Trains.com

Why baggage cars at all?

19412 views
101 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Why baggage cars at all?
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 8:48 AM

Today's out-of-left field idea:

Why have baggage cars at all for single level trains.  Just build baggage compartments under the floor like a bus. Lots of unutilized space down there.  Would allow checked baggage service at every podunk flag stop in the network.

The big show stopper would be places with high level platforms, but even that could be solvable...  Money you save by not owning or operating could fund quite a bit of platform reconstruction.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:40 AM

   I've often thought the same.   One advantage would be that in cases where some cars are switched in or out of a train (rarely done any more, I think), the baggage would automatically go with it's owner.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:11 AM

I wonder if anyone ever observes the loading/unloading of baggage cars on LD trains?  Most folks travel much lighter today than 50 years ago.  Who uses a trunk?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 177 posts
Posted by Jim200 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:31 AM
I wondered about the latest procurement. Perhaps Amtrak is looking toward the future with contracted package revenue as per PRIIA and the Southwest Chief. Under car storage sounds interesting.
  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:10 AM

oltmannd

Why have baggage cars at all for single level trains.  

To my mind one of Amtrak's advantages is its generous baggage allowance.  Even with the recent restrictions Amtrak will accept a lot more baggage than planes or buses.  Because trains by there nature are large Amtrak can afford to do this.  While most riders do not check baggage some do and it can be important to those who do use the service.  

As I understand the point, there are costs to hauling around a baggage care and often baggage cars are almost completely empty.  

Under car baggage compartments do make sense except at stations with high level platforms.  I can only wonder how a baggage handler could get to an under car compartment at New York Penn Station.  

What occurs to me is that there doesn't have to be a whole baggage car.  A section of any kind of car could be used for baggage and the rest could be a coach or a sleeping care.  But when Amtrak has baggage cars it may make more sense to use them rather than buying a new combination car.  

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:13 AM

PS.  Maybe it is time to reconsider Amtrak Express Service.  I know the idea was tried and abandoned as it was not profitable.  But perhaps with more careful planning the idea could be profitable.  

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:38 PM

schlimm
I wonder if anyone ever observes the loading/unloading of baggage cars on LD trains?  Most folks travel much lighter today than 50 years ago.  Who uses a trunk?

..and how many backs are bent out of shape getting baggage on and off the cart/car?

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 3:09 PM

How much usable space is there under a passenger car, with air brake equipment, Air Conditioning equipment, septic holding tanks, etc?  If you could fit all the baggage for the entire train under one car, then you would have something.  However, if you needed the space spread out over several cars it would be a baggage handling nightmare.  Remember the space must also accommodate the Congressionally mandated gun safe.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:23 PM

Convert (or better still, change before the are finished) the new baggage cars to combines, either half coach half baggage or some other configuration, such as 1/3 baggage, 2/3 coach seating.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 8:25 PM

I check my bags if I plan on staying at the destination longer than 3 days.     I would propose that Amtrak change it's boarding procedure for long distance trans to be the following.

1. Keep the baggage car on the head end or convert part of a coach to carry baggage.

2. At small station stops make the passengers get on the forward car against the baggage and detrain there as well.    One 3-4 min stop per train per station.    Keep some seats open and reserved for those waiting to check their bags or get them back prior to the station stop.

3. Check the bags on the train or dispense them prior to the small station stop.   Hand carry into the baggage part of the car.

Sleeping car passengers that board at the small stop can easily walk to the sleeping car with their carry-on bags, if they can't then the sleeping car attendent or porter can help them for a small fee.

  • Member since
    December 2012
  • 193 posts
Posted by eagle1030 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 8:55 PM

How essential are the baggage cars on the long-distance Superliner runs?  I would think a couple of Coach-Baggages could replace those.

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:17 PM

eagle1030
How essential are the baggage cars on the long-distance Superliner runs?  I would think a couple of Coach-Baggages could replace those.

I think that depends on the situation.  When I was in the Army an awol bag could easily fit on the luggage rack but my duffle bag had to be checked.  

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:28 PM

schlimm

I wonder if anyone ever observes the loading/unloading of baggage cars on LD trains?  Most folks travel much lighter today than 50 years ago.  Who uses a trunk?

I have observed the loading/unloading. Have you ever waited for your baggage in a place such as Salt Lake City, Atlanta, or Washington?

Johnny

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 277 posts
Posted by Thomas 9011 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:43 PM

Doesn't Amtrak still carry mail? I remember reading a while back that Amtrak was making a nice chunk of change carrying priority and express mail parcels.

It maybe a little off subject but when did they stop using steam heat cars (converted B units)?

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 1:59 AM

If you're going to left-field luggage stowage... why not do it with bilevel cars... following the way the sesquidecker van Hools used for the Megabus service do it.  These don't have possum-bellies (the bottom 'deck' is low-floor) but the rear portion of the lower passenger compartment is currently reserved for luggage bays, and these are (even on the bus!) at what corresponds to high-level-platform height (over the rear and tag axle).

Easy to put slide-out rails and even motor assist to move the luggage outboard for ease and speed of handling, regardless of what side of the car is facing the platform, or if you are at low level...

Naturally the through-car passageway has to be on the upper level if the bay goes side to side like a possum belly -- but that's where you want free walkthrough, and maximum passenger space, anyway,  and there's no showstopping reason the idea couldn't be adapted to Superliner or other high-level car design ...

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 6:01 AM

If checked bags are not all in one place on the train you will drastically increase dwell time at each stop.

If you are suggesting that passengers handle their own baggage at every stop, have you ever watched the people who board the train with large bags trying to move and store them?

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 6:13 AM

MidlandMike
How much usable space is there under a passenger car, with air brake equipment, Air Conditioning equipment, septic holding tanks, etc?

On Amfleet and Horizon coaches, a huge amount - take a look some time.  Although you might have to rearrange some components.  (you forgot potable water tank, HEP transformer, emerg. lighting batteries, but that's about it.)

MidlandMike
However, if you needed the space spread out over several cars it would be a baggage handling nightmare.

In some cases it would be easier, some harder.  For small stations, car attendant does it right at the platform like bus.  At lager locations, not much would change - but you might have to keep track of which car has which bags.

MidlandMike
Remember the space must also accommodate the Congressionally mandated gun safe.

That goes in the compartment on the Cafe car.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 10:41 AM

oltmannd
On Amfleet and Horizon coaches, a huge amount {of space under cars for baggage]

But Don, as you pointed out some stations have high platforms.  How do you get to this space in, say, New York Penn Station?

  • Member since
    June 2010
  • 78 posts
Posted by Alan F on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 11:03 AM

schlimm

Convert (or better still, change before the are finished) the new baggage cars to combines, either half coach half baggage or some other configuration, such as 1/3 baggage, 2/3 coach seating.


The CAF single level long distance car order includes 25 dorm-baggage cars with roomettes in 1/2 of the car for the on-board staff and 1/2 baggage storage space. The order also includes 55 baggage cars for use on the western LD trains, the eastern day trains which have baggage cars, and the #66, #67 overnight Regionals with baggage cars. Reportedly one or two additional NE Regionals will get baggage cars for checked baggage once the CAF cars are delivered, fixing the current tight supply of baggage cars,
 
The design of a 1/2 crew dorm and 1/2 baggage car says that Amtrak could also, when the Amfleet I cars are to be replaced, order some 1/2 coach, 1/2 baggage cars for use on corridor & day trains with checked baggage. Or a cab car with a large baggage storage space with a bike rack between the cab and the 1/2 coach car space.
 
As for placing the baggage underneath the floor level on the single level cars, that is rather impractical as high level platforms are the norm on the NEC and as all the stations on the Keystone East, New Haven-Springfield, many on the NY Empire corridors have or will get high level platforms. South of DC, Raleigh, Savannah. Tampa, Jacksonville FL are all funded to build high level platforms in the next few years.
  • Member since
    November 2009
  • 422 posts
Posted by Dragoman on Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:07 AM

 

Not to go back into history, but if I've understood my reading, Southern Pacific's early/original Coast Daylight had a baggage car, but would handle checked baggage between endpoints San Francisco and Los Angeles (presumably to keep dwell times at intermediate stations).

But, the coaches actually had baggage elevators accessed from the outside. to easily shuttle luggage up to the luggage storage area inside each car.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:34 AM

John WR
But Don, as you pointed out some stations have high platforms.  How do you get to this space in, say, New York Penn Station?

You'd have to get clever with the platform design.  The platform would have to have a passageway beneath it with a 2 or 3 foot pit to all allow a person to maneuver baggage carts and baggage should do it. Or, perhaps, strategically placed cut-outs in the platform.

This would not come cheap, but you wouldn't have to do all the platforms at every effected station, just the ones served by LD trains. I would think a dozen or so stations would be cheaper to retrofit than buying dozens of new baggage cars and operating them.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:09 AM

Couldn't single-level coaches have a somewhat larger storage area at the end of the car?  DB does that for luggage that is bulky or too heavy to put in overhead storage.  Seems to work just fine for them on trains with much heavier passenger loads and very short dwell times at stops, usually only 2-3 minutes.  BTW, couldn't Amtrak improve point to point times considerably (outside NEC) by reducing station dwell times, even with no improvement in top speed?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 PM

oltmannd
 The platform would have to have a passageway beneath it with a 2 or 3 foot pit to all allow a person to maneuver baggage carts and baggage should do it. Or, perhaps, strategically placed cut-outs in the platform.

That seems quite possible.  Typically high platform stations have baggage elevators already.  The pits should be doable.  

Also, outside of cities very few stations have high platforms.  Even Washington, DC has low platforms.  In most stations there would be no problem.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:58 PM

schlimm

Couldn't single-level coaches have a somewhat larger storage area at the end of the car?  DB does that for luggage that is bulky or too heavy to put in overhead storage.  Seems to work just fine for them on trains with much heavier passenger loads and very short dwell times at stops, usually only 2-3 minutes.  BTW, couldn't Amtrak improve point to point times considerably (outside NEC) by reducing station dwell times, even with no improvement in top speed?

Want to maximize revenue space per car. Put the baggage where you can't put people. 

If you went to bi-level equipment, which would improve revenue even more, you'd have to do a luggage rack.  The California cars do it this way.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:16 PM

oltmannd
If you went to bi-level equipment, which would improve revenue even more, you'd have to do a luggage rack.  The California cars do it this way.

I've never been in an Amtrak coach that did not have an overhead luggage rack.  Some cars also have a place for baggage at one end of the car.  It seems to me that this is reasonable as somethings cannot go in the overhead rack and some people put them on the seats.  

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:53 PM

oltmannd

schlimm

Couldn't single-level coaches have a somewhat larger storage area at the end of the car?  DB does that for luggage that is bulky or too heavy to put in overhead storage.  Seems to work just fine for them on trains with much heavier passenger loads and very short dwell times at stops, usually only 2-3 minutes.  BTW, couldn't Amtrak improve point to point times considerably (outside NEC) by reducing station dwell times, even with no improvement in top speed?

Want to maximize revenue space per car. Put the baggage where you can't put people. 

If you went to bi-level equipment, which would improve revenue even more, you'd have to do a luggage rack.  The California cars do it this way.

Luggage racks are overhead on Amtrak and DB.  A space at the end of the car for heavy and oversized luggage doesn't take that much space.  Certainly less time-consuming than having someone retrieve bags from under cars at each stop.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 25, 2013 1:58 PM

schlimm
Luggage racks are overhead on Amtrak and DB.  A space at the end of the car for heavy and oversized luggage doesn't take that much space.  Certainly less time-consuming than having someone retrieve bags from under cars at each stop.

Best to have people handle their own bags. Don't need checked baggage or baggage car at all!  But, if you do have to offer it, why not use space that is currently wasted?

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, January 25, 2013 5:59 PM

If Viewliner sleepers had shelves at one end of the car where passengers could stow the baggage that will not fit in the roomettes or bedrooms, it might not be necessary to check baggage. However, if you are taking an extended trip it may be necessary to have one or two more bags than will fit in your space. Even the shelves on the lower level of a Superliner may be filled with such baggage.

I was astounded the first time we rode in a Viewliner to learn that there is no such space; the 10-6 sleepers that I had ridden had shelves at one end.

I think of seeing a family of (I think) a couple and two young children boarding a Viewliner in Washington. It seemed that each one had two large suitcases. I did not stay around to see how they arranged their baggage.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Sunday, January 27, 2013 10:58 AM

oltmannd

schlimm
Luggage racks are overhead on Amtrak and DB.  A space at the end of the car for heavy and oversized luggage doesn't take that much space.  Certainly less time-consuming than having someone retrieve bags from under cars at each stop.

Best to have people handle their own bags. Don't need checked baggage or baggage car at all!  But, if you do have to offer it, why not use space that is currently wasted?

WIth respect to the high-level platforms, I think the idea of cutouts to access the baggage racks is too complicated.

But you essentially have two Amtraks -- the high-level platform Amtrak with clearances that prevent Superliners, Auto Trains, etc., and the low-level platform territory where the Superliners and California cars roam.  So I guess if you want checked baggage on the Florida trains into Penn Station, yes, you will need some kind of single-level baggage car.  By the way, a Superliner into Penn Station would not work, even if you could get into through the tunnels, because it doesn't support boarding from high-level platforms.

But these alternative ideas should be considered for the everything-but-entry-to-Penn-Station territory.  But the way things are going, you are largely talking about Superliners or California cars, the latter seeming to be the new standard for other-than-the-NEC corridors.

But there is this kind of railroad philosophy that every function has a car.  You need fuel and water for a (steam) locomotive?  There is a tender.  Baggage?  A baggage car.  A place to eat?  A dining car.  Someplace else to sit and maybe eat a snack because a long distance train trip is too uncomfortable to sit in one place for the duration (even intercity bus lines take you to McDonalds and let you stretch your legs)?  A lounge car.  A place for mandated rest of on-board crew?  A crew dorm (ocean crossing airlines need crew dorm space, but they make do with curtaining off a few coach seats).

With the expense of new rail passenger cars along with the seemingly high maintenance costs to keep those cars rolling, maybe this pattern of a train car for every function is dated.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Sunday, January 27, 2013 3:07 PM

Paul Milenkovic
With the expense of new rail passenger cars along with the seemingly high maintenance costs to keep those cars rolling, maybe this pattern of a train car for every function is dated.

But there was a time when there were even more special use cars.  The New Haven even in its poorest days ran real dining cars but now there are none on the Northeast Corridor Line.  

Which is not to say that Amtrak should return to library cars and similar amenities.  

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy