Railroad Forums 

  • Would nicer stations in better locations materially help Amtrak ridership?

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

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1543809  by Tadman
 
bdawe wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 1:49 pm I can think of a few between hence and thence that might improve their location a bit - Vancouver of course is the ex CNoR station, which is at the very periphery of downtown. I suspect that they would have meaningfully better ridership if they could figure out how to terminate at the ex CP depot, which is at the very core of downtown, and is walking distance to a vastly larger number of destinations than the current station, which really requires a local transit connection to get anywhere.
Wouldn't that make for even worse timing into Vancouver? I can't count how many times we sit waiting for the bridge and lose an hour or so, and we keep seeing Skytrains zip by overhead somewhere near Scott Road perhaps. I think they should either decide to make the CNOR station work and do it right, or give up and terminate in Surrey and let folks ride downtown on Skytrain.
bdawe wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 1:49 pm Bellingham station is peripheral to the Fairhaven secondary downtown area, but If they were over at the old GN depot (currently a BNSF yard office) they'd be more centrally located as well. The current station site affords at best a connection to the Alaska Ferry and little else.
I've made the Alaska ferry connection here (coming from Juneau to Bellingham, then Cascade to Seattle) and the idea is good on paper but does little in reality. First, the connection is not guaranteed. If the ship misses Amtrak, you're up a creek. There are only two trains per day to Seattle. The ship has much more erractic timing, too, due to weather and a much longer route. Second, it causes the train to skip downtown as we noted. Also, the ferry only runs like 2x/week. It usually shows up in the morning, and leaves in the afternoon.

Given those facts, I'd suggest a boat train that is entirely separate from the Talgo/Cascade program. Every Friday at 4am, the P32BW shops switcher grabs 2 coaches, perhaps even Sounder commuter cars, and a baggage, and deadheads north to Bellingham Ferry Docks. The ferry arrives 7-8am, people are transloaded, and the train heads south. Three stations only - Edmonds Amtrak/Ferry docks, King Street, and Tukwila (Seatac), arrival about noon. Change ends at Tukwila and load passengers for Alaska. Head back north through King and Edmonds and drop all at Bellingham Ferry Docks again.

Of course this leaves a big question - why would Washington State want to foot the bill for tourists/travelers to get to Alaska smoothly?
 #1543812  by mtuandrew
 
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 8:26 am
bdawe wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 1:49 pm Bellingham station is peripheral to the Fairhaven secondary downtown area, but If they were over at the old GN depot (currently a BNSF yard office) they'd be more centrally located as well. The current station site affords at best a connection to the Alaska Ferry and little else.
I've made the Alaska ferry connection here (coming from Juneau to Bellingham, then Cascade to Seattle) and the idea is good on paper but does little in reality. First, the connection is not guaranteed. If the ship misses Amtrak, you're up a creek. There are only two trains per day to Seattle. The ship has much more erractic timing, too, due to weather and a much longer route. Second, it causes the train to skip downtown as we noted. Also, the ferry only runs like 2x/week. It usually shows up in the morning, and leaves in the afternoon.

Given those facts, I'd suggest a boat train that is entirely separate from the Talgo/Cascade program. Every Friday at 4am, the P32BW shops switcher grabs 2 coaches, perhaps even Sounder commuter cars, and a baggage, and deadheads north to Bellingham Ferry Docks. The ferry arrives 7-8am, people are transloaded, and the train heads south. Three stations only - Edmonds Amtrak/Ferry docks, King Street, and Tukwila (Seatac), arrival about noon. Change ends at Tukwila and load passengers for Alaska. Head back north through King and Edmonds and drop all at Bellingham Ferry Docks again.

Of course this leaves a big question - why would Washington State want to foot the bill for tourists/travelers to get to Alaska smoothly?
This belongs in a different thread, but Bellingham-Seattle may be the best justification for a mixed train in mainland America. Operate it under contract to Alaska Railroad - a pair of freight engines, a pair of coaches (doesn’t matter which kind), direct service from Bellingham to Seattle-King Street & Tukwila for passengers & express, then on to Tacoma for interchanging the freight cars that come down from Alaska. Same trip in reverse when the ferry is ~4 hours away from departure at Bellingham.
 #1543815  by Tadman
 
AMHS ferries are not rail, just passenger and car/truck. The baggage would be for tents, canoes, large suitcases, etc... Alaska Railroad ferries are more like tug-barge if I recall, and they make a few stops like Prince Rupert and then some BN docks somewhere.
 #1544039  by gprimr1
 
I really like the idea of the designated rideshare pickup area.

I would also suggest looking at security options for some of these stations. Amtrak has a police department, providing security at stations should be part of it.
 #1544049  by eolesen
 
I don't think Amtrak's core problem in attracting riders is the stations... People don't fly because they like the airport experience. They value their time.

The only thing Amtrak needs to do to improve ridership is fix the schedule. Get there ontime, and perhaps offer service at a time when people are willing to travel.

The rest is wasted money.
 #1544077  by bdawe
 
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 8:26 am

Wouldn't that make for even worse timing into Vancouver? I can't count how many times we sit waiting for the bridge and lose an hour or so, and we keep seeing Skytrains zip by overhead somewhere near Scott Road perhaps. I think they should either decide to make the CNOR station work and do it right, or give up and terminate in Surrey and let folks ride downtown on Skytrain.
The if you go right at the junction immediately before the current station, you end up on the Burrard Inlet line which connects to waterfront station. Same bridge delays, same Willingdon Junction delays (which are likely to be ameliorated with the new siding under construction. The bridge is something to be fixed eventually, but a terminus out in Surrey is near precisely no-ones destination.
 #1544081  by Tadman
 
gprimr1 wrote: Wed May 27, 2020 8:50 pm Amtrak has a police department, providing security at stations should be part of it.
The security question is important. If a station absolutely cannot be located in a secure area, a guard or policeman is important. But should it be Amtrak police or local police? Or rentacop? I think it should be local police just like Chicago PD patrols O'hare.

For comparison, Chicago has 13,800 police, while UP has 175 and Amtrak has 450 (mostly in NEC). Twenty years ago, CNW had something like 10, five of which were on commuter detail. To cover 8,000 miles of system.

Rentacop is probably the cheapest, but you get what you pay for. I was once rudely hassled by the rentacop in Detroit, who insisted I "check in". Uh, we don't do that here.

After posting this maybe an hour ago, I have come to think the best policy would be a very public and clear "Amtrak security guarantee" that discusses station, parking, and on-train security. Of course, we'd have to adhere to it, and that's a different story. Supposedly Amtrak has an on-board standards manual. It was either written by a mad man or forgotten by all.
 #1544152  by Greg Moore
 
eolesen wrote: Thu May 28, 2020 1:52 am I don't think Amtrak's core problem in attracting riders is the stations... People don't fly because they like the airport experience. They value their time.

The only thing Amtrak needs to do to improve ridership is fix the schedule. Get there ontime, and perhaps offer service at a time when people are willing to travel.

The rest is wasted money.
I have to disagree. Yes, people value airports, but they also want clean airports where they feel safe. Witness the number of people that try to avoid flying through certain airports if they can help it.
And of course most everyone I know avoids the Port Authority Bus Terminal in NYC (something about walking through pools of pee being a turn-off).

People have a perception that trains are slow and dirty, and their first impression of some stations supports that.

Now that said, I think in most cases, the solution is not for Amtrak to own and operate the station, but for local authorities.
(though, now that I think about that, I wonder: Brightline has focused on real-estate, and Ray Kroc always said McDonald's was really in the real estate business. Perhaps Amtrak should get into real-estate and develop stations where they can pay their bills with the rent. Though not sure them owning 500 stations is the best idea. And now I suddenly recall one of my last trips on the Crescent (in 2019) where I had dinner with an employee of Amtrak who worked in real estate. Hmm..)