Railroad Forums 

  • Amtrak - Post 3/11

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
It is currently Mon May 13, 2024 7:29 am

Amtrak - Post 3/11

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

Amtrak - Post 3/11

  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Hello everyone, welcome back.

Post THREE/11 is not a misprint. Obviously, since the Madrid incident, I believe it is a safe assumption that "changes will be made".

Of course, the nature and scope of the security changes should not be speculated upon either at this Forum or elsewhere. Many will of course be invisible.

But I guess of concern to me is that rail travel will "loose its innocence" - just as air travel did during 1973 (the "retro" movie "Catch Me if You Can" currently making rounds on the HBO channels is a "look back" at air travel during "days of innocence") when mandatory security screening was initiated.

I have only been on two flights since 9/11 (ORD-HPN-ORD). While, suffice to say, both were without incident, I simply detected a degree of uneasiness that was simply not there pre-9/11 (of interest, I was on flights ORD-SWF-ORD "the weekend before"). For example, someone took longer than normal to use the washroom; the Flight Attendant clearly was "noting" such.

Any of my "post-9/11" Amtrak trips, to me as a passenger, have always appeared to be in the "no change" category. Of the 16 Amtrak trains (plus various METRA and Metro-North as well) I have boarded since 9/11, only once was my photo ID examined. Any other time I proffered such, it was quickly dismissed. Needless to say, I have never had a piece a carry on baggage examined, but then who has?.

Of concern not only will be the patronage likely lost since 3/11, but for those of us continuing to use Amtrak, will the prevalent "laid back" culture of a train ride, particularly an LD rode, be drastically changed?

Discussion, anyone?

Amtrak -- Post 3/11

  by NellieBly
 
The sad fact is that the sheer volume of passengers on commuter or rapid transit trains makes airport-type screening simply impossible. We can be on the lookout for suspicious backpacks, but that's about all that can be done.

Recall that in the post-9/11 hysteria, Grand Central Terminal in New York was evacuated when a "suspicious" white powder was noticed on the floor. Turns out a commuter had dropped a sugared donut!

Even at airports, I question the effectiveness of the screening process. I've taken my shoes off for the security checkers dozens of times -- despite the fact that, in more than 500 flights over the last 15 years, I've not tried to hijack a plane or threaten anyone.

We need to think harder about how better to identify suspicious persons, and we need to stop treating paying passengers like criminals.

  by dwmoore1416
 
Also makes you wonder about Amtrak's attitude towards railfans or more specifically cameras. It may make it harder to fans with cameras and notepads to wander on the platforms taking pictures and making notes of consists. Real shame.

One point:

  by mattfels
 
Those were commuter trains.

I would imagine this question will get some lively discussion on the commuter forums if posted there.

Good article on the general subject of passenger-train safety. in today's Wall Street Journal by Daniel Machalaba and Robert Block. Lead paragraph: "Yesterday's deadly bombings in Mardid underscore a fact the world's police long have known and hoped to avoid: Railroads are nearly impossible to protect." Some mention of Amtrak in the article as well, and something I found interesting: Eurostar screens its pax, but TGV doesn't.
Last edited by mattfels on Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

  by FatNoah
 
I don't think I agree 100% with Mr. Norman's observations.

I do agree that attitude of rail travellers doesn't seem to have changed. I've travelled only twice by train since 9/11, once a round trip from BOS to NYP and another from BON to Old Orchard Beach in Maine. Maybe it was because of the (relatively) short lengths of the trips, but everyone did seem relaxed etc. The only time people took note of someone taking too long in the restroom was when they had to go as well.

In January, I pretty much lived on an Airplane...Boston to Chicago to LA to Sydney, Australia to Singapore to Hong Kong to Tokyo to Sydney to LA to Chicago to Boston. That was about 68 hours in an airplane seat over the course of three weeks. People didn't seem any different to me. People congrated less outside the restrooms, but no one seemed suspicious of others...at least any more than is normal! :roll:

  by FatNoah
 
Let's face it...nothing is 100% protectable. Will railroads become a bigger target? It's hard to say. There's still the ROI to consider. It takes more effort and money for foreign terrorists to operate in the US than in Europe. They'll still want to top 9/11 or at least match it, which would be harder to do with any train.

Can anything really be done to secure trains? It's probably possible at large stations, but at whistle stops or commuter rail stops, it would be virtually impossible...and that ignores the task of securing the ROW.

  by mlrr
 
I've had a concern for this issue as well. Right now, I find it hard to imagine rail travel with the same things air travel has prior to boarding (security checks, etc.).

If the airlines suffered from the effects from 9/11, I'm affraid of what will happen to Amtrak if it is hit like that train in Madrid.

My Grandmother has always said however that you have a better chance of walking away from a train accident than you do a plane crash.

My speculation is, if passenger rail service steps up thier security measures to the same level the airlines do, they will have to do it gradually or they will more than likely suffer from a great deal of delays in the early going. Another thing is that station capacity is not equipped to handle such measures as today's airports are. I've seen 30th street and Penn Station as well as Grand Central and if you had to go through all that stuff, it would seem impossible. I could just imagine lines to different trains getting tangled because people are going through medal detectors before boarding and occasionally getting one person who is setting off the alarm but can't find what's causing it, lol.

It would be great to have a way keep passenger rail travel in America and all over the world for that matter, as safe as possible from terrorism, but it will take a great deal of time and money to revamp the infrastructure. Congress will definately have to put out the money for that and not string Amtrak along like it's been doing for the bast 30+ years.

