was an unstaffed station. I organized passengers by destinations and kept them informed on where to stand. What made that difficult though some conductors were good at spotting the train. While others spotted the boarding door three cars away from the only platform access point. I think the German H signs could be used instead of conductors spotting trains. Then every car should stop in the same place each time. And for the record when I was doing that at Clemson they could finish station work in about a minute
 
The simple matter is that the major city stations need more space. With the destruction of the head house at CUS and the complete demolition of NYP station Amtrak is left with cramped basement boarding corridors. Add in the commuter crowd during rush hour and you can't move down there. In NYC the refurbishment of the old post office will be the solution but at CUS there doesn't appear to be much of a solution. Chicago still has two old RR stations that are now not utilized for passenger rail. Its a long shot but if overcrowding continues they may need to be reopened for train service.
The old Dearborn station headhouse still exists, but south of the station, once the home to railyards, is loads of housing built in the last 40 years, so rails will never again reach Dearborn. Northwestern (Ogilvie) and LaSalle are exclusively used by Metra. Central and Grand Central has long been torn down. What other stations are you talking about?
 
The simple matter is that the major city stations need more space. With the destruction of the head house at CUS and the complete demolition of NYP station Amtrak is left with cramped basement boarding corridors. Add in the commuter crowd during rush hour and you can't move down there. In NYC the refurbishment of the old post office will be the solution but at CUS there doesn't appear to be much of a solution. Chicago still has two old RR stations that are now not utilized for passenger rail. Its a long shot but if overcrowding continues they may need to be reopened for train service.
The head house at CUS still exists, it is the Great Hall. It was the Concourse which was demolished and an office building put above its footprint. Even though now underground, if they simply went back to a floorplan like the original design and completely opened up the area down there between the north and south tracks and put most services, ticketing and waiting room back in the head house/Great Hall where they were originally, the flow would be similar to the original design even if it were not as attractive as the high ceilinged, airy Concourse building.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait was someone proposing moving Amtrak to more then one Chicago terminal. I think that is a bad move. As it will confuse passengers and cause misconnects. Also the tracks might not line up for all routes logically.
 
Wait was someone proposing moving Amtrak to more then one Chicago terminal. I think that is a bad move. As it will confuse passengers and cause misconnects. Also the tracks might not line up for all routes logically.
I don't think this would be proposed. Look at all the effort that went into consolidating operations in New York City. I bet that it would be pretty easy to show that having two stations in Boston discourages connecting passengers and revenues suffer as a result.
 
If Union Station in Chicago becomes overcrowded, Metra trains would be more likely rerouted than Amtrak. Trains from the North could go to Ogilvie and trains from the South could go to Lasalle Street.
 
There are already plans to move Metra Southwest Service (and the occasionally-proposed Southeast Service) to LaSalle. You can't practically move BNSF line service (theoretically you could put it in LaSalle or Millennium, but the way the yards are set up makes it impractical). Heritage Corridor service could potentially be moved to Millennium or LaSalle, but nobody wants to.

The north side of Union Station isn't crowded so nobody's worrying about it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The OIG's recommendations are well-taken. The "oh, let each station manager do his own thing" protocol at Amtrak isn't working at all.

"Safety" is a red herring. In the context of boarding procedures, it's generallly a bogus excuse to do stupid stuff which makes things worse for passengers, and allows employees to slack off. In nearly every station on the planet, people go to the platform and wait for the train. Only under exceptional circumstances of severe overcrowding (NY Penn-- NOT Chicago) would this be problematic. In NY Penn, a coherent and well-thought-out boarding procedure would do wonders, but the lazy dumbass running the station refuses to implement one, as the OIG report makes clear.

I have the credentials to call the NY Penn Station manager (as of late 2014, I suppose he might have been fired by now) a lazy dumbass after some of the **** he pulled during a service disruption which I was dealing with. He simply did not do his job. Literally every other Amtrak employee I talked to told me what he was supposed to be doing (and they were all consistent), and he didn't do it (which seemed to shock them). I ended up getting a refund, coverage for my hotel bills, and compensation certificate from Customer Relations. Most appalling failure of communications I've ever seen and it's all on him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Personally I like the European system. On German platforms you will see a diagram which each IC/EC/ICE train that stops on that track and a diagram of which cars are at which location. So you place yourself where you either have a seat reservation or where you want to ride.

I also think being allowed to wait on the platform definitely helps speed things up.

When I went up to visit my ex at Clemson, SC. Every evening we would spend it at the Amtrak station. So I sort of made my self the station master as it was an unstaffed station. I organized passengers by destinations and kept them informed on where to stand. What made that difficult though some conductors were good at spotting the train. While others spotted the boarding door three cars away from the only platform access point. I think the German H signs could be used instead of conductors spotting trains. Then every car should stop in the same place each time. And for the record when I was doing that at Clemson they could finish station work in about a minute
Considering that Amtrak changes the positions and number of cars, it would be difficult unless they spend the money for some dynamic electronics so at stations, one can find which car is one's assigned. It seems like crew spends an inordinate amount of time telling every passenger where they should board because the passengers have no idea where their car is even when they walk up to it (as the car's assigned number is tiny and is behind dirty, clouded covers whereas the number that identifies the physical car is high enough to read and has large painted numbers).

Wouldn't it be nice if there were electronic signs even at small stations that pointed to where sleeper, BC and coach passengers should stand because that info was either consistently the same or controllable remotely by an Amtrak employee with knowledge of that train's specific consist? But that would cost money and that's a problem. Of course, the train would need to stop at the same place every time.
 
Denver used to put up very consistent signs on the platform saying which car was where. I guess they're better about assembling the CZ consistently than with some other trains?
 
How would you get trains from the southwest side to Millenium with out major trackwork? Without even getting into it's an underground station designed for electric service?
 
How would you get trains from the southwest side to Millenium with out major trackwork?
Depends what you count as major. Reconnect the north side of the wye from St. Charles Air Line to Metra Electric. Reconnect the wyes between the St. Charles Air Line and the line from LaSalle Street.

The issue that it's only really designed for electric trains... yeah, that's a bigger issue.
 
Personally I like the European system. On German platforms you will see a diagram which each IC/EC/ICE train that stops on that track and a diagram of which cars are at which location. So you place yourself where you either have a seat reservation or where you want to ride.

I also think being allowed to wait on the platform definitely helps speed things up.

When I went up to visit my ex at Clemson, SC. Every evening we would spend it at the Amtrak station. So I sort of made my self the station master as it was an unstaffed station. I organized passengers by destinations and kept them informed on where to stand. What made that difficult though some conductors were good at spotting the train. While others spotted the boarding door three cars away from the only platform access point. I think the German H signs could be used instead of conductors spotting trains. Then every car should stop in the same place each time. And for the record when I was doing that at Clemson they could finish station work in about a minute
Considering that Amtrak changes the positions and number of cars, it would be difficult unless they spend the money for some dynamic electronics so at stations, one can find which car is one's assigned. It seems like crew spends an inordinate amount of time telling every passenger where they should board because the passengers have no idea where their car is even when they walk up to it (as the car's assigned number is tiny and is behind dirty, clouded covers whereas the number that identifies the physical car is high enough to read and has large painted numbers).
Wouldn't it be nice if there were electronic signs even at small stations that pointed to where sleeper, BC and coach passengers should stand because that info was either consistently the same or controllable remotely by an Amtrak employee with knowledge of that train's specific consist? But that would cost money and that's a problem. Of course, the train would need to stop at the same place every time.
I thought Amtrak was using standard consists for the most part now. So that should make things easier. I also think that allowing passengers on the platform is a good thing to do. And lastly station staff need to organize their stuff better. The silver star should not be sitting in Columbia for fifteen minutes while an hour late for them to load passengers and baggage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top