Amtrak ready to allow roll-on bike service between Pittsburgh, D.C

[CCC1007]

Wrong thread Jim...

 

[PaulM]

I classified the $25 complaints as what do you "want for nothing, your money back?" It exactly matches the current cost of $15 for the box plus $10 handling fee. Not to mention that currently, you can't take you bike if you board or detrain at most of the stations in the system.

In California (as far as I know, other state subsidised routes too) roll on bikes are free. You need a reservation on the Surfliner, but that's as much a benefit as a hassle. There's no reason not to treat a bike like any other piece of checked luggage.

Current policy is asinine. $10 to "handle" a box that's no more problem (and likely lighter) than any other big piece of luggage is simply a matter of "we can get away with it, so we do". $15 for a box is reasonable enough, except that it's unnecessary. So is restricting it to stations with luggage service: the state routes don't have luggage service at all.

The big question for me is how will Amtrak deal with bikes once the Viewliner II bags are fully deployed and operational. If this is a preview, it's not looking good.

I'll stick by my "what do you want for nothing, your money back?" crack. I also disagree with the statement that it is easier to handle a bike box than a large piece of luggage (within the guidelines). And that comes from personally handling the boxed bikes, not from listening to a disgruntled employee.

Minor points. Illinois and Missouri subsidized trains charge $10. Others (I forget who) charge $5. Other auto-centric states like NY don't permit bikes at all. The $15 box charge is optional; you are welcome to use your own, which means the type the bike came in from the factory. But that would required much more disassembly; and it's not easy to find and schlep a box to the station when finishing a tour. I know, I've tried it.

Restricting bikes to stations with baggage service is the crux of the whole discussion. Amtrak has finally done the revolutionary thing with the CL; and you don't seem to like it,

As far as the preview, which I presume you mean the CL service using a coach-bag, what is not looking good? Did the conductor sass you when you tried to load your bike? Is something wrong with the racks? Did someone throw your bike off mid trip? You found a way to transport your bike that charges less than $20? Or are you reviewing a product you haven't actually tried?

The only downside I see is the use of the coach bag. It was a perfect solution for the CL problem 10 years ago. But now it tells me that the bike racks in the new VL's are still a rumor.

 

[TiBike]

The "preview" I'm talking about is this thread -- that's as much as I know about the Capitol Limited. Never rode it.

OTOH, except for going east out of LA, I've been on all of the Californian routes – state and long distance, with and without a bike – and a few others. There's no rational reason for the current LD policy other than pure bureaucratic cussedness. If Amtrak wanted to put roll on bike racks in some LD cars, it could. Or racks in current baggage cars. Or just bungee a bike, boxed or not, to something, if only to bridge between a station with luggage service and one without. I don't know of a single transit agency on the West Coast that doesn't accommodate roll on bikes, albeit with occasional restrictions (if you know of one, cool, I'd like to know about it, but I've never seen it).

I didn't say a bike was easier to handle than big luggage, I said it was no more problem. Except maybe that somebody has to do something a little differently or with a little more care, which shouldn't be a problem but might be if the primary objective is minimising the thinking required. But even that appears not to be an issue with the CL, which is self serve. I did say it would likely be lighter, which may be an overstatement but I'll stick with it. Even a gas pipe touring rig isn't going to be much more than 30 pounds by itself, with panniers and all that packed separately. 40 max. But Amtrak is perfectly happy to take a 50 pound bag for free.

I was harsh on the new CL service and didn't mean to be particularly – I get it that it's a long awaited improvement and if it was my local, I'd be happy as hell on balance. But I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who has been waiting just as long for roll on bikes on the CS and CZ. What the available information – i.e. this thread – tells me is that Amtrak still views bikes as a nuisance, rather than an opportunity to attract more riders. That's what's giving me heartburn right now. Which probably means I should be on my bike right now and not in front of a computer.

 

[WestBerkeleyFlats]

The "preview" I'm talking about is this thread -- that's as much as I know about the Capitol Limited. Never rode it.

OTOH, except for going east out of LA, I've been on all of the Californian routes – state and long distance, with and without a bike – and a few others. There's no rational reason for the current LD policy other than pure bureaucratic cussedness. If Amtrak wanted to put roll on bike racks in some LD cars, it could. Or racks in current baggage cars. Or just bungee a bike, boxed or not, to something, if only to bridge between a station with luggage service and one without. I don't know of a single transit agency on the West Coast that doesn't accommodate roll on bikes, albeit with occasional restrictions (if you know of one, cool, I'd like to know about it, but I've never seen it).

Yes, because long distance trains serve the same purpose and needs as local transit agencies. Umm, what?

 

[PaulM]

TIbike, I also have long complained about the inability to take a bike on most LD trips. But to be fair, any number of people more knowledgeable than I tried to explain why bicycles and Amtrak really is a combination of rocket science and brain surgery. Or why corridor and LD trains are inherently different. Or why it is irrelevant that you can lift your bike onto the baggage car on an OBB (Austrian) intercity train and bungee it a railing. Or hang it on a rack CL style or sit by it in the cab car of an OBB regional express.

That is why I am thankful about the CL news, and disappointed that the new baggage cars are not being used. I doubt there are enough coach-baggage cars to go around to extend the service to the CZ and CS and the rest of the LD trains.

 

[PaulM]

Yes, because long distance trains serve the same purpose and needs as local transit agencies. Umm, what?

Of course they do, if you change "local transit agencies" to "state supported" trains. The distinction is strictly arbitrary (or legal, same thing). Two big differences are that LD trains in general have greater distances between stops and run hours vs. minutes late, both of which mean the extra minute or two to load bikes doesn't affect LD trains as much.

 

[TiBike]

Two big differences are that LD trains in general have greater distances between stops and run hours vs. minutes late, both of which mean the extra minute or two to load bikes doesn't affect LD trains as much.

You're right, the differences between LD and state trains would seem to favor bikes on LD rather than state supported trains, or commuter trains, streetcars and buses. LD trains also have a lot more room per passenger, particularly when baggage cars are factored in. And the average number of passengers getting on and off at one time is lower. Yet it's local/state transit that bends over backwards to accommodate bikes, while Amtrak seems to be fighting a rear guard battle against them. Mechanically, there's no difference: bike racks and bungee cords work the same no matter who's running the train.

Never been on the OBB, but I have ridden trains elsewhere in Europe and the UK. Going to London once, I made the train by scant seconds. It was an old-style car where the passenger compartments had exterior doors. I literally threw my bike into the compartment and jumped in after it as the train started moving. The conductor appeared and growled "I saw that". Then he said "oh well" and led me to the baggage car where I bungeed the bike to a wire mesh cage. If I tried that on Amtrak, they'd throw me off.

 

[TiBike]

Yes, because long distance trains serve the same purpose and needs as local transit agencies. Umm, what?

In California outside of the Bay Area and the LA/SD metro, in addition to state-subsidised trains, LD trains and local buses also provide intercity service. You can stitch together local bus rides to go between, say, Berkeley and Davis, but that's not what the systems are designed to do. There are two LD trains that serve that route, but there's enough Capitol Corridor service that the bike ban isn't a big problem.

It's different in rural and exurban California.

My nearest train station is Salinas, which has one train a day, north and south, the Coast Starlight. For most practical purposes, only the northern half of Monterey County is served by local transit. Getting to San Jose is doable on local transit, but the options going south are pretty slim. Its either the CS, a thruway, a Greyhound (also stroppy when it comes to bikes) or the once a day Monterey-Salinas Transit run to Paso Robles. From there, you can get to San Luis Obispo on local transit, where you can pick up the Surfliner.

So yes, in many cases LD trains and local transit agencies do serve the same purpose and needs as local transit.