All in all I'd hate to see passenger rail travel "loose its innocence".

  by mlrr
 
dwmoore1416 wrote:Also makes you wonder about Amtrak's attitude towards railfans or more specifically cameras. It may make it harder to fans with cameras and notepads to wander on the platforms taking pictures and making notes of consists. Real shame.
I agree 100%.

They've already stopped with alowing rail photographers and railfans alike from viewing activity at 30th Street Station Philadelphia. You may have to get special permission now but i'm not sure.

But I think those measures were taken right after 9/11

  by JFB
 
Though Amtrak will certainly increase its diligence in light of the Madrid bombings, I doubt that anyone will be taking off their shoes involuntarily during the course of an Amtrak trip. Of all passenger trains in the US, Amtrak’s are probably the least likely to become targets of terrorism.

Terrorists aim to disrupt life and commerce at their basest levels. Killing people in the course of their daily, and necessary, activities is the most effective way to do so. Hence the destruction of New York’s largest office complex, and repeated bombings in public gathering places worldwide. Opportunity is important, too. Large-scale acts of violence are less likely to be prevented where people flow freely.

Amtrak offers some of that, but not as much as commuter systems. Its less-crowded trains (consisting of few people who ride daily) and more rigorous booking system is less attractive and convenient to terrorists than commuter trains, where one can board unchallenged and be among twice the number passengers, almost all of whom ride daily. That’s why the Madrid bombings didn’t occur aboard Thalys.

Yet, despite the incident in Madrid, we shouldn’t forget that trains continue to be mediocre targets for terrorism when compared to other venues. The compartmentalized nature of a train effectively contains blast damage, and survival rates remain high even in catastrophic situations. Terrorists seeking high body counts and widespread commercial devastation are better off looking elsewhere.

  by mlrr
 
JFB wrote:
Yet, despite the incident in Madrid, we shouldn’t forget that trains continue to be mediocre targets for terrorism when compared to other venues. The compartmentalized nature of a train effectively contains blast damage, and survival rates remain high even in catastrophic situations. Terrorists seeking high body counts and widespread commercial devastation are better off looking elsewhere.
You've got a great point there about the blast containment. I failed to think about that. You make a great case overall.

We should also remember, terroist want to get "publicity". That's why they chose NYC. Although what happened in Madrid is terrible and shouldn't be ignored, one could say that the media could help if they didn't hype these stories up too much, because that gives terrorists what they want.

(sorry if this drifts off topic a bit)

  by JDFX
 
Lets apply some common sense here. Now, If I wanted to blow up a train, kill hundreds of people, and interrupt the flow of commerce,

NO, I AM NO TERRORIST EITHER...

I would do it in a tunnel. PATH or the tubes to GCT NY.

Pack enough C-4 around you, and I'd be willing to bet that you not only get the train, but probably flood the tunnel with water too.

I wouldn't completely rule out train bombings in the US folks. Remember, it took these guys 2 times to bring down world trade, they learned from the last time that you can never have too much explosive.

If they want to flood the tunnels under the hudson, they're going to do it with alot of C-4, and maybe even multiple bombers in one car. They're not as stupid, or indetermined as some of you think.

Amtrak Post 3/11

  by CarterB
 
The largest problem may well be not the stations or other infrastructure themselves, but 'boarders' from any of hundreds of suburban stations heading to NYP or any other major terminal/station, then setting off devices when they arrive at that location a la what happened in Madrid.

It is going to be extremely difficult to defend against that kind of scenario.

The real bottom line is that the event or even threat of such can hugely affect the economy, the costs of Homeland Security, and the utilization of the railroads.

We need more and better on-the-ground undercover agents, ears, informants etc. to better become aware of threats, and more importantly, the cells or groups capable of them.

While there are those who may carp about the 'freedoms lost' in the Patriot Act, unless we get better at identifying the 'bad guys' it isn't a matter of 'if'....but 'when'

  by Ken W2KB
 
>>>Amtrak’s are probably the least likely to become targets of terrorism<<<

Probably so as to long distance trains, but not on the NEC where Acelas and commuters are in a tight mix. It's my understanding that during WW2 soldiers were detailed to guard major rail bridges (and th North River tunnels and H&M (now PATH) to prevent acts of sabatoge and it may come to that again.

I ride NJT Raritan Valley line High Bridge <> Newark, NJ weekdays to work and will continue to do so. It's still a lot less risky than I-78. :wink:

Amtrak -- post 3/11

  by TomNelligan
 
Well: let's see if this works. I'm still trying to figure out this new format.

Yesterday's tragedy in Spain was going to happen sooner or later. In our post-9/11 discussion on the old forum, some people smugly observed that you can't hijack a train and said that terrorism wasn't a potential problem for Amtrak. Others of us, like myself, observed that hijacking wasn't the issue, it was bombs.

We live in ugly, dangerous times and there are people out there who are willing to commit mass murder in the name of politics or religion. One way of doing that is to carry a bomb on board a train. I'm all in favor of spot-checking of carry-on baggage, but 100% inspection akin to air travel is obviously impractical, especially on commuter trains.

Here in Boston, the MBTA has issued a generic advisory to riders to be alert regarding their surroundings and report suspicious activity, which of course is a good idea. There were bomb-sniffing dogs patrolling South Station today. But aside from that, we can only hope and pray for a change in the world political situation, which I'm realistic enough to know isn't going to happen soon.

  by Irish Chieftain
 
"Railroads are nearly impossible to protect"

If the carnage was horrible on a suburban commuter train, consider the disruption and bloodbath that would ensue should a high-explosive device detonate on a traffic-jammed highway during a morning or evening rush-hour. If railroads are nearly impossible to protect, then highways are utterly impossible to safeguard, seems to me. The highways are a true "free-for-all"...
 Return to “Amtrak”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -