Amtrak to Long Island

[LIT 150]

Unfortunately, joint through service will most likely never happen due to many reasons.

First, back in 2002, Amtrak ran a test train all the way out to Montauk. They found that the equipment did not make good/safe clearances in certain portions, so that idea was scrapped. The only other known time they ran on the LIRR was for some Mets games.

Second, with the current Empire Service trains only running with only one direction engine,there would only be a handful of places to turn the engines, and none are within 50 miles of Penn Station.

Third, why the heck would they run to places like Hicksville? There are plenty of trains that serve these populated areas perfectly fine.

Look, I can tell you for a fact that there will not be any Amtrak trains running on LIRR tracks past Harold. It would be very profitable in the summer if they ran a train from Penn to Montauk/Albany to Montauk/ etc etc, but lets face reality, the LIRR is not doing this plain and simple.

 

[NY Penn]

Stats seem to indicate that such a service would enjoy significant popularity. According to Wikipedia (

), Nassau County has a population density 8 times greater than that of Albany County (1800 people/km2 vs. 225 people/km2). Along with the easy connection to JFK Airport, IMO such a service would enjoy significant usage.

Maybe there could be three roundtrips on weekdays extended:

NYP........JAM........HKS

07:45.....08:00.....08:20

12:45.....13:00.....13:20

18:55.....19:10.....19:30

HKS........JAM........NYP

09:30.....09:50.....10:05

01:30.....01:50.....02:05

18:45.....20:05.....20:40

I'm not aware of any such law. Amtrak does have certain agreements in some places, like on the Metro North Hudson line, where they won't sell a ticket between MN stations. So you can't for example go from Poughkeepsie to Croton Harmon or say Yonkers. But you can buy a ticket from Yonkers to NYP or even Albany.

That brings up an interesting point: this appears to be allowed but actually is not. When the city pair is typed in, the screen shows up, but adding to cart gives a system error.

 

[benjibear]

I was able to add them to my cart.

 

[NY Penn]

EDIT: So was I. So AlanB is incorrect.

 

[AlanB]

Adding something to the cart does not mean that one can actually complete the sale.

A couple of years ago I was able to add a sleeper to the cart, but was unable to actually complete the sale.

That said, it seems as though this restriction may well have been dropped. It used to be noted in the timetables, but I no longer see any mention of it. Not sure when the dropped that restriction, but I'm glad that they did.

 

[DingDong]

Stats seem to indicate that such a service would enjoy significant popularity. According to Wikipedia (

), Nassau County has a population density 8 times greater than that of Albany County (1800 people/km2 vs. 225 people/km2). Along with the easy connection to JFK Airport, IMO such a service would enjoy significant usage.

Maybe running them to Babylon instead of Hicksville would work better. It would avoid the Main Line and its capacity problems. On the other hand, it's not as central so probably would not draw as much ridership.

 

[DingDong]

That said, it seems as though this restriction may well have been dropped. It used to be noted in the timetables, but I no longer see any mention of it. Not sure when the dropped that restriction, but I'm glad that they did.

Odd, I tested this just last week and I was unable to pull up an itinerary (it gave an error message).

 

[LIT 150]

Stats seem to indicate that such a service would enjoy significant popularity. According to Wikipedia (

), Nassau County has a population density 8 times greater than that of Albany County (1800 people/km2 vs. 225 people/km2). Along with the easy connection to JFK Airport, IMO such a service would enjoy significant usage.

Maybe running them to Babylon instead of Hicksville would work better. It would avoid the Main Line and its capacity problems. On the other hand, it's not as central so probably would not draw as much ridership.

It will NEVER happen. The LIRR serves Long Island; Amtrak serves Albany, plain and simple.

 

[jis]

It will NEVER happen. The LIRR serves Long Island; Amtrak serves Albany, plain and simple.

You are absolutely correct. But that is hardly a good reason not to have a 7 page discussion here.

It is more likely to happen if MNRR stretches its range to include Albany. But still it is highly unlikely.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

That's because you are familiar with, and comfortable in, the system.

Through ticketing can be very important to the passenger experience for occasional riders. It is one of the reasons that Britain has continuously imposed the requirement on its private operators, and many people purchase through tickets, at higher prices than they would pay if they broke the trip into two, and bought separate tickets on each operator's service. SNCF has just introduced a feature on its web site to automatically propose local connecting services off of main line trains.

Would extending Empire Service trains onto Long Island be a good idea? Maybe. There is a lot of precedent for this type of thing in the bus world, or in other countries. Example: many buses arriving in downtown Boston are timetabled to continue to Logan Airport. In fact, if three buses operated by the same company arrive at the same time downtown, the drivers will transfer their few Logan-bound pax to just one of those three buses for the trip on to Logan, and only one bus will really run through. But the timetable says that all three do, and the service is popular.

Greyhound has long originated many buses on Long Island. And suburban stops usefully compete with air and bus service all over North America (Dorval for Montréal, Route 128 for Boston, Metropark, New Carrollton, Glenview, Glendale...). We even have a US example: the Detroit - Chicago trains which now originate in Pontiac.

But, failing that, through ticketing is a no-brainer. You should absolutely be able to buy a ticket from Philadelphia to Babylon, and make the tightest possible connection at NYP. Without having to figure out the ticket machines....

Why can't Amtrak do something like they do with Atlantic City. You can buy tickets for Atlantic City on NJ Transit via Amtrak. Maybe this shouldn't be done for parallel lines, but just think a National Train System where you can buy tickets to places not just served by Amtrak but other commuter railroads. It would have to help the railorad indistry on a whole. Maybe not though.

It is not exactly that difficult to buy tickets for LIRR at NYP. It is a commuter train system, no reservations needed. Just walk up to the ticket machine and buy a ticket. For intercity transportation, we could use more integration or sharing in buying tickets, but for commuter trains I don't see much benefit to the idea.

 

[jis]

I absolutely agree with the idea of selling inter-line tickets universally across the US. US has to be one of the few countries in the work that does not have interline ticket clearing house for RRs. Even most airlines, those that are members of IATA are able to do this among themselves.

 

[DingDong]

I absolutely agree with the idea of selling inter-line tickets universally across the US. US has to be one of the few countries in the work that does not have interline ticket clearing house for RRs.

Any ideas on why it has not happened?

 

[zephyr17]

I absolutely agree with the idea of selling inter-line tickets universally across the US. US has to be one of the few countries in the work that does not have interline ticket clearing house for RRs.

Any ideas on why it has not happened?

When private railroads had the system, there was interline ticketing via all of them. You could walk into a, say, SP ticket office and buy a ticket for every railroad in the country. It wasn't fast, as it was manual, and they'd have to wire the operating railroad to secure space if reservations were required, but they could write the ticket and they had a clearinghouse system like ARC for settling. In fact, the RRs, not the airlines, originated the term "interline". Amtrak even interlined with the remaining private RRs offering intercity passenger service after Amday (D&RGW and Southern. Not sure about Rock Island).

You are talking about interlining with commuter lines that are separate from the operating railroads, and post-1971 the responsibility for those were split. Back in the day, you could interline with the commuter services as they were offered by RRs participating in the interline system, LIRR via PRR, NYC, New Haven, SP for the Pennisula, etc. Since Amday, those services basically evolved separately, Amtrak taking intercity, and local transit agencies taking over the commuter lines. And the need isn't as much. Back in the day, you had to interline to write a ticket from New York to Los Angeles. It is all Amtrak now, except commuter lines.

 

[Heading North]

I love the idea of interlining, especially because lots of my Amtrak trips may also involve NJT or VRE. But, there are two reasons why I wouldn't see it, and another option that could work:

1. Who would collect and maintain schedules for the different commuter railroads? I can't see Amtrak taking on this role for free.

2. How do you handle connections, guaranteed and otherwise? Let's say I'm taking Amtrak from WAS-TRE, then NJT from TRE-PJC. This happens fairly often, since PJC sees very little Amtrak service, and I'm not going to leave WAS at 6:20 am on a weekend [when the Metro isn't open until 7] just to make the guaranteed connection in PHL. If I had a joint ticket, and my train was late arriving into TRE, I could just take the next northbound NJT train using my ticket. That's no big deal. But in the opposite direction, if I'm on NJT from PJC to TRE and somehow miss my connection, does Amtrak have to rebook me? What if, instead of TRE-WAS, I'm traveling on one of the longer east coast trains, say to North Carolina or Florida, and miss the connection? (For that matter, what if I miss the Cardinal?) Yes, the odds of a stalled NJT train on the NEC also delaying Amtrak are pretty good, but what about other lines that connect with the NEC?

3. One thing that should work: Some old timetables (I have a hard-copy 1981 timetable; I'm sure it's available at the timetable museum) had very clear charts showing connecting lines. In this case, you could see the commuter lines out of Grand Central, Hoboken, Reading Terminal in Philadelphia, etc. and find that yes, you *can* get there from here. I don't think it would be that hard to make these available in schedules again, maybe with different colors illustrating whether it's weekday-only, rush-hour-only, or more common, and then (at least for people who actually read timetables!) the options are clear. Maybe this could be tied to the station pages on the website. Just a thought.

 

[DingDong]

I love the idea of interlining, especially because lots of my Amtrak trips may also involve NJT or VRE. But, there are two reasons why I wouldn't see it, and another option that could work:

1. Who would collect and maintain schedules for the different commuter railroads? I can't see Amtrak taking on this role for free.

2. How do you handle connections, guaranteed and otherwise? Let's say I'm taking Amtrak from WAS-TRE, then NJT from TRE-PJC. This happens fairly often, since PJC sees very little Amtrak service, and I'm not going to leave WAS at 6:20 am on a weekend [when the Metro isn't open until 7] just to make the guaranteed connection in PHL. If I had a joint ticket, and my train was late arriving into TRE, I could just take the next northbound NJT train using my ticket. That's no big deal. But in the opposite direction, if I'm on NJT from PJC to TRE and somehow miss my connection, does Amtrak have to rebook me? What if, instead of TRE-WAS, I'm traveling on one of the longer east coast trains, say to North Carolina or Florida, and miss the connection? (For that matter, what if I miss the Cardinal?) Yes, the odds of a stalled NJT train on the NEC also delaying Amtrak are pretty good, but what about other lines that connect with the NEC?

3. One thing that should work: Some old timetables (I have a hard-copy 1981 timetable; I'm sure it's available at the timetable museum) had very clear charts showing connecting lines. In this case, you could see the commuter lines out of Grand Central, Hoboken, Reading Terminal in Philadelphia, etc. and find that yes, you *can* get there from here. I don't think it would be that hard to make these available in schedules again, maybe with different colors illustrating whether it's weekday-only, rush-hour-only, or more common, and then (at least for people who actually read timetables!) the options are clear. Maybe this could be tied to the station pages on the website. Just a thought.

1. Google Transit basically has all the schedules already available and remarkably up-to-date. If reassembling that data would be too hard (and I doubt it would, as the railways constantly update their information), then I'm sure Google could sell it and Amtrak could add a small $2 interlining charge into the ticket price (would not have to be apparent to purchaser that the ticket costs slightly more).

2. There could be a disclaimer about missed connections on interlined services--i.e., do this at your own risk.

3. Good idea. Or a more high-tech version -- short of actually offering interlined tickets, you could put in "PHL to Danbury" on amtrak.com and the website sells you the Philadelphia to Stamford ticket and then tells you "Purchase a MNRR ticket at Stamford on the 4:23pm to Danbury."

 

[Hotblack Desiato]

I absolutely agree with the idea of selling inter-line tickets universally across the US. US has to be one of the few countries in the work that does not have interline ticket clearing house for RRs.

Any ideas on why it has not happened?

Because commuter railroads fall under the jurisdiction of transit authorities, and, among other challenges:

1) Transit authorities generally don't have reservations systems and, for the most part, have only basic/rudimentary ticketing systems (even the fancy Cubic/GFI vending machines that you see in large train stations don't really do much except sell you a fare from A to B). Amtrak's system is based around reserving space on a specific train (even for unreserved trains, you still have to pick a train when booking your trip). Transit systems would need to generate some kind of feed that would input a schedule, and fares, into Arrow or whatever ticketing system was ultimately used. They would probably argue that the added cost of doing so (individually) would not be covered with higher overall fares, and therefore they can't do it. Metra in Chicago, for example, didn't even take credit cards until recently (they claim due to the cost), and except for Millennium Station, do not have ticket vending machines anywhere. Other than that, all ticketing is done manually (again, they claim it would cost too much to convert to a system that uses vending machines).

This is a problem because:

2) Transit is horribly, terribly, atrociously underfunded in the US. Most of the rest of the world has money available to develop/implement common ticketing systems. In the US, every transit system is for itself, and getting even neighboring transit systems to come to an agreement on fare integration, let alone a system where someone could start their trip on SEPTA, ride to 30th Street, take Amtrak to Boston, and ride MBTA all on one ticket, is extremely difficult.

This results in a situation where:

3) Transit systems have different fare structures and rules and policies. There is no nationwide standard for transit fare payment (and this ties into 2) above), and developing one would require every system to agree on things, and then take tons of money to implement. Some systems are proof-of-payment based, where a ticket is only valid for a certain period of time after you purchase it. Other systems use conductor lift (similar to Amtrak), where a ticket is valid until used (or until a certain expiration date) and a conductor lifts it/takes it/hole punches it/staples it/eats it/folds it up/throws it away.

A time-based proof-of-payment ticket wouldn't work on Amtrak today because you wouldn't know if your train was going to be on time or not. Some systems have ticket validators, but then you'd need to change Amtrak's ticketing, and standardize on something that could work in a universal validator (so that once you arrive, you can validate your ticket and have it good for the next train out).

Trying to impose a federal mandate that transit systems standardize their fare collection policies to work with a nationwide rail network would offend all sorts of "states rights" folks. Having a system be compatible with dozens (hundreds?) of different fare and ticketing systems so that each could run their own would be unmanageable. Yet one or the other would pretty much be necessary in order to implement this kind of service.

 

[MikefromCrete]

There's no advantage for local commuter systems to take part in such a system. Any transfers from Amtrak to local commuter trains probably wouldn't increase ridership or revenue that much for the commuter trains. As stated above, the commuter just sell tickets without regard to who will be riding what train. There would be little gain for the commuter authorities and probably a lot of cost to link up with an Amtrak intercity ticket sales computer system.

 

[Ocala Mike]

OK, I am old enough to remember traveling as a young lad 20 or more years before Amtrak on a trip that was routed over three different railroads (NYNH&H/B&M/MEC). I think the paper ticket that my mother had was essentially in three different sections, and had to be presented each time the conductor asked for it, at which time he would remove the ticket portion good for that part of the journey. Very cumbersome, but I guess workable from the standpoint of the railroad's accounting departments. Like another poster on here suggested, however, is the fact that the passenger railroads pre-Amtrak, just as now, rarely if ever "interlined" with commuter railroads like the LIRR.

Ocala Mike

 

[B&Ofan]

What I thought was amusing (and confusing) in the schedule on this page was that the trains from Pittsburgh and Washington were on Standard time (EST) and the Long Island trains were on Daylight Savings time (DST). It makes you wonder what time the clocks in Penn station were set to.

afigg: Here's a great link for the Sunrise Special:

http://arrts-arrchives.com/sunrisespl.html

It appears that a PRR DD-1 brought the train through the East River tunnel, and a switch to a G-5S was made at "H" Tower.

Ocala Mike

 

[DingDong]

There's no advantage for local commuter systems to take part in such a system. Any transfers from Amtrak to local commuter trains probably wouldn't increase ridership or revenue that much for the commuter trains. As stated above, the commuter just sell tickets without regard to who will be riding what train. There would be little gain for the commuter authorities and probably a lot of cost to link up with an Amtrak intercity ticket sales computer system.

All very good points. Still seems like it would be a good idea for Amtrak to display connections on its website when you buy tickets (getting the data from Google, as Google Transit already has most commuter schedules). Even if you couldn't actually buy a connecting ticket, it still seems like the benefits would outweight the (really quite minor) costs to allow people to type in, say, "PHL" as a departure station and "Danbury" as an arrival and get a sense of the length of the wait for the connection, the total trip time etc. etc. all at once as they are buying their Amtrak ticket.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

There's no advantage for local commuter systems to take part in such a system. Any transfers from Amtrak to local commuter trains probably wouldn't increase ridership or revenue that much for the commuter trains. As stated above, the commuter just sell tickets without regard to who will be riding what train. There would be little gain for the commuter authorities and probably a lot of cost to link up with an Amtrak intercity ticket sales computer system.

Metrolink does it, although thats with Amtrak California.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

I think that this assertion would need to be substantiated.

I think that there is the potential for a great number of additional tickets sold. And, as you can read in the thread above, many other authorities around the world have concluded that, too. Amtrak's Thruway bus network is nothing more than an interline ticket system, seeking to expand the railroad's reach beyond its bare-bones network....

From the commuter authority's point-of-view, any additional revenue is gravy, especially since pax connecting to and from long distance services are as likely to travel off-peak as peak. Amtrak gets to claim more service points. And we all know people who get picked up from their trains, rather than making easy connections, because it is "too complicated."

There's no advantage for local commuter systems to take part in such a system. Any transfers from Amtrak to local commuter trains probably wouldn't increase ridership or revenue that much for the commuter trains. As stated above, the commuter just sell tickets without regard to who will be riding what train. There would be little gain for the commuter authorities and probably a lot of cost to link up with an Amtrak intercity ticket sales computer system.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

We're making this way too complicated.

No one is suggesting federal mandates or universal coverage. Only a modest effort by Amtrak, met half way by forward thinking commuter authorities looking for new revenues. Whoever wants to play can play. The others can stay home and pout. No discounts, special fares... just a simple, one-way ticket, tacked on to / part of the Amtrak ticket. Period.

- The accounting is simple (Amtrak turns over the revenues for the tickets it sells).

- The tickets on the commuter authorities don't permit stopovers, at least not beyond the same day: if you arrive at NYP with a thru ticket to, say, Port Jefferson, your LIRR ride must happen the same day as the date of the Amtrak trip.

- The commuter conductor doesn't even need to lift a coupon, just see it. If he is suspicious, he can ask for ID (a requirement of riding Amtrak). Tickets are nominative, though why the commuter authority would care WHO is using the ticket is not clear, since they are not discounted.

- If the commuter authority wants a head count of Amtrak pax per train (to make sure Amtrak is turning over the proper revenues), its conductors can keep count. There won't be 1,000 people aboard, it should be easy to get rough figures.

- Passengers who qualify for some sort of special fare on the commuter authority would have the option of doing as now: waiting in line to buy the commuter ticket at the connection point. Or, for the convenience of the through ticket, forgoing the discount.

This happens around the world, and especially in countries reputed for their transit systems. Heck, where I now live (in Paris) the subway system interlines with commuter rail, and even local buses operated by private companies! In your subway station, you can buy a ticket to an outer suburb, including the subway trip, and the connecting train. Your monthly pass is good on any bus, train or street car operating within your pass' zones, anywhere in the region (and there are something like 50 operators!).

Let's look for ways to help North American railways catch up. Solutions, not problems!

I absolutely agree with the idea of selling inter-line tickets universally across the US. US has to be one of the few countries in the work that does not have interline ticket clearing house for RRs.

Any ideas on why it has not happened?

Because commuter railroads fall under the jurisdiction of transit authorities, and, among other challenges:

1) Transit authorities generally don't have reservations systems and, for the most part, have only basic/rudimentary ticketing systems (even the fancy Cubic/GFI vending machines that you see in large train stations don't really do much except sell you a fare from A to B). Amtrak's system is based around reserving space on a specific train (even for unreserved trains, you still have to pick a train when booking your trip). Transit systems would need to generate some kind of feed that would input a schedule, and fares, into Arrow or whatever ticketing system was ultimately used. They would probably argue that the added cost of doing so (individually) would not be covered with higher overall fares, and therefore they can't do it. Metra in Chicago, for example, didn't even take credit cards until recently (they claim due to the cost), and except for Millennium Station, do not have ticket vending machines anywhere. Other than that, all ticketing is done manually (again, they claim it would cost too much to convert to a system that uses vending machines).

This is a problem because:

2) Transit is horribly, terribly, atrociously underfunded in the US. Most of the rest of the world has money available to develop/implement common ticketing systems. In the US, every transit system is for itself, and getting even neighboring transit systems to come to an agreement on fare integration, let alone a system where someone could start their trip on SEPTA, ride to 30th Street, take Amtrak to Boston, and ride MBTA all on one ticket, is extremely difficult.

This results in a situation where:

3) Transit systems have different fare structures and rules and policies. There is no nationwide standard for transit fare payment (and this ties into 2) above), and developing one would require every system to agree on things, and then take tons of money to implement. Some systems are proof-of-payment based, where a ticket is only valid for a certain period of time after you purchase it. Other systems use conductor lift (similar to Amtrak), where a ticket is valid until used (or until a certain expiration date) and a conductor lifts it/takes it/hole punches it/staples it/eats it/folds it up/throws it away.

A time-based proof-of-payment ticket wouldn't work on Amtrak today because you wouldn't know if your train was going to be on time or not. Some systems have ticket validators, but then you'd need to change Amtrak's ticketing, and standardize on something that could work in a universal validator (so that once you arrive, you can validate your ticket and have it good for the next train out).

Trying to impose a federal mandate that transit systems standardize their fare collection policies to work with a nationwide rail network would offend all sorts of "states rights" folks. Having a system be compatible with dozens (hundreds?) of different fare and ticketing systems so that each could run their own would be unmanageable. Yet one or the other would pretty much be necessary in order to implement this kind of service.

 

[DingDong]

We're making this way too complicated.

Solutions, not problems!

I like this attitude! I would also add to your list -- it's true some commuter railways use time-window ticketing, but those don't have to join if they don't want to. MNRR, LIRR and NJ Transit is already a very large percentage of the US commuter rail network and their ticketing system would work fine.

What's interesting is that Amtrak already runs a whole bunch of the US commuter network under contract (Metrolink, Shore Line East, etc.). You'd think that would make it easier to do interline ticketing (or at least displaying the commuter schedules and destinations on the Amtrak ticketing website).

And I'll mention again -- the scheduling data is already there on Google Transit. Not much more work is required.

 

[Donctor]

What's interesting is that Amtrak already runs a whole bunch of the US commuter network under contract (Metrolink, Shore Line East, etc.). You'd think that would make it easier to do interline ticketing (or at least displaying the commuter schedules and destinations on the Amtrak ticketing website).

If they're just getting paid to run the trains, then no, I don't think that would have much bearing on their ability to cross-ticket.