Rail stations at Airports

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
PeeweeTM said:
Schiphol Amsterdam airport (red arrow) in attached pdf-file representing Dutch passenger railway lines.
The fully coloured lines represent half-hourly service between about 0600-2000 hrs.
Black dot: all trains stop here.
No dot: train doesn't stop.

You can see Schiphol airport has pretty good connections.
Click to expand...
Schiphol has had for 40+ years. Seems like good transport planning
 
jis said:
Exactly! This would not be the first time by a very very long shot that a tunnel was dug below the water table. Time to stretch ones imagination a bit I suppose.
Click to expand...
Hehe. Decades ago, arriving KLM first time AMS, instructed by multilingual in-person help desk to NS station several levels down from runway level, (runways only a few meters below MSL)
The emergency exit signs at the NS (Nederlandse Spoorwagen) station maybe 10 meters below the runways or 13 meters below MSL
Showed 1600 meters to the nearest exit. I was not frightened at all. 1600 meters is only a mile.
 

Attachments

  • not-exit.png
    not-exit.png
    2.7 KB · Views: 0
PeeweeTM said:
Schiphol Amsterdam airport (red arrow) in attached pdf-file representing Dutch passenger railway lines.
The fully coloured lines represent half-hourly service between about 0600-2000 hrs.
Black dot: all trains stop here.
No dot: train doesn't stop.

You can see Schiphol airport has pretty good connections.
Click to expand...
These are not just NS lines (the Dutch NS I mean). Some of the lines in the north of the country are run by other people than NS. It's a genuinely comprehensive map of passenger rail services (omitting only metros and local light rail lines for reasons of simplicity).

The map also shows the bus and ferry routes that connect the islands. I am surprised though that the bus crossing Afsluitdik is missing, as this can be used to connect between rail services and thus closes a gap in the rail network.

Piece of historical trivia: When the original Afsluitdijk was built in the 1930s it was planned to later build a double-track electrified railroad on it and space was reserved for this landside of the highway and even some preparatory concrete pored in places. Several studies were later done into the viability of this but all confirmed that there was insufficient demand in relation to the costs. Dutch railways then withdrew their interest and the project was de-listed from their development plans. One of the problems being the lack of obvious rail-based land approaches meaning a considerable length of railroad would have had to be built at either end to even reach the dyke heads, hugely adding to the costs. Much of the alignment on the dyke has since vanished as the space was needed to widen the highway. Looking at the number of cars driving here today, it is difficult to accept there is no case for a rail link.

The line between Zwolle and Lelystad mostly crosses land reclaimed from the sea. It was not completed until 2012 and provides a new shortcut between the north and the south of the country.
 
Last edited:
jis said:
Depends on the bus. Low floor buses are no more awkward than low floor LRTs.
Click to expand...
Depends on the door configuration and presence or absence of a level-boarding platform. Even low floor buses require lifting luggage a few inches from the street. If entry is thru a conventional front door, maneuvering around the corner past the driver's compartment and fare box is awkward with luggage. I don't have numbers, but it seems like many LRV's are wider than buses and have wider, more easily maneuvered aisles.
 
joelkfla said:
Depends on the door configuration and presence or absence of a level-boarding platform. Even low floor buses require lifting luggage a few inches from the street. If entry is thru a conventional front door, maneuvering around the corner past the driver's compartment and fare box is awkward with luggage. I don't have numbers, but it seems like many LRV's are wider than buses and have wider, more easily maneuvered aisles.
Click to expand...
But it is not worth a few hundred million dollars to just work around these absent the potential demand to justify the cost. Precious transit dollars should be used where needed and access to airports is not always their best use, given that often the rest of the urban area has precious little of it in typical US towns.

It really is much cheaper to build a bunch of low floor level boarding platforms than an entire LRT system ;)
 
jis said:
But it is not worth a few hundred million dollars to just work around these absent the potential demand to justify the cost. Precious transit dollars should be used where needed and access to airports is not always their best use, given that often the rest of the urban area has precious little of it in typical US towns.

It really is much cheaper to build a bunch of low floor level boarding platforms than an entire LRT system ;)
Click to expand...
Airport connections are often prestige projects which is why, sometimes maybe, the same levels of scrutiny are not applied as are used in justifying other LRT projects.
 
cirdan said:
interesting to note that article is dated 2018, and no progress since ....
Click to expand...
Apparently they have other bigger fish to fry for now. As I alluded to earlier, an airport light rail connection is not that high a priority at present. It is more or less a back burner thing for now.
 
cirdan said:
There are subway system where the subway has individual stops serving separate terminals. In London Heathrow for example both the Piccadilly line and Elizabeth line do this. So essentially the metro system fulfils the role of ground-side circulator between the terminals (use is free for inter-terminal rides) while also assuring passengers arriving by metro don't need to change to a different vehicle.


For some reason that is not entirely clear to me, airports the world over seem to love gadgetbahns but need a lot of pushing, shoving and arm twisting to accept the extension of a regular light rail system even when one runs right up to their doorstep.

Maybe something to do with wanting to control everything themselves?
Click to expand...
There is an Amtrak/Metrolink station one block from the Burbank(Bob Hope) airport. They have shuttles, but we just walk.
 
west point said:
As far as I know there is not a subway closer to domestic bag claim and ticketing than ATL airport to MARTA, No intermediate transportation needed. BART might come close??i
Click to expand...
Philadelphia, where the train platform is just down the hall from bag claim. It's regional rail rather than subway though.
 
west point said:
As far as I know there is not a subway closer to domestic bag claim and ticketing than ATL airport to MARTA, No intermediate transportation needed. BART might come close??i
Click to expand...
SFO has a BART station. In Oakland I think you have to catch a shuttle. San Jose has a 5 minute shuttle to the Caltrain station, which gets you to San Jose Diridon Amtrak.
 
jis said:
San Diego Airport has a very convenient frequent bus connection from the airport to Santa Fe Depot, and at least for now it seems to be more than adequate for extremely minimal capital cost.
Click to expand...
There will be some sort of people-mover built from San Diego Airport Terminal 1 to the new rail station by Old Town if/when that is built. Extending the trolley is infeasible due to FRA regulations and having no good path to connect a rail line to downtown.
 
allanorn said:
There will be some sort of people-mover built from San Diego Airport Terminal 1 to the new rail station by Old Town if/when that is built. Extending the trolley is infeasible due to FRA regulations and having no good path to connect a rail line to downtown.
Click to expand...
Well it could still be built, but it will cost way more than if the FRA mandated things did not have to be addressed..
 
Last edited:
west point said:
As far as I know there is not a subway closer to domestic bag claim and ticketing than ATL airport to MARTA, No intermediate transportation needed. BART might come close??i
Click to expand...
Chicago has a connection to the L, but only one and I forget what terminal it is out of.
anilou said:
SFO has a BART station. In Oakland I think you have to catch a shuttle. San Jose has a 5 minute shuttle to the Caltrain station, which gets you to San Jose Diridon Amtrak.
Click to expand...
SFO has a BART station on property that's directly connected to the airport. Oakland has a gadgetbahn that is run by BART and requires a separate fare to ride to the Oakland Coliseum BART station. San Jose uses the #60 bus which runs between the Milpitas BART station, the San Jose VTA tram, and the Santa Clara Caltrain station. It doesn't connect to Diridon directly.
 
jis said:
Well it could still be built, but it will cost way more than anyone is willing to spend on it.
Click to expand...
It's in the approved plans and they're beginning work on the station in Terminal 1 soon (if not already). SANDAG wants it done. I forget who's pitching in money for what part though, but it's happening. They want to get rid of the buses to Old Town and have better connections for everyone north/east of Old Town via rail. The airport bus (#992) is great but a nightmare to connect to if you're not downtown, which is why there are buses connecting directly to Old Town.

Until relatively recently (2019-ish?) only airport fees and funds could be used on things at the airport for the airport. You couldn't use airport cash to build direct transit stations because Federal law didn't allow it. That's also why airports in the USA have all these weird gadgetbahns between airports and transit. (I don't know how the Portland MAX and Chicago "L" got around that; the city could have just ponied up the cash to outright build it.)
 
railbuck said:
The Blue Line El at ORD has connecting walkways to terminals 1, 2, and 3. Access to terminal 5 is via the ATS people mover from terminal 3.
Click to expand...
Under the main parking garage (immediately under what was a temporary international terminal for ages) - quicker access than parking in the garages, since you don't have to take the elevator or stairs down to the walkway level like you do if you park. The people mover/ATS sort of connects to commuter rail too, but not well, plus only one line, the North Central Line, serves the airport. This is despite Metra being the way to really fly.*

https://www.flychicago.com/ohare/tofrom/publictransit/Pages/default.aspx
Midway has L access too, but not as formalized - a covered walk through the parking structure. But shorter than at O'Hare as befits a more compact airport with one security and exit point.

https://www.flychicago.com/midway/tofrom/publictransit/pages/default.aspx

*Metra Commercial, featuring old MED highliners while we're at it...

 
allanorn said:
Chicago has a connection to the L, but only one and I forget what terminal it is out of.

SFO has a BART station on property that's directly connected to the airport. Oakland has a gadgetbahn that is run by BART and requires a separate fare to ride to the Oakland Coliseum BART station. San Jose uses the #60 bus which runs between the Milpitas BART station, the San Jose VTA tram, and the Santa Clara Caltrain station. It doesn't connect to Diridon directly.
Click to expand...
#60 makes a stop at the VTA light rail station where you can take the light rail directly to Diridon.
 
AmtrakBlue said:
#60 makes a stop at the VTA light rail station where you can take the light rail directly to Diridon.
Click to expand...
Correct, which is the cheaper and often faster way to get to Diridon from the airport. Going by Caltrain you run the risk of hourly trains on the weekend.

The relatively easy way around that is to take the Rapid #522 bus downtown at the Santa Clara Caltrain station, which will stop within a couple-minute walk to Diridon. Not sure if it's faster than #60 to the light rail station to Diridon.
 
I talked to a member of MODOT, (Missouri Department Of Transportation). He said they had talked about s possible Amtrak Station at Lambert St. Louis Airport for a possible St. Louis-Moberly-Kansas City Amtrak Service.. He said the possible service would run over Norfolk Southern from St Louis to Carrollton, Mo and BNSF from (Carrollton to Kansas City, the same trackage the Southwest Chief uses). 83 percent of Missourians in a recent poll said they wanted additional Amtrak Service in the State. Don’t know if it will happen but the fact that they have considered it is a glimmer of hope.
 
uncleboots said:
I talked to a member of MODOT, (Missouri Department Of Transportation). He said they had talked about s possible Amtrak Station at Lambert St. Louis Airport for a possible St. Louis-Moberly-Kansas City Amtrak Service.. He said the possible service would run over Norfolk Southern from St Louis to Carrollton, Mo and BNSF from (Carrollton to Kansas City, the same trackage the Southwest Chief uses). 83 percent of Missourians in a recent poll said they wanted additional Amtrak Service in the State. Don’t know if it will happen but the fact that they have considered it is a glimmer of hope.
Click to expand...
Interesting! I had to look up Moberly. The tracks do go right alongside the airport per OpenRailwayMap. Certainly would be an interesting development.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top