Security in Israel is tight. Security is separate from fare-control. Just to enter the railroad station, you have to go through security. This is straightforward, with bags going through an X-ray device sepately from the personal scanners. Often there is a security policeman present with a dog on a leash, presumasbly to smell somehing suspicious.
Although the large city bus terminals have security similar to the railroad stations, security at local stops is enirely on the wisdom of the individual drivers. who have security training. On Jerusalem Light Rail, the roving security people are also the Rav-Card and validated cardboard ticket inspectors.
Things are a bit more relaxed on fare control. For example, on one of my trips I got hungry, and at Haifa Central, asked the gate attendent whether I could exit to buy lunch and return without going throught the ticket-reading turnstiles (used on both entrance to the platforms and exit, in addition to possible ticket inspectioni onboard), and he ansered the Hebrew for "of course," and opened the manufal gate for me to exit and to return to the platform with my sandwich and soda. The tickets have now been replaced by the reading of the Rav-Card, the magnetic plastic card used by all the public bus comopanies (to be extended shortly to the Arab bus lines which still use cash and cardboard multi-ride. light rail, and the railroad When you buy transportation at the railroad station, either at a ticket window or at a cash-or-credit-card accepting machine, the entrance and exit information is inserted into your rav-card and it serves as the ticket for the journey, including a go and return if that is what you bought.
Okay. I think I'm understanding the expectations that Millenials insist on fastening onto the rest of us. There are to be no dining cars serving meals where personal interaction is required. Just strap on the earphones and eat cold or nuked food out of a cardboard box without even looking up at others.
But did Amtrak do research to find out what sort of toilets Millenials desire? I mean, the new sleeping cars will have common toilets, with only bedrooms having in-room facilities.
So, it appears that schlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine with the same people who can't bear to eat at a table with strangers.
Really? I wouldn't have guessed that.
NKP guy Okay. I think I'm understanding the expectations that Millenials insist on fastening onto the rest of us. There are to be no dining cars serving meals where personal interaction is required. Just strap on the earphones and eat cold or nuked food out of a cardboard box without even looking up at others. But did Amtrak do research to find out what sort of toilets Millenials desire? I mean, the new sleeping cars will have common toilets, with only bedrooms having in-room facilities. So, it appears that schlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine with the same people who can't bear to eat at a table with strangers. Really? I wouldn't have guessed that.
It's true. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/coliving/414531/
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
NKP guy Okay. I think I'm understanding the expectations that Millenials insist on fastening onto the rest of us. There are to be no dining cars serving meals where personal interaction is required. Just strap on the earphones and eat cold or nuked food out of a cardboard box without even looking up at others.
If it's just the millenials... how come there's very few restaurants that seat you across from strangers?
Then again, if they didn't blame it on millenials, how could you trigger older generations?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
As to eating with a stranger at the same table in a restaurant, I have done that in Chicago (I do not remember the name of the restaurant, but it was recommeded in a Triple A guidebook)--I arrived, without a reservation, at lunch time, and when another man came in, the two of us were placed at the same table. As I recall, we did have some conversation. Of course, this was 51 years ago.
Johnny
About the only difference between the roomettes in the new cars and open sections is that you have a door and a wash basin in the room. Actually, you could have a little more luggage in a section than you can in an Amtrak Viewliner roomette.
zugmannIf it's just the millenials... how come there's very few restaurants that seat you across from strangers?
I'm guessing it's because: 1. most restaurants have more than eight or ten tables and a maximum of 40 seats; and 2. trains have a captive market; where else can passengers (customers) eat? As for restaurants, I can always go to another one. And 3. Sharing tables has been traditional train culture. I never wrote out my order in a restaurant because that's not been (until now, I know) traditional restaurant culture.
No need to disparage my view of Millenials because many of them were my students in high school. I am proud of my former "kids" and many stay in touch with me. I have lunch with about a dozen or so each year and we all seem to like and understand each other.
Some of my best friends are Millenials.
[quote user="Deggesty"] Maybe we will go back to open sections
"Go back" is certainly the correct term.
As for dorms, oltmannd, ever notice how some people just can't seem to get out of college?
NKP guyschlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine
So does that mean you are fine with sharing that filthy toilet with some stranger?
"But this is also a generation that has grown up with luxury, and may be accustomed to college campuses with climbing walls, infinity pools, and of course, their own bathrooms." from oltmannd's "Dorms for Grownups"
******
So in the Amtrak LD train of the future, Millenials will lose the privacy of a private bathroom and the Rest of Us will lose the convenience and pleasure of a traditional dining car.
Everybody's happy, right Amtrak? Great marketing research!
1. Are the "facilities" neceswsarily filthy?
2. Don't I have complete privacy when using? That is not exactly sharing.
3. The culture is the same in all locations and has not changed since privies were replaced by indoor plumbing.
charlie hebdoNKP guy schlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine So does that mean you are fine with sharing that filthy toilet with some stranger?
No, of course not. I've been ranting about the need for private toilet facilities in every sleeper for as long as it's been discussed here. I'm surprised you draw that inference. I have tried to point out here how important that is to women and their sense of decency, but not to much effect.
American trains ought to be getting better and more decent, not the reverse.
NKP guy charlie hebdo NKP guy schlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine So does that mean you are fine with sharing that filthy toilet with some stranger? No, of course not. I've been ranting about the need for private toilet facilities in every sleeper for as long as it's been discussed here. I'm surprised you draw that inference. I have tried to point out here how important that is to women and their sense of decency, but not to much effect. American trains ought to be getting better and more decent, not the reverse.
charlie hebdo NKP guy schlepping down the corridor any number of times to use (or waiting to use) a common (translation: filthy) toilet will be perfectly fine So does that mean you are fine with sharing that filthy toilet with some stranger?
It was not-very-subtle sarcasm, directed at your snide comment on millenials. I understand you want improved passenger train service. So do I. But many of us say it's high time to eliminate most/all the archaic LD passenger trains and use that money to expand the number and frequency of services that make sense, such as corridor day trains, and speed up existing services.
Snide? moi?
NKP guy And 3. Sharing tables has been traditional train culture. I never wrote out my order in a restaurant because that's not been (until now, I know) traditional restaurant culture.
And 3. Sharing tables has been traditional train culture. I never wrote out my order in a restaurant because that's not been (until now, I know) traditional restaurant culture.
Traditions die. If people are just as fine eating in their rooms, or their seats, then that's that. Or they coudl set up a counter around the walls of the dining car instead.
As far as the "millenial dorms", how is that different from the singles complexes that have been around for decades? Or is it just worrying people that nobody will want their 10 bedroom McMansion when they are too old to live there anymore?
charlie hebdoBut many of us say it's high time to eliminate most/all the archaic LD passenger trains and use that money to expand the number and frequency of services that make sense, such as corridor day trains, and speed up existing services.
LD trains should be run in the summer months as tour trains with free stopovers at National Parks and other points of interest. In the winter months the coach equipment can be used in regional service.
Here's some evidence that contradicts an opinion bandied about here as a fact. Not all millenials want fast-food & the abolition of dining cars on trains. Just take a look at the headline:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/28/opinion/sunday/millennial-dining-car-amtrak.html?searchResultPosition=1
Also note as the author does, that Less is being touted as More.
Orwell's NEWSPEAK is live and well. I say amen to what she wrote.
NKP guy No, of course not. I've been ranting about the need for private toilet facilities in every sleeper for as long as it's been discussed here. I'm surprised you draw that inference. I have tried to point out here how important that is to women and their sense of decency, but not to much effect. American trains ought to be getting better and more decent, not the reverse.
I am fine with communal as I have seen them when maintained properly are just like private facilities. In my view the issue is not 2-3 toilets per car it is the attendant or whomever not cleaning them as frequently as they ought to. Also, sleeping car construction and maintenence is a LOT cheaper without all the extra plumbing and it is not likely your willing to pay substantially more fare for that seperate toilet.
Also, in my view if they put clean showers and restrooms in all the major stations like they have done at Chicago Union Station. They could make all the sleeping cars showerless for overnight LD trains and you can spend a little time in the station lounge freshing up with a shower also have the lounge provide rooms at close in hotels for those that want to stayover a night or two.....Amtrak could get a cut of that money for the hotel referral.
NKP guy Here's some evidence that contradicts an opinion bandied about here as a fact. Not all millenials want fast-food & the abolition of dining cars on trains. Just take a look at the headline:
Wow, hyperbole much? Who said that ALL millennials what fast food? I have yet to see that put said anywhere. It seems like MANY millennials don't like the 1950s experience that Amtrak puts out in its dinning cars. It is a fact that Amtrak feels the need to appeal to those that don't like to eat in the socially uncomfortable rolling museum that some baby boomers can't let go of. My guess is Amtrak knows a tad bit more about that market than you do.
An "expensive model collector"
CMStPnPI am fine with communal as I have seen them when maintained properly are just like private facilities. In my view the issue is not 2-3 toilets per car it is the attendant or whomever not cleaning them as frequently as they ought to. Also, sleeping car construction and maintenence is a LOT cheaper without all the extra plumbing and it is not likely your willing to pay substantially more fare for that separate toilet.
1. My experience is that no one takes any responsibility or ownership of communal toilets on Amtrak. Car attendants are not the least bit interested in cleaning toilets; that's left for the car-cleaning crews at Sunnyside or Chicago or some such terminal. The word "filth" was invented to describe the communal toilets on any western Amtrak train that I have ever ridden since 1973.
2. Did you check with your wife and/or daughter as to their feelings about communal, as opposed to in-room toilet facilities? Most men may not mind peeing in an aluminum trough as at a county fair while riding a train, but I think women passengers may have a different reaction, as in "never again." I don't know about you, but even this male recoils at using a communal toilet for purposes that require a seated posture.
3. What the devil do I care about the "extra" costs of in-room toilets since a) no one really knows the costs of those toilets, and b) the costs of sleeping cars are paid by grants or subsidies; no one expects the fare box to pay for sleepers, diners, or anything else. Let me ask you, Do you expect sleeping car fares will go down for customers using the new sleepers? By how much? Based on what evidence?
4. Showers at major city railroad stations? Where? In what space would such a facility be carved out? What about those of us boarding or getting off in cities that are not terminals, such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, etc.? What? We're not to have the showers on trains that passengers have enjoyed for over 50 years? Again, aside from the insult and inconvenience to customers, what cost benefits will be achieved, especially after the costs of building new facilities the a few big city stations?
And to charlie hebdo:
I totally take your point about an expanded and better Amtrak. But this doesn't have to be a zero-sum game. It's not a question of an expanded and better Amtrak VERSUS dining cars. We can have both. We can have expanded funding, even greatly expanded funding for Amtrak if only we want it.
* * * * *
After all, the political party which for half a century has bedeviled Amtrak for its "extravagant" costs has demonstated in the past 3 years that they really have no such principles. "We the people" wanted a trillion-dollar tax cut for the richest among us, right? How come we can afford that without any compunctions, but a nice dining car or a roomette with a toilet is somehow unaffordable pie-in-the-sky?
NKP guy And to charlie hebdo: I totally take your point about an expanded and better Amtrak. But this doesn't have to be a zero-sum game. It's not a question of an expanded and better Amtrak VERSUS dining cars. We can have both. We can have expanded funding, even greatly expanded funding for Amtrak if only we want it. * * * * * After all, the political party which for half a century has bedeviled Amtrak for its "extravagant" costs has demonstated in the past 3 years that they really have no such principles. "We the people" wanted a trillion-dollar tax cut for the richest among us, right? How come we can afford that without any compunctions, but a nice dining car or a roomette with a toilet is somehow unaffordable pie-in-the-sky?
I think the evidence of the last 50 years is that, for the most part, neither party wants to fund Amtrak properly, the Democrats just don't want to eliminate Amtrak. So to me, funding expensive sleeping cars and the archaic 2-night journey trains is a waste of limited resources.
NKP guy 2. Did you check with your wife and/or daughter as to their feelings about communal, as opposed to in-room toilet facilities?
2. Did you check with your wife and/or daughter as to their feelings about communal, as opposed to in-room toilet facilities?
I asked my wife. While she said it is not ideal, it is not any different than using the facilities on an aircraft, or stopping and using the public restroom while on a road trip. It is just the cost of travel to her.
A note about showers on Amtrak trains. When Amtrak began operation in 1971, there were, of course, no showers fo passengers on board any train (unless some of the NYC or PRR cars with Master Rooms were still in use; I am not sure about the Master Rooms on one Southern train, either).
When the Superliners came into service, there were no showers in the bedrooms; these were added later. I first rode in what were at first called "deluxe bedrooms" in 1989, and showers had been installed in the annexes, I do not remember just when I looked in such a room and saw the shower.
I remember when some major stations did have showers and basins for shaving. There were also attendants that kept things in order. Such places as Grand Central Terminal, Boston South Station,etc. These facilities were needed when business men traveled in Pullmans without in room facilities. There were several basins for shaving, but no showers in the Pullmans.
DeggestyA note about showers on Amtrak trains. When Amtrak began operation in 1971, there were, of course, no showers fo passengers on board any train (unless some of the NYC or PRR cars with Master Rooms were still in use; I am not sure about the Master Rooms on one Southern train, either).
The California Zepher's observation car's drawing room had a shower and I used it. And I believe you are correct about Southern's Crescent having one.
Also, as far as in room facilities, all rooms in the original Budd Slumber cars had them. Although, I grant you they were not retention toilets.
nyc#25 remember when some major stations did have showers and basins for shaving. There were also attendants that kept things in order. Such places as Grand Central Terminal, Boston South Station,etc. These facilities were needed when business men traveled in Pullmans without in room facilities. There were several basins for shaving, but no showers in the Pullmans.
Amtrak has restored them at Chicago Union Station. They now have two showers directly in the station for sleeping car passengers can use along with towels via the Metropolitan Lounge. Additionally, I have been told they have an arrangement with a gym connected to Union Station that gives them additional showers if they ever need them along with one day passes to the gym available if passengers want a workout (not sure if the gym access is an additional charge). If the Metropolitain lounge concierge in Chicago does not know about these services, ask up higher in the Amtrak chain.
NKP guy1. My experience is that no one takes any responsibility or ownership of communal toilets on Amtrak. Car attendants are not the least bit interested in cleaning toilets; that's left for the car-cleaning crews at Sunnyside or Chicago or some such terminal. The word "filth" was invented to describe the communal toilets on any western Amtrak train that I have ever ridden since 1973.
One exception should be the California Zephyr which according to Amtrak has a dedicated crew to clean it's restrooms and the only Western Train with that setup. At any rate, this is a problem that Amtrak needs to fix.
NKP guy2. Did you check with your wife and/or daughter as to their feelings about communal, as opposed to in-room toilet facilities? Most men may not mind peeing in an aluminum trough as at a county fair while riding a train, but I think women passengers may have a different reaction, as in "never again." I don't know about you, but even this male recoils at using a communal toilet for purposes that require a seated posture.
I guess it is the difference between growing up in a large family vs small family.
NKP guy3. What the devil do I care about the "extra" costs of in-room toilets since a) no one really knows the costs of those toilets, and b) the costs of sleeping cars are paid by grants or subsidies; no one expects the fare box to pay for sleepers, diners, or anything else. Let me ask you, Do you expect sleeping car fares will go down for customers using the new sleepers? By how much? Based on what evidence?
Rather short-sighted view to take as eventually the states will be supporting the LD trains directly and they do look more carefully at costs then the Feds. My bet is when the states take over they will drop the sleeper altogether in favor of reclining long distance chairs or find another way to economize the costs and yes some states do expect the corridor passenger service they subsidize to approach break even if not exceed it. At some point that will also be the rule for LD trains and Amtrak indicated already as much in last testimony before Congress where the CEO Andersen stated in so many words he does not have the money currently to make the LD product what it should be to make it more efficient financially........what does that tell you about his goal there? It's definitely not maintain the status quo if he gets more funding, he is going to try to raise revenues to such an extent that the large losses start to drop.
NKP guy4. Showers at major city railroad stations? Where? In what space would such a facility be carved out? What about those of us boarding or getting off in cities that are not terminals, such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, etc.? What? We're not to have the showers on trains that passengers have enjoyed for over 50 years? Again, aside from the insult and inconvenience to customers, what cost benefits will be achieved, especially after the costs of building new facilities the a few big city stations?
Chicago Union Station which still has a lot of unused space. Amtrak recently restored showers there, they have two attached to the new Metropolitain Lounge and my guess they are in the same location they were before at CUS since that would be the most logical with the installed plumbing. I think if you check there might already be dormant showers at Pittsburgh. Probably in a walled off and unused space as they were at CUS before Amtrak restored them. Your "carved out" comment suggests all the space is utilized at big city terminals like CUS and Pittsburgh, according to Amtrak most of the old big city stations are not fully leased and not all the space is currently used adding to their overhead costs. As far as Clevelands new station, you don't really connect to other trains there. Why would you need showers if it is a terminating or originating station. The same argument could be made for Pittsburgh today though it probably has showers from long ago when it was a transfer point. You really only need showers at stations where transfers between Amtrak LD trains take place or between LD and Corridor trains.
NKP guyAfter all, the political party which for half a century has bedeviled Amtrak for its "extravagant" costs has demonstated in the past 3 years that they really have no such principles. "We the people" wanted a trillion-dollar tax cut for the richest among us, right? How come we can afford that without any compunctions, but a nice dining car or a roomette with a toilet is somehow unaffordable pie-in-the-sky?
Though one party rarely ever acts on it. It is the duty of Congress to support an expanding Economy and to also encourage wages to rise, in fact that is part of their job and why we elect them to Congress. For an elected official to run around and say 1.5% GDP Growth is the new normal is for that same person to admit they are not fit for elective office.
Congress' function is not just tax, tax, and tax. The other side of the equation is their legislating programs to boost wages via economic growth (min wage should be indexed and increase automatically) and so a lot in Congress sit on their arse and make excuses when they are in office as to why the Economy is stagnant or in decline instead of acting to improve it.
This led to massive frustration as folks saw real income decline and taxes continue to increase which led to the current dodo in the Oval Office today. Frustration over increasing taxes no matter what personal incomes do......incompetent management of the Economy by the Congress led us to where we are today in our politics. And we still have a majority of candidates on one side urging us to wreck the Economy further in the cause of leading us to Socialism.........exactly the wrong way to go and against the flow of the rest of the Western world.
charlie hebdoI think the evidence of the last 50 years is that, for the most part, neither party wants to fund Amtrak properly, the Democrats just don't want to eliminate Amtrak. So to me, funding expensive sleeping cars and the archaic 2-night journey trains is a waste of limited resources.
I think Andersen is the first CEO to make that arguement to Congress consistently and clearly via laying it out on the line as a matter of choice of the problems he faces managing the company due to lack of funding. He is forced to follow the money currently which is the states are providing for corridor services. If the Feds pay for LD service he is willing to improve it and increase the market value as well as ticket prices the public is willing to pay for using it..........lowering the losses. Until that time he is forced to maintain a status quo which he also finds distasteful as he feels some LD trains should be cut as beyond hope of ever reducing their losses.
When the new union station in New Orleans was opeded (about 1954), the re were showers in the restrooms. Back then, you had trains from Jacksonville, New York City, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis, Kansas City, El Paso, and Los Angeles. Now, with one train from New York City, one from Chicago, and 3/7 of a train from Los Angeles, there is very little traffic--and no showers in that section of the station, which has been remodeled. Also, there is no real restaurant there now.
The only things I can say for the station now is that there is a waiting room that is set aside for passengers with sleeping accommodations (you need a passcode to enter the room)--and Greyhound uses the station as its New Orleans terminal.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.