EchoSierra
Train Attendant
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2017
- Messages
- 84
They should just bring it back. When people see the train is almost full, it's an incentive to book immediately.
Ouch!Amtrak gets a juvenile sense of power and authority with obfuscation of information, whether it be load factors, timetables, laziness in posting Twitter delays and cancellations, Adirondack suspension, you name it.
I do not understand why Amtrak cannot simply publish how many seats are available at what fare at any given point in time. Airlines are able to do this and even third world railways like in India are able to do this even on trains and accommodation which are subject to yield management, and of course on trains and accommodations that are not subject to yield management (there are both types of trains in their system), and even publish status of waiting lists (WL) and reservation against cancellation (RAC) lists. It may have something to do with Amtrak not having a single source of truth database like these other systems do, and being hamstrung in funding to get to such a state.Amtrak put up those percentages so that people could avoid crowded conditions during Covid. With the pandemic gone, so is that feature.
I think Amtrak is significantly handicapped by having chosen less than competent contractors to revamp their customer facing IT platform, together with ill conceived destaffing of functions that are important for providing useful and convenient information to the customers in a usable for.Amtrak gets a juvenile sense of power and authority with obfuscation of information, whether it be load factors, timetables, laziness in posting Twitter delays and cancellations, Adirondack suspension, you name it.
Airlines just give a figure between 0 and 9 (9 meaning 9+). You don't want to give too much insight on your business to competitors...I do not understand why Amtrak cannot simply publish how many seats are available at what fare at any given point in time. Airlines are able to do this
Actually that is sufficient information for most purposes. Of course in an environment where trains mostly run full and are more often than not sold out a few days before departure there are additional facilities available and numbers associated with those like Waiting Lists and Reservation Against Cancellations which carry different fare supplements. But Amtrak can barely manage straight reservations so we won;t worry about such complications.Airlines just give a figure between 0 and 9 (9 meaning 9+). You don't want to give too much insight on your business to competitors...
My understanding is all connecting city pairs must be entered into ARROW individually. I understand it cannot even handle entering connections on a train to train basis.In today's episode of "Amtrak IT issues", someone made me realize that you currently cannot book a trip that only combines the Empire Builder (8/28) then the Lake Shore Limited (48/448) with a single transfer. Any other combination including this one is fine though.
Fargo > Pittsfield? Gives you Fargo > 8 > Chicago > 48 > Albany > 448 > Pittsfield.
Fargo > Albany then? No connection available.
Seattle > Pittsfield? Again, Seattle > 8 > Chicago > 48 > Albany > 448 > Pittsfield.
But Seattle > Albany? Seattle > 11 > Sacramento (!) > 6 > Chicago > 48 or 448 > Albany
What about Portland > Albany? It's shorter, Portland > 500 > Seattle > 8 > Chicago > 48 or 448 > Albany...
Also strange that they make you change from 48 to 448 at ALB rather than booking you on 448 the whole way from Chicago.In today's episode of "Amtrak IT issues", someone made me realize that you currently cannot book a trip that only combines the Empire Builder (8/28) then the Lake Shore Limited (48/448) with a single transfer. Any other combination including this one is fine though.
Fargo > Pittsfield? Gives you Fargo > 8 > Chicago > 48 > Albany > 448 > Pittsfield.
Fargo > Albany then? No connection available.
Seattle > Pittsfield? Again, Seattle > 8 > Chicago > 48 > Albany > 448 > Pittsfield.
But Seattle > Albany? Seattle > 11 > Sacramento (!) > 6 > Chicago > 48 or 448 > Albany
What about Portland > Albany? It's shorter, Portland > 500 > Seattle > 8 > Chicago > 48 or 448 > Albany...
The proper city pair routing entries are apparently temporarily missing/dropped inside ARROW. It is entirely a system artifact, not reality. When you realize the city pairs with routes have to be manually entered into ARROW, that pretty much explains such temporary screw ups. The remaining options are just that, ones that did not get dropped for whatever reason. 48/448 change at Albany has usually been a valid option that route, that one just didn't get sideswiped in the current mess and is now is the only/top option. For me, right now the displayed SEA-NYP options 8/30/42, 11/6/48, 11/6/50, but not 8/48.Also strange that they make you change from 48 to 448 at ALB rather than booking you on 448 the whole way from Chicago.
Enter your email address to join: