The limits of Amtrak wi-fi
- Thread starter CHamilton
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Ryan
Court Jester
That sounds familiar... 
TraneMan
Conductor
Why are soo many people depending on wifi when a good share of them has smart phone? I have an iPhone and using AT&T works just fine when we traveled, and I wasn't crying for WiFi on the Empire Builder.
Ryan
Court Jester
Things like wifi only iPad and iPods.
Laptops, too.
Laptops, too.
Last edited by a moderator:
amamba
Engineer
Can't work on my iPhone.
transit54
Conductor
I think upgrading to LTE will make a substantial improvement. Remember that each train carriers multiple cell antennas for different carriers. Essentially, right now they get about 1.5 mb/sec from each carrier. With LTE, they will be able to pull in around 8-12 mb/sec per carrier. That's a huge increase, and if they need to, they can always add multiple cell antennas.
Sure, will coverage drop out in places with poor cell service? Of course. But those areas cover probably less than 3 or 5% of the total NEC, perhaps much less.
The maps shown in the article are also out of date. AT&T LTE, for instance, covers almost all of the NEC in Southwestern Connecticut (from New Haven to NYC). Verizon has committed to finishing the vast majority of their LTE buildout by the middle of this year.
I manage a WiFi system for a fleet of buses for a public transit agency. When we upgraded from 3G to LTE it made an absolute world of difference. While our buses seat a fraction of those on an Amtrak train, we also only have a single carrier per bus and we make no restrictions on high bandwidth usage, which Amtrak does a very good job of.
I am inclined to disagree with the Atlantic that things won't get substantially better. LTE represents huge bandwidth jumps and is available in more places than they suggest (keep in mind that carrier maps lag about 1-3 months versus actual deployed service area). Is shared WiFi ever perfect? No. But if it's that important to you to remain connected, bring your own cellular connection. Tethering is usually a $15 or $20 monthly option with most carriers.
And the cost to build out their own trackside network would be absurd and really unnecessary for the few places where cell service currently drops out. That money is much better spent on track improvements, rolling stock and the like.
Sure, will coverage drop out in places with poor cell service? Of course. But those areas cover probably less than 3 or 5% of the total NEC, perhaps much less.
The maps shown in the article are also out of date. AT&T LTE, for instance, covers almost all of the NEC in Southwestern Connecticut (from New Haven to NYC). Verizon has committed to finishing the vast majority of their LTE buildout by the middle of this year.
I manage a WiFi system for a fleet of buses for a public transit agency. When we upgraded from 3G to LTE it made an absolute world of difference. While our buses seat a fraction of those on an Amtrak train, we also only have a single carrier per bus and we make no restrictions on high bandwidth usage, which Amtrak does a very good job of.
I am inclined to disagree with the Atlantic that things won't get substantially better. LTE represents huge bandwidth jumps and is available in more places than they suggest (keep in mind that carrier maps lag about 1-3 months versus actual deployed service area). Is shared WiFi ever perfect? No. But if it's that important to you to remain connected, bring your own cellular connection. Tethering is usually a $15 or $20 monthly option with most carriers.
And the cost to build out their own trackside network would be absurd and really unnecessary for the few places where cell service currently drops out. That money is much better spent on track improvements, rolling stock and the like.
I've had times on the Pacific Surfliner where my phone's 3G/4G worked better for internet access than the same phone via Amtrak Connect. It appeared that no internet access was available via Amtrak Connect.
transit54
Conductor
Typically, your phone's 3G/4G will always work better than a shared connection. Essentially, you are getting the full bandwidth available on a cellular connection on your phone and sharing it with no one else. When connected to Amtrak Connect, you're getting that same bandwidth and splitting it across everyone on the train. Granted, Amtrak has multiple carriers for Amtrak Connect so I'm simplifying things a bit, but that's the essence of it.
OlympianHiawatha
Engineer
This all makes you wonder how rail passengers survived before electronic took over their lives. I guess they had to interact with other passengers, perhaps enjoy good conversation and actually relax and enjoy the trip itself.
the_traveler
Engineer
TTTTAAAALLLLKKKK to real humans - in person? The horrors!
The horrors! 
I love talking with people on the train. I very much enjoy the company at mealtime, across the aisle, and when I go to the lounge car or Parlour Car.
That said, I have a laptop with me, because I have to get some work done. I don't own a smartphone because there is no cell reception where I live (so a smartphone would just be an expensive paperweight at my house). People like me DO take the EB, CS, and Amtrak Cascades. It can be hard to be without connectivity for two days between PDX and CHI. Slow/intermittent service is fine for my sparse work needs (just email and the occasional web page). I've had no complaints about the service on the CS and Cascades, I was just happy to have it. The same kind of service on the EB, even if spotty, would be very welcome. My 2 cents!
That said, I have a laptop with me, because I have to get some work done. I don't own a smartphone because there is no cell reception where I live (so a smartphone would just be an expensive paperweight at my house). People like me DO take the EB, CS, and Amtrak Cascades. It can be hard to be without connectivity for two days between PDX and CHI. Slow/intermittent service is fine for my sparse work needs (just email and the occasional web page). I've had no complaints about the service on the CS and Cascades, I was just happy to have it. The same kind of service on the EB, even if spotty, would be very welcome. My 2 cents!
Alexandria Nick
Lead Service Attendant
If I have wifi, that means I can work. Which means leaving early on a Friday for a weekend in NYC doesn't make me burn half a day in vacation.
Not everyone is riding the train for just the experience of riding a train. They're often competing against buses in the same corridor with wifi that cost less than the train. Amtrak advertises to business travelers as usable time, so the more amenities that can accommodate it, the higher ridership will be.
TimePeace
Disillusioned.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,166
One of many attractions to the train. Anything they can do to attract riders is good, business or otherwise.
There is, however, a middle ground between business travel, and "the experience of riding the train". A great many of us are using it to get someplace important but don't happen to be getting compensated for the time by our work. And yes, some of us appreciate the connectivity for personal reasons.
I also agree that the move to G4 will help a lot with Amtrak's wifi, what there is of it. My home internet connection is based on a cellular network (Verizon) and we recently experienced the upgrade from 3G to 4G. My average speeds increased by a factor of 5X.
I agree that more wifi installed on LD trains will be nice, however it can be factored into already overburdened budgets.
Ryan
Court Jester
This article explains how it works in California:
http://www.capitolcorridor.org/on_board/wifi.php
It was posted in this thread, which also has some good information:
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/53423-2012-pips-are-out/page__st__60
http://www.capitolcorridor.org/on_board/wifi.php
It was posted in this thread, which also has some good information:
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/53423-2012-pips-are-out/page__st__60
amamba
Engineer
Well that was before we all had to work 24/7.
TimePeace
Disillusioned.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,166
Never. Work more, spend more, get more stuff, be more stressed. No thanks.
oftentimes, Michigan Mom is actually happy that her socioeconomic status hinders her full participation in these types of debates.
Having said that... where I used to work.. i was continually appalled at how many people, who depend on these gadgets for everything work and personal, lose them. my #1 piece of advice: Do not ever "lock" your devices if you are prone to losing things. Never, ever. So people can access your email. Is that the end of the world? I used to turn on the device, go to the first Sent message and get the owner's identity and then called or emailed them or both. Reunited many happy owners with thier items that way. Locking the screen will make finding you close to impossible, MI Mom has other ways, such as charging the device and waiting for someone to call it... but sadly, most people aren't going to care that much to put effort into it.
Having said that... where I used to work.. i was continually appalled at how many people, who depend on these gadgets for everything work and personal, lose them. my #1 piece of advice: Do not ever "lock" your devices if you are prone to losing things. Never, ever. So people can access your email. Is that the end of the world? I used to turn on the device, go to the first Sent message and get the owner's identity and then called or emailed them or both. Reunited many happy owners with thier items that way. Locking the screen will make finding you close to impossible, MI Mom has other ways, such as charging the device and waiting for someone to call it... but sadly, most people aren't going to care that much to put effort into it.
I just have a note on my phone on the lock screen with my phone number (can remotely get voice mails) and my email address.
Ryan
Court Jester
Find my iPhone has the ability to display a message remotely. I'm sure that Android has something similar.
I'd just as soon keep my data private.
I'd just as soon keep my data private.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
- Messages
- 14
Makes one wonder what happened to "other passengers" to make pursuing good conversation less preferable than going online.
There are always two sides to everything.
I'm one of those iPod + book people who doesn't like talking to other passengers. I'm shy, and small talk terrifies me and makes me uncomfortable. Sorry if I'm ruining your trip, but I want to relax too, and that means not talking to strangers. I prefer quiet solitude with my scenery. That's my version of "relaxing". :hi:
To say nothing of the fact that you have to speak with strangers on a daily basis as part of your job.
My career of choice entailed working with the public and I enjoyed (still do) my *alone* time, whether or not strangers are present.
Being around people who are enjoying the same thing you are is nice, being 'expected' to socialize/talk because a stranger thinks you should... not so much.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
- Messages
- 14
There's another aspect of this for me (us). We go on vacation to spend time with each other. To catch up with each other. To share the experience with each other. Strangers don't add to that; sometimes the folks sitting across the table from us in the dining car actually detracted from that. We have so many opportunities to socialize with others in our lives - church, volunteering, affinity groups, etc. Vacation is not just a break from day-to-day work, but also a break from other routine aspects.
- Status
