WIFI on trains

[wayman]

And the SSL cars just weren't designed for movie viewing ... too many windows, and the seating is all wrong. And if you don't want to watch the movie, it was much less fun hanging out in the lounge when the movie was on.

Every ride I've taken with an SSL, there's always been a great movie playing there. It's in high-definition widescreen, projected outside the windows, and it's called "America". There's no need for an alternative movie playing on a small screen in the SSL.

 

[AlanB]

The TVs they had in the Viewliners were free.

If Amtrak could not keep those LCD TV's and the tape players feeding them working well in the Viewliners, I really doubt Amtrak will be able to keep something even more technical like WiFi and its internet link going. It might work for a short while, but as with a lot of things on Amtrak, it will degrade, fall into disrepair, and get scraped.

Well, the major difference with between a VHS player and WiFi is that the former has moving parts and the latter is solid state. Having no moving parts greatly reduces the chances that something will break, and if it does, it just needs to be swapped out with a new unit.

Actually the biggest problem that Amtrak had with keeping the videos going in the Viewliners was the theft of the tapes and to a lesser extent, theft of the VCR's.

Replacing the small TV's screens was also an expensive proposition when they were damaged by a careless passenger throwing a suitcase around, but that didn't happen too much and the prices on those screens has come way down since they were first introduced.

 

[Guest]

Wi-Fi is a *Must*.... As for the others, flat screens with content in either sleepers or lounge, eh, I kind of agree with OP, I'd rather see the $$$ spent on deep cleaning or other subtle improvements.
Problem is, I'm and old fart, and maybe the 20-something, 30-somethings have a completely different view.......

I am in the 20-30 something demo and I agree with you. Give us kids wifi and we will be happy. I think it is some of the older folks that would be tickled with tv screens, you know people who still have landlines, no debit card, write checks, ect. I am of course referring to my parents.

 

[Guest]

There's free WiFi at 30th St. But that's because it's provided by the Cosi cafe, not Amtrak. And you have to be sitting in the fourth of the station waiting hall nearest the Cosi to get a decent signal.

My experience is different. The WiFi provided to passengers at the 30th Street Station is for a fee, by T-Mobile.

I guess if someone is sitting in the right area, one might pick up an unintended, unsecure, signal, but that is not what Amtrak is providing waiting passengers.

 

[wayman]

There's free WiFi at 30th St. But that's because it's provided by the Cosi cafe, not Amtrak. And you have to be sitting in the fourth of the station waiting hall nearest the Cosi to get a decent signal.

My experience is different. The WiFi provided to passengers at the 30th Street Station is for a fee, by T-Mobile.

I guess if someone is sitting in the right area, one might pick up an unintended, unsecure, signal, but that is not what Amtrak is providing waiting passengers.

I never said this particular network was provided by Amtrak.

But it's not "unintended, unsecure" -- it's a free, open, network just like you'd find at any decent coffeeshop, and you have to click an "I agree with the terms and conditions" box to use it. It doesn't say "you must be sitting in Cosi to use this" or "you must have purchased something from Cosi to use this". And I'd go so far as to guess Cosi may intend for people in the station to find it. After all, if I'm waiting for a train and I'm sitting closer to Cosi than I am to McDonalds, Saxby's, or Au Bon Pain, so I can use their WiFi, maybe I'm more likely to buy my coffee from them....

There is also a TMobile fee network. But really, unless you're already a TMobile subscriber, why choose that one?

 

[amamba]

The downeaster between BON and Portland also has free wi-fi, although it wasn't working the last time I rode that train in July of this year. I asked the conducter about it and he said that it worked sometimes and sometimes it didn't.

I reiterate, if the MBTA can have free wifi on all of their commuter trains in and out of Boston, I certainly think Amtrak should at the very least put it on the NE regionals and the Acela for business travel. I would consider paying for it on the LD train, but I would think that it should be free on Acela and the NE regionals as its a different type of traffic.

And there is no need for tvs as long as there is wifi - once on my computer I could watch you tube videos, stream as many movies as I wanted from netflix, watch tv shows at hulu and boxxee, etc. I am 29 and I actually have many friends that are cutting cable because we can get almost all the content we want to watch from the internet. My tv at home is hooked up to my computer so I can watch all that stuff anyways.

 

[AlanB]

It's a little easier for the T to do, since they're confined to one area, and a generally moderately populated area at that. It's a bit tougher to do things when you're in the mountains and valleys and tunnels, and miles from the nearest city.

And at least when Amtrak was testing Wi-Fi, downloading of videos was not allowed and I understood the plan was to continue that policy. It was to be for email and web browsing only. Any thing that chewed up major band width, like videos, would result in your being disconnected.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

It's a little easier for the T to do, since they're confined to one area, and a generally moderately populated area at that. It's a bit tougher to do things when you're in the mountains and valleys and tunnels, and miles from the nearest city.
And at least when Amtrak was testing Wi-Fi, downloading of videos was not allowed and I understood the plan was to continue that policy. It was to be for email and web browsing only. Any thing that chewed up major band width, like videos, would result in your being disconnected.

so watching youtube videos is out of the question.

 

[AlanB]

It's a little easier for the T to do, since they're confined to one area, and a generally moderately populated area at that. It's a bit tougher to do things when you're in the mountains and valleys and tunnels, and miles from the nearest city.
And at least when Amtrak was testing Wi-Fi, downloading of videos was not allowed and I understood the plan was to continue that policy. It was to be for email and web browsing only. Any thing that chewed up major band width, like videos, would result in your being disconnected.

so watching youtube videos is out of the question.

Yes, unless you've downloaded it prior to boarding or they change the way of thinking that was in place during the tests on Acela.

 

[Guest]

But it's not "unintended, unsecure" -- it's a free, open, network just like you'd find at any decent coffeeshop, ...

What do you think "unsecure[d]" means? It means it is an open network; no encryption or passwords. So, when you claim it is not unsecured, you mean it is a private, locked, network, which is totally opposite to your other claims. So, which is it? Secured or unsecured?

Though I still believe reception of Cosi's WiFi within the Amtrak waiting lounge is unintended. T-Mobile is the vendor Amtrak picked to supply for-fee WiFi, not Cosi.

Now, back to the discussion of WiFi on Amtrak trains. I suppose the relevance to Cosi is that there is already WiFi on Amtrak trains, and has been for years. Passengers on-board an Amtrak train just need to be accidentally within range of an unsecured WiFi network during their travel. Given that, this means no capital or maintenance expenses for Amtrak.

 

[PRR 60]

Here is the present status of wifi on domestic airlines. Note that only JetBlue is limiting access to narrowband (as was done with the Acela trial).

AirTran: All aircraft equipped: $8 to $13 per flight depending on flight time, device type used

Alaska: Testing on one aircraft

American: On 15 767-200’s, 150 MD80’s, all new 737-800’s; $6 to $13

Continental: Live TV on 30 aircraft, planning to expand to permit wifi as well.

Delta: On 300 aircraft now, on 530 aircraft (including former NW) by June 2010

JetBlue: Testing on one aircraft now, no timeline on implementation; free, but narrowband only

Southwest: On 4 aircraft now, planning full fleet in 18 months; $5 to $10

United: On 13 757’s used for transcon PS flights, no schedule for expansion; $6 to $13

US Airways: On 50 A-321’s by mid-2010; $6 to $13

Virgin America: On all aircraft now; $6 to $13. Virgin America is expanding seatback IFE system to permit internet access without using laptop or PDA.

 

[amamba]

If you have to pay for it, then it shouldn't be limited as to what the bandwidth is.

If it is free, I understand not being able to watch an entire 2 hour movie streaming from netflix.

I consider watching clips (say five minutes or less) on youtube to be internet browsing.

 

[transit54]

If you have to pay for it, then it shouldn't be limited as to what the bandwidth is.
If it is free, I understand not being able to watch an entire 2 hour movie streaming from netflix.

I consider watching clips (say five minutes or less) on youtube to be internet browsing.

Well, it needs to be limited for practical reasons. I understand your argument, but the only way that it can really be unlimited is that if they charged you based on bandwidth used, not time. I.e. you'd buy 200 MB or 500 MB or some other amount of data transfer.

The reality is that everything coming from that train needs to be transmitted through a cellular connection and cellular data is limited and expensive. Watching clips uses much more bandwidth than browsing so they are in no way comparable. A typical cellular wifi set up with one cell card can transmit a bit over 3.2/mbit down and around 700k up (there are other technologies out there, but they are not widely deployed). Now Amtrak can equip each wireless access point with additional cell transmitters, but that gets more and more expensive. Regardless, you have to split that bandwidth across the car - not everyone can be watching videos at the same time. And that bandwidth is not always going to be available - you're competing against everyone else who's also using that cell site for data (the total amount of bandwidth the cell site can offer depends on a number of factors).

The other problem is that cell data contracts specify a limit of data - usually 5 GB. Anything transmitted over that in a month is billed additionally. Even if Amtrak has an access point in every car, and each of these APs has two cell cards, they're going to blow right through that allowing people to watch videos and will be loosing money at $5 or $10 a session if they allow for unlimited data usage.

To get an idea of the technology used to do this, check out: http://www.waav.com. They make the products that drive WiFi on BoltBus, MBTA and may other entities.

In short, cellular internet is a technology with substantial bandwidth constraints and costs. It's nothing like sitting on your home hard-wired internet connection and watching YouTube videos or Netflix.

 

[Ryan]

But it's not "unintended, unsecure" -- it's a free, open, network just like you'd find at any decent coffeeshop, ...

What do you think "unsecure[d]" means? It means it is an open network; no encryption or passwords. So, when you claim it is not unsecured, you mean it is a private, locked, network, which is totally opposite to your other claims. So, which is it? Secured or unsecured?

Clearly it's unsecured, he was obviously disagreeing with your claim that it was unintended. Rather than being shallow and pedantic (not that old bit again!), how about attempting to make a cogent point without belittleing others?

Though I still believe reception of Cosi's WiFi within the Amtrak waiting lounge is unintended.

You're certainly welcome to believe that or anything else that you would like. You've got nothing to back that up, and wayman made a pretty compelling case for why Cosi would want its wifi to spread into the Amtrak waiting area.

T-Mobile is the vendor Amtrak picked to supply for-fee WiFi, not Cosi.

Irrelevant, since nobody is claiming that's the case.

 

[wayman]

If you have to pay for it, then it shouldn't be limited as to what the bandwidth is.
If it is free, I understand not being able to watch an entire 2 hour movie streaming from netflix.

I consider watching clips (say five minutes or less) on youtube to be internet browsing.

The reality is that everything coming from that train needs to be transmitted through a cellular connection and cellular data is limited and expensive. Watching clips uses much more bandwidth than browsing so they are in no way comparable.

The other problem is that cell data contracts specify a limit of data - usually 5 GB. Anything transmitted over that in a month is billed additionally.

And some readers may be thinking "but wait, I've got an unlimited data plan on my iPhone, so such unlimited cellular contracts exist"... well, yes, that's true ... but AT&T has realized that's not working out very well for them (or for many of their customers). Yesterday I read that they're considering ditching unlimited data and charging iPhone users by usage. It may not come to pass -- there will be significant opposition -- but that AT&T would even publicly consider this is an example of how much more limited cellular data networks are than we'd like to think they are.

As for me, I'll be totally satisfied if I can read the Amtrak Unlimited forums while on the train Low bandwidth usage, high quality entertainment!

 

[Pastor Dave]

The first year we started doing our annual Florida mid-winter break was the first year of the Viewliners. The TV's kept my then young children occupied but it wasn't too long before they seemed to be non-functioning and then eventually removed. We now take the autotrain. WIFI would be nice, but isn't real high on my list of better amenities on Amtrak routes. Consistently competent sleeping car attendants and dining car stewards would be nice, although the autotrain staff does seem to be more consistent than Silver Service staff.

 

[GiantsFan]

On the coast starlight right now. No wifi...

Edit: I was told by my sca it only works in the lounge car. The signal does not reach the sleepers (and I didn't get it in the diner either)

 

[Shawn Ryu]

My fear with WiFi on LD trains is that they might be so bad that it will be useless most of the times. Because lets look at the facts. Trains like Empire Builder go through routes that are mostly not urban, very densely populated lands.

 

[Train2104]

How about WiFi on all routes except the TE west of SAS, SL, SWC, CZ, and EB? The other routes shouldn't really have coverage problems.

 

[PerRock]

my one experience with WiFi on a train was aboard the National Express East Coast Service on the ECML in the UK. it was decent for watching the little map that showed you were you were. But not much else; loading even the most basic of webapes was painfully slow (I've had better dial up then their service) youtube was out of the question, I did finally get facebook open and was able to chat online in FB with some friends. But it really wasn't great. Mind you a year + has passed since then...

peter

 

[GiantsFan]

Just an update:

[im on the CS as I type this- using my iPhone 4]

The wifi in the parlour car does NOT work... And the attendant cannot/will not fix it. Oh well...