oltmanndAt 30th St. it was similar, except you kept your eye on the Solari board. The voice announcement sounded like one of the adults from Charlie Brown Peanuts specials... It was also easier than NYP because the platforms were wide and you had some time to get spread out along the platform before the trains wheeled into the station.
At 30th Street in the '70s, I recall the Metroliners having guards of some kind checking tickets at the head of the stairway. I of course never bothered with this because there was a path extending across all the tracks at the west end of the platforms, and I would judiciously cross to the one with the 'right' train and board through any open door. Didn't have a reserved seat, of course, but whenever I rode Metroliners it was up in front with a view out, anyway...
Sometimes there were other implications for security procedures at 30th Street -- someday I'll tell the story of how I got to ride the 'Save Grand Central' special train,,, (but this isn't really the thread for THAT story!)
Refer to my comments above regarding safety. Before Amtrak existed, our society was much less litigious. Photos taken in the past were taken from railroad signal masts, the tops of boxcars, and other locations where it would be absolutely forbidden today. The top sections of dutch doors were sometimes opened by passengers or crew members on moving trains so they could breathe the air or get a better view. End doors were often left unlocked on the last car, and the vestibules were readily available. Nothing but a folding metal gate separated the vestibule from the track.
In that climate, it shouldn't be surprising that boarding procedures were less formal than they are today. I suspect non-employees may not realize how much Amtrak's day to day operations are impacted by real or potential safety concerns, and I suspect that many of these issues are the result of those concerns.
It is possible that better ways can be found at some locations. However, it seems to me that Congress ought to have Amtrak find those ways because Amtrak knows the practical aspects of its business far better than the I. G. does, simply because the I.G.'s greatest expertise is not in railroad safety.
Tom
i
m
In the '70s, the boarding procedure at NYP was kind of llke a cattle drive. The "regulars" would hover around "magic orange doors" in the concourse which led to the track they thought the train would depart. If you were clever, and it was a through train from Boston, you could find which track the arrival was planned for. Then, when the guy with the nuanced baritone voice made the boarding announcement, a great crush of folk would coalesce down to singe file on the narrow escalator. Sometimes, you could beat the crowd by using the opposite set of doors. The crowd would usually try boarding the train at the first several open doors, but life was simpler when you walked up or down a few cars and avoided the crush.
At 30th St. it was similar, except you kept your eye on the Solari board. The voice announcement sounded like one of the adults from Charlie Brown Peanuts specials... It was also easier than NYP because the platforms were wide and you had some time to get spread out along the platform before the trains wheeled into the station.
There was no checking of tickets either place back then. That's something new.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
A rather broad assumption and not a holdover from PC and predecessor railroads. "Even at the time, it was understood to be inconvenient but helpful to avoid passengers accidentally boarding a wrong train. I just wonder how much of a problem that really was?" What are you basing your assumptions on? I rode PRR/PC/early Amtrak and while there were ushers at the gate it was not a single file cluster of confusion on the order of current standards and at places like Penn Station in New York there were the usual back door ways onto the platform. During early Amtrak days long haul trains at NYP had check in desks but again it was not the same environment as today. So bottom line the current boarding protocols appear to pretty much be a "new idea".
Paul Milenkovic samfp1943 ACY Read the papers and anybody can see that Congress has bigger fish to fry. Tom THis is what the furror is all about: FTA: Here's the legislative language: 10 (a) REPORT.-Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Amtrak Office of Inspector General shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that (1) evaluates Amtrak's boarding procedures at its 10 stations through which the most people pass; (2) compares Amtrak's boarding procedures to- (A) commuter railroad boarding procedures at stations shared with Amtrak; ( B) international intercity passenger rail boarding procedures; and (C) fixed guideway transit boarding procedures; and (3) makes recommendations, as appropriate, to improve Amtrak's boarding procedures, including recommendations regarding the queuing of passengers and free-flow of all station-users. I seems to smack of a solution in search of a problem? So Congress is asking for a report? And why does asking for a report "smack of a solution in search of a problem" let alone case of "Congress (having) bigger fish to fry"? Congress is asking for a report? And this has a number of our regular commenters disrespecting Congress and generally angry at the state of the world. Congress appropriates money and then asks for a report, and this constitutes overstepping its authority? I can suggest what problem is searching for a solution. Members of Congress who ride Amtrak, especially on the NEC, have probably experienced Amtrak boarding procedures first hand. You could say these members are exercising a "princely prerogative" to demand answers to something that inconveniences them personally. But maybe that Members of Congress use Amtrak benefits Amtrak when these Members deliberate whether Amtrak is important or not? Don't we want Members of Congress to be taking the train rather than ignoring it because they have better ways to travel? But Congress should appropriate the money but pay no attention to what happens with that money?
samfp1943 ACY Read the papers and anybody can see that Congress has bigger fish to fry. Tom THis is what the furror is all about: FTA: Here's the legislative language: 10 (a) REPORT.-Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Amtrak Office of Inspector General shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that (1) evaluates Amtrak's boarding procedures at its 10 stations through which the most people pass; (2) compares Amtrak's boarding procedures to- (A) commuter railroad boarding procedures at stations shared with Amtrak; ( B) international intercity passenger rail boarding procedures; and (C) fixed guideway transit boarding procedures; and (3) makes recommendations, as appropriate, to improve Amtrak's boarding procedures, including recommendations regarding the queuing of passengers and free-flow of all station-users. I seems to smack of a solution in search of a problem?
ACY Read the papers and anybody can see that Congress has bigger fish to fry. Tom
Read the papers and anybody can see that Congress has bigger fish to fry.
THis is what the furror is all about: FTA:
Here's the legislative language:
10 (a) REPORT.-Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Amtrak Office of Inspector General shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that (1) evaluates Amtrak's boarding procedures at its 10 stations through which the most people pass; (2) compares Amtrak's boarding procedures to- (A) commuter railroad boarding procedures at stations shared with Amtrak; ( B) international intercity passenger rail boarding procedures; and (C) fixed guideway transit boarding procedures; and (3) makes recommendations, as appropriate, to improve Amtrak's boarding procedures, including recommendations regarding the queuing of passengers and free-flow of all station-users. I seems to smack of a solution in search of a problem?
10 (a) REPORT.-Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Amtrak Office of Inspector General shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that (1) evaluates Amtrak's boarding procedures at its 10 stations through which the most people pass; (2) compares Amtrak's boarding procedures to- (A) commuter railroad boarding procedures at stations shared with Amtrak; ( B) international intercity passenger rail boarding procedures; and (C) fixed guideway transit boarding procedures; and (3) makes recommendations, as appropriate, to improve Amtrak's boarding procedures, including recommendations regarding the queuing of passengers and free-flow of all station-users.
I seems to smack of a solution in search of a problem?
So Congress is asking for a report?
And why does asking for a report "smack of a solution in search of a problem" let alone case of "Congress (having) bigger fish to fry"?
Congress is asking for a report? And this has a number of our regular commenters disrespecting Congress and generally angry at the state of the world. Congress appropriates money and then asks for a report, and this constitutes overstepping its authority?
I can suggest what problem is searching for a solution. Members of Congress who ride Amtrak, especially on the NEC, have probably experienced Amtrak boarding procedures first hand. You could say these members are exercising a "princely prerogative" to demand answers to something that inconveniences them personally. But maybe that Members of Congress use Amtrak benefits Amtrak when these Members deliberate whether Amtrak is important or not? Don't we want Members of Congress to be taking the train rather than ignoring it because they have better ways to travel?
But Congress should appropriate the money but pay no attention to what happens with that money?
+1
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
ACYT&E, OBS, and especially station personnel have been at their jobs for a long time, and their procedures have been developed through years of experience as to what works and what doesn't work. This sounds like spending a heap of money to reinvent the wheel.
Sounds more like doing things because "that's the way we always have done it here" [credit to Don Oltmann.]
Sometimes, not always, but sometimes it is just possible to stop and observe how things are done elsewhere, often with far greater passenger density. Nothing wrong with borrowing other strategies that have far more real life testing.
ACY Paul: Three things: First, I realize this is just a study. However, it does look like a fishing expedition.
Paul:
Three things:
First, I realize this is just a study. However, it does look like a fishing expedition.
Who knows why this provision is in the bill. Maybe a Member of Congress who rides the train was disrespected by an Amtrak conductor or gate agent?
And before we get huffy around here about a Member of Congress throwing their weight around, don't you think it is better that someone from Congress is actually riding trains, having enough of an interest in the trains to write something like this into the appropriation than for the people in Congress to have no contact with Amtrak and wonder what it is even good for?
We want the money to support Amtrak, but when it comes with strings attached, the most sinister of motives is assumed.
Looks like a fishing expedition. Everything looks like a fishing expedition. Sure it is political, but if you need government money to have passenger trains, you are inviting in politics.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
First, I realize this is just a study. However, it does look like a fishing expedition. There are different situations in existence at stations all over the country. For the most part, boarding and detraining procedures have been developed at various stations in such a way as to be tailored to the existing conditions at those particular locations. T&E, OBS, and especially station personnel have been at their jobs for a long time, and their procedures have been developed through years of experience as to what works and what doesn't work. This sounds like spending a heap of money to reinvent the wheel.
Second, I have said on another thread that I did not concur with some of the I.G.'s findings regarding Amtrak food service several months ago.. This leads me to question the idea that the I.G. will identify the correct problems and recommend the correct remedies in this case. I don't think it would be productive to rehash the things I said almost a year ago on another subject, so I hope we can avoid going into that. I will simply say that I do not accept the notion that the I.G.'s office is entirely competent or unaffected by political biases. Reasonable people may have a different opinion.
Third, I honestly don't understand your questions. If you can rephrase them I'd be happy to respond, with the understanding that I don't have personal knowledge of every situation for every train at every track at every station.
ACY If the narrow platform is between two tracks, a crowd can overflow onto the adjacent track with dangerous consequences, especially if the platform is raised. Current regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) require that there be a minimal difference between platform height and car entry, so some fairly costly projects are currently underway to raise some platforms. At low level platforms where passengers may have to step up, it is essential that a train staffer be present at each open door, unless Amtrak wants to invite lawsuits over real or imagined injuries. The current trend is towards a lower number of onboard service personnel as well as operating personnel. You can't ensure safety if all open doors are not manned at low level platforms. Nobody likes to have a train make two or more stops to board and detrain passengers. It takes longer and is just plain inconvenient for everybody. But a single stop requires a longer platform. Extending current platforms will be costly; even more so because of the more stringent standards imposed by the ADA.
If the narrow platform is between two tracks, a crowd can overflow onto the adjacent track with dangerous consequences, especially if the platform is raised. Current regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) require that there be a minimal difference between platform height and car entry, so some fairly costly projects are currently underway to raise some platforms.
At low level platforms where passengers may have to step up, it is essential that a train staffer be present at each open door, unless Amtrak wants to invite lawsuits over real or imagined injuries. The current trend is towards a lower number of onboard service personnel as well as operating personnel. You can't ensure safety if all open doors are not manned at low level platforms.
Nobody likes to have a train make two or more stops to board and detrain passengers. It takes longer and is just plain inconvenient for everybody. But a single stop requires a longer platform. Extending current platforms will be costly; even more so because of the more stringent standards imposed by the ADA.
Let me get this straight. On some trains boarding from low-level platforms, Amtrak crews can open only one trap and still be ADA compliant. On other trains requiring "double stops", Amtrak cannot board from one trap, or even from one trap for Coach, a second trap for Sleepers, and be in ADA compliance?
And what is this step box thing but a relic from a kind of service culture from a bygone era? What other mode of transportation, air, motorcoach, requires crew members to personally help each passenger use a step stool to embark and disembark?
On the Cascades, the train has all doors open (usual at larger stops), or the passengers open the doors by pressing a button (usually at intermediate stops). Dwell time seems to be about five minutes, far longer than is needed.
ACY Notice the photo that accompanied the original post. If platforms throughout the Amtrak system were as wide as the one shown at Paddington, then all of this would be much easier. In actual fact, many of Amtrak's platforms are extremely narrow, and widening them would involve moving adjacent tracks and reducing the number of available tracks at some stations. Applied nationwide, this could involve a massive outlay of cash that Amtrak doesn't have. If the narrow platform is between two tracks, a crowd can overflow onto the adjacent track with dangerous consequences, especially if the platform is raised. Current regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) require that there be a minimal difference between platform height and car entry, so some fairly costly projects are currently underway to raise some platforms. At low level platforms where passengers may have to step up, it is essential that a train staffer be present at each open door, unless Amtrak wants to invite lawsuits over real or imagined injuries. The current trend is towards a lower number of onboard service personnel as well as operating personnel. You can't ensure safety if all open doors are not manned at low level platforms. Nobody likes to have a train make two or more stops to board and detrain passengers. It takes longer and is just plain inconvenient for everybody. But a single stop requires a longer platform. Extending current platforms will be costly; even more so because of the more stringent standards imposed by the ADA. Now that I've said all that, I will add that it's very likely that boarding procedures probably can and should be improved at a lot of Amtrak stations. I'm all for that whenever it's possible. However, I do agree that it is a bit excessive for Congress to impose rules like this across the board, when there may be very good financial and practical reasons to do it in a way that differs from the ideal that Congress envisions. Safety and legal liability issues can't be ignored in today's litigious society. Read the papers and anybody can see that Congress has bigger fish to fry. Tom
Notice the photo that accompanied the original post. If platforms throughout the Amtrak system were as wide as the one shown at Paddington, then all of this would be much easier. In actual fact, many of Amtrak's platforms are extremely narrow, and widening them would involve moving adjacent tracks and reducing the number of available tracks at some stations. Applied nationwide, this could involve a massive outlay of cash that Amtrak doesn't have.
Now that I've said all that, I will add that it's very likely that boarding procedures probably can and should be improved at a lot of Amtrak stations. I'm all for that whenever it's possible.
However, I do agree that it is a bit excessive for Congress to impose rules like this across the board, when there may be very good financial and practical reasons to do it in a way that differs from the ideal that Congress envisions. Safety and legal liability issues can't be ignored in today's litigious society.
dakotafredSorry, I was just crabby because I've got a houseful of company coming. Instant tenement living.
Apology accepted,Fred, though not really needed. Off-topic, but apropos to your situ, I know the feeling. Even worse when they don't seem to know when common sense and good manners would suggest they should be moving on.
Further to Deggesty's comments: When I board at Cleveland (in the middle of the night and with not even a platform roof over our heads, onto a train already hours late because it was held at Chicago to benefit those passengers, and not us down the line), the conductor shows up within a few minutes. At Penn Station, however, we first class passengers find out that it's time to board when the lone redcap shows up at the Acela Lounge. We then follow him, just like chicks behind a mother duck, out the door of the lounge usually to the elevator which takes us down two levels to the cars on track 7. As we wait for the elevator it's not hard to see the looks on the faces of the coach passengers waiting nearby at the escalator. But it's worse when the train is on track 8 and the elevator can't be used. Then we are paraded right past the coach folks, who are told to step back for us as we enter the escalator and descend. If looks could kill!
A colleague of mine, asking once about first class train travel, remarked on what we might call the opposite of boarding procedures. He asked, in case of a derailment or accident, if first class passengers had first dibs on the ambulances.
I think we could board passengers faster and with more dignity, too, but I should hope to goodness that Congress has more important issues to grapple with. Or maybe this is just the kind of stuff a timid and poorly led legislature can do to look like they're doing something.
schlimm dakotafredBalt and Schlimm don't get a free pass on this gratuitous introduction of (shudder) politics on this thread. My comment and Balt's were about campaign financing, which C-U has turned from bad to worse.
dakotafredBalt and Schlimm don't get a free pass on this gratuitous introduction of (shudder) politics on this thread.
My comment and Balt's were about campaign financing, which C-U has turned from bad to worse.
When I board in Salt Lake City, a conductor arrives early, lifts transportation and gives a boarding pass/seat check (he has mine already made out with car and room number on it). On this trip, when I boarded #14 in Oakland, I never saw a conductor, but went straight to my car and then to my room; the car attendant told me that he had informed the conductor that I was on board, and the conductor then entered the information in his record--I still have the coupon for that part of my trip.
Sometimes when I board in Chicago a conductor comes to the Metropolitan Lounge and lifts the transportation, and at other times no conductor shows, even for the same schedule. Before boarding a Cascade at the origin, passengers are given seat assignments after their transportation is lifted or scanned. I do not remember just how it was done when I boarded at Everett, but my coupon for that leg was lifted.
Johnny
schlimm BaltACD I have a problem with government being bought and sold - every thing I have been seeing for the past two decades is that the US has the best government that money can buy. +1 And the buyers aren't the American middle and lower classes.
BaltACD I have a problem with government being bought and sold - every thing I have been seeing for the past two decades is that the US has the best government that money can buy.
I have a problem with government being bought and sold - every thing I have been seeing for the past two decades is that the US has the best government that money can buy.
+1 And the buyers aren't the American middle and lower classes.
BaltACDI have a problem with government being bought and sold - every thing I have been seeing for the past two decades is that the US has the best government that money can buy.
schlimm Paul MilenkovicSo again, are these remarks a matter of "blowing off steam" by someone who has political differences with the current Congress, which is off-topic for this Forum, or do these remarks contribute meaningfully to the topic of Amtrak and Passenger Trains? +1 Very meaningful contribution, in my opinion.
Paul MilenkovicSo again, are these remarks a matter of "blowing off steam" by someone who has political differences with the current Congress, which is off-topic for this Forum, or do these remarks contribute meaningfully to the topic of Amtrak and Passenger Trains?
Very meaningful contribution, in my opinion.
It is bought and sold daily, from the local precinct all the way up!
The Billions and Billions that are being 'invested' in political campaigns expect a return when the desired candidate is elected.
The Amtrak problem is not having a 'Godfather' that can 'invest' it's position in government. Amtrak is too poor to buy it's continued health or existence.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The very last time I rode a Metroliner north from 30th St., Philadelphia, I recall a boarding announcement 5 minutes before arrival, tickets checked at the top of the stairs at the concourse gate, and an announcement that 1st class passengers should be at the rear of the train. Passengers were on the platform as the train came in, all doors opened, and the total dwell time seemed not more than two minutes.
blue streak 1 Unfortunately not possible at all stations . At some locations maybe freight gauntlet tracks in place ? Level platform heights would certainly speed up boarding's ?
Unfortunately not possible at all stations . At some locations maybe freight gauntlet tracks in place ? Level platform heights would certainly speed up boarding's ?
Several stations on South Shore with high-level platforms (Hegewisch and Hammond to be sure) have gantlet tracks in place for freight trains.
blue streak 1 As others have pointed where freight trains run next to platforms the platforms need to be low due to plate "H" freight car clearances. Why did we ever allow a loading gauge so wide? Answer: Freight has a higher priority, apparently. At large boarding stations maybe some kind of boarding ushers could board each train at all doors. Ushers could move from train to train ? The boarding I-Pads that conductors use could take downloads from the ushers ? Why would US passengers require ushers on the platform. Trains in Europe can enter a station, debark 100 or more passengers, load 100 from ALL doors, and depart all within 2-3 minutes, routinely, everyday. It is time that boarding location signs also be installed at many stations so passengers que up for their car ? Once a train stops the location annunciator will announce what location to go to . Ex. Train 91, car 9131 go to boarding spot "E". Spots could automatically be computed by where car stops ? Why is such a scheme needed? In Europe each platform has a car locator sign. You look for your train and see where each car will be on the platform so you can decide where to stand [letters A-G] if you have a reserved seat or location preference. And on the electronic signs above each side of the platform showing arrival time of each train, it also shows where each train's car will be on the long platforms. It is simple.
As others have pointed where freight trains run next to platforms the platforms need to be low due to plate "H" freight car clearances.
Why did we ever allow a loading gauge so wide? Answer: Freight has a higher priority, apparently.
At large boarding stations maybe some kind of boarding ushers could board each train at all doors. Ushers could move from train to train ? The boarding I-Pads that conductors use could take downloads from the ushers ?
Why would US passengers require ushers on the platform. Trains in Europe can enter a station, debark 100 or more passengers, load 100 from ALL doors, and depart all within 2-3 minutes, routinely, everyday.
It is time that boarding location signs also be installed at many stations so passengers que up for their car ? Once a train stops the location annunciator will announce what location to go to . Ex. Train 91, car 9131 go to boarding spot "E". Spots could automatically be computed by where car stops ?
Why is such a scheme needed? In Europe each platform has a car locator sign. You look for your train and see where each car will be on the platform so you can decide where to stand [letters A-G] if you have a reserved seat or location preference. And on the electronic signs above each side of the platform showing arrival time of each train, it also shows where each train's car will be on the long platforms. It is simple.
As others have pointed where freight trains run next to platforms the platforms need to be low due to plate "H" freight car clearances. The best solution would be to build station platforms ( completely separate tracks ) with east coast high platforms. Have West coast platforms at superliner platform height so passengers can cross directly over to cars without having to step up.
BaltACD Congress needs single file entry procedures and credential check in entering the Congressional chambers, they should also be drug tested before each and every vote.
Congress needs single file entry procedures and credential check in entering the Congressional chambers, they should also be drug tested before each and every vote.
It seems that Amtrak is using cumbersome, antiquated, and "Conductor as control-freak" procedures for boarding many trains. Such as use of the yellow "step box" instead of matching equipment stairs to the platform height, loading an entire train through a single door, or not loading passengers through restricted sets of door requiring "double station stops" on some runs.
It could be argued that the airline industry uses similar cumbersome, time-delaying boarding procedures, but one could reason that because of the unique security situation with air travel, that we board a big jumbo jet through one door "called by row number" is not going away any time soon. Transit, commuter trains, and the California corridor trains aren't using such restrictive procedures. Such procedures are not followed in Europe.
I reason that some Amtrak passengers are put out that Amtrak operates that way, some may have even written to Amtrak with no satisfactory response, so what do they do, they "write to Congress." Their Member of Congress wants to serve their constituents complaining this way, they may have made inquiries of Amtrak and hit a bureaucratic wall, so they write some reform into the Amtrak appropriation?
Now Congress should not be micro-managing Amtrak, but Amtrak probably needs to be a little more customer-centric, and these points have been discussed on this thread. That Amtrak is ignoring this an other issues is probably why Congress is "overstepping its authority" and getting involved.
So one of our frequent forum participants, someone I am imagining has had a range of life experience, feels to response "Congress needs single file entry procedures and credential check" where they conduct their business. Why? What is this remark supposed to mean?
Congress may be overstepping their bounds (not really, they have the legislative authority), but to what end? As far as I can tell, members of the Transportation Subcommittee want Amtrak passengers to not have to stand single file for a credential check and boarding. Maybe Congress should leave this up to Amtrak, but Congress is against a single file boarding line for Amtrak passengers. So for "punishment" or "experiencing first hand what the people endure", members of Congress need to be subject to a line an credential check? What is this supposed to mean, and can someone explain this to me?
And what if Members of Congress indeed have to show passes, ID, or credentials, or at least be recognized by a security officer, say, to enter their offices or enter the Floor for votes, perhaps for security reasons, especially after a dreadful incident not that many years ago where a person with mental illness shot dead two Capitol Police officers and wounded others forcing his way into a Congressional office suite? Would our esteemed forum participant care to modify their remarks if this is indeed the case?
As to drug testing, this is off topic because to my knowledge neither airline nor bus nor Amtrak passengers are required to submit to drug screens, although the employees serving them do. Drug testing is a tremendous invasion, not only of one's privacy but one's personal dignity, and I can see how an employee subject to such drug testing would want Congress to "know what that is like."
But drug testing of transportation workers has come about, not just because Congress "wants to get tough on drugs (for everyone else, but maybe not for themselves)", but there have been fatal accidents involving drugs that have motivated what are admittedly unpleasant rules.
Also with respect to drug testing or Members of Congress, each Member is subject to intense public and media scrutiny beyond anyone working for a railroad. Congress itself has its own Ethics process, and a Member behaving badly becomes a campaign issue for reelection, not only for themselves but for the political party they represent.
So again, are these remarks a matter of "blowing off steam" by someone who has political differences with the current Congress, which is off-topic for this Forum, or do these remarks contribute meaningfully to the topic of Amtrak and Passenger Trains?
schlimm Whether at a large urban station like DC or Chicago Union or NYC Penn, boarding should not require first being checked at a gate, unless such a procedure incorporated a required security scan. At intermediate stops, boarding and alighting should occur the length of the platform, with all car doors open. If the platform is too short, passengers should be informed which car to use. Ticketing should be electronically scanned onboard. These methods are used elsewhere in places with much greater passenger loads. It reduces the dwell time at stops. This really is not rocket science.
Whether at a large urban station like DC or Chicago Union or NYC Penn, boarding should not require first being checked at a gate, unless such a procedure incorporated a required security scan. At intermediate stops, boarding and alighting should occur the length of the platform, with all car doors open. If the platform is too short, passengers should be informed which car to use. Ticketing should be electronically scanned onboard. These methods are used elsewhere in places with much greater passenger loads. It reduces the dwell time at stops. This really is not rocket science.
Right on! I doubt there is a legitimate reason to que the passengers routinely at any station unless there is a reason to lift their tickets at that time. I suspect we do it mostly as the "security theater" we find so appealing at our airports.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.