Is Amtrak getting stricter with the carry on policy?

[BCL]

Sorry.  Poor wording on my part.  When saying "I, for one, certainly hope so." I was referring to stricter enforcement of the existing policy - not making the existing policy stricter. 

They need to start somewhere.  While I appreciate that the hands off policy can help passengers, when they have passengers who openly move their entire living rooms on board it gets pretty ridiculous.

 

[niemi24s]

And when someone reports here that they successfully "took their entire living room on board" it becomes the new norm for some people.  Then, later, when someone unsuccessfully tries to get aboard with their entire living room they post here to complain about it and we end up with threads similar to this.  

 

[railbuck]

You can do laundry on the road ...

Certainly.  You just need to find a washboard road.

 

[CelticWhisper]

Isn't that what those ridges of bumps are along the side of some roads?  I just set cruise control and hang out the door with my soaped-up clothes - works a treat.

 

[BCL]

Isn't that what those ridges of bumps are along the side of some roads?  I just set cruise control and hang out the door with my soaped-up clothes - works a treat.

Rumble strips?

I remember joking with friends about "driving by Braille" although it was back when the reference would have been to driving over raised lane markers.

Seriously though - those things are great when driving in the snow and it's hard to figure out where the dividing line it.  On US-50 on the way to Lake Tahoe, it's an undivided road.  They have rumble strips on the center line too, although often those are two pairs of double yellows with a bit of separation.

 

[fillyjonk]

I remember 10-12 years ago, getting on at MIN, a couple tried to get on with one of those 4' tall trash cans full of stuff. I guess they were moving house? They were boarding a different car so I never saw if they were successful. I also once saw a car attendant tell a woman her suitcase was too heavy and she had to take some stuff out. I guess she did, handed it to the person who had driven her to the station. The baggage rules are more generous than the airlines but I do think they do need to enforce them, at least when it's ridiculously over. I can't imagine the car attendants having a scale or something and weighing every single bag to be sure it's under 50 lbs, but yeah, not letting people drag a 4' by 2' by 2' trashcan totally stuffed with clothes means there's actually room for the other passengers' stuff.

I tend to be a bit paranoid about the limits - 3 week trip into cold-weather land with a small suitcase and one of those Vera Bradley duffel bags as my carry on. I'd rather not be told I have to quickly jettison some stuff.

I usually get on at Mineola, which is unstaffed, so I can't check bags. (Or else I'd check my suitcase just to avoid having to mess with it. Once I wound up with it in my roommette because there was no more room on the lower luggage rack in the bilevel car)

 

[Siegmund]

I haven't seen any sign of enforcement in Whitefish - but I haven't seen anyone try to take anything absolutely ridiculous, either. Just that there is no barrier beyond carrying it past the attendant.

I imagine that means something insanely huge would get stopped. But if you can lift 75 pounds without being in visible agony... just don't hand it to the attendant to carry it for you and he won't know. In the sleeper, the attendant might try quite hard to be helpful.

 

[Karl1459]

The 50 lb rule should be a hard rule, I read a nstb report on an Amtrak derailment that occurred in Canada (Cant remember the train right know, think it was Detroit-Toronto), the conclusion was that many injuries were caused by flying luggage and a strong recommendation for the 50 lb limit was issued.

If there were an issue with too many pieces (which could be combined under the 50 lb limit), a 55 gal garbage bag could aid in correcting the piece count. Personally I find it easier to carry and stow multiple smaller bags than one or two larger ones.

 

[flitcraft]

As far as safety goes, a 50 pound limit is clearly not stringent enough. In a derailment, getting a direct hit with a 50 pound case would likely be serious if not fatal.  (Actually, a much lighter weight object can cause a serious injury--many years ago, an uncle sustained a pretty serious injury in a car crash when he was hit by a flying tissue box. Really.)  Obviously, there has to be a compromise between the safety consequences of flying luggage and giving people a practical luggage allowance. If we were really concerned with safety, there would need to be latching luggage bins as in aircraft.  I assume, though, that derailments are rare enough events that the additional cost and inconvenience of using overheard latching bins is considered to be not worth the marginal safety gains. 

 

[Maglev]

If there were an issue with too many pieces (which could be combined under the 50 lb limit), a 55 gal garbage bag could aid in correcting the piece count. 

Actually, Amtrak specifically prohibits trash bags and plastic containers as luggage.

https://www.amtrak.com/onboard/baggage-policy/packing-your-luggage.html

 

[bratkinson]

Actually, Amtrak specifically prohibits trash bags and plastic containers as luggage.

https://www.amtrak.com/onboard/baggage-policy/packing-your-luggage.html

Does Amtrak EXPECT people to read those directions?  It's like expecting someone to read the 'warranty' and other 'legal documents' when installing new software.  It just doesn't happen.

One trip through the LD coaches on a train will reveal everything from large trash bags to 'collections' of smaller trash bags, countless plastic bags from Walmart and local grocers, etc, baby strollers, plastic bins, and just about anything else with a handle on it, including cardboard boxes with 'looped' shipping tape to make a handle on them.

Perhaps the extensive 'packing your luggage' instructions is more of a legal 'out' for the lawyers in that if anyone gets hit by one of these 'projectiles' or 'falling luggage', the owner of the 'luggage' gets sued, not Amtrak, as they had it all in the directions,  which the passenger obviously ignored.  And, of course, ignorance of the rules/law is NOT an excuse for violating it.

 

[BCL]

As far as safety goes, a 50 pound limit is clearly not stringent enough. In a derailment, getting a direct hit with a 50 pound case would likely be serious if not fatal.  (Actually, a much lighter weight object can cause a serious injury--many years ago, an uncle sustained a pretty serious injury in a car crash when he was hit by a flying tissue box. Really.)  Obviously, there has to be a compromise between the safety consequences of flying luggage and giving people a practical luggage allowance. If we were really concerned with safety, there would need to be latching luggage bins as in aircraft.  I assume, though, that derailments are rare enough events that the additional cost and inconvenience of using overheard latching bins is considered to be not worth the marginal safety gains. 

I doubt that the latches would be strong enough.  In heavy turbulence latches tend to fly open anyways.  The danger isn't necessarily from them flying, but from falling.  Airline bin style design is made so baggage can slide in and then get closed up.

Some of the Amtrak California cars have airline style bins.  But they have size limits unlike the open bins with posts that can everything from surfboards to skis.

 

[neroden]

I've never seen Amtrak stop anyone who can (a) carry all their own luggage at once, and (b) is using real suitcases.  They've stopped people who are clearly carrying far too much.

 

[cpotisch]

Perhaps the extensive 'packing your luggage' instructions is more of a legal 'out' for the lawyers in that if anyone gets hit by one of these 'projectiles' or 'falling luggage', the owner of the 'luggage' gets sued, not Amtrak, as they had it all in the directions,  which the passenger obviously ignored.  And, of course, ignorance of the rules/law is NOT an excuse for violating it.

It’s almost certainly that. Anything they have in the “Terms and Conditions” can be used as an out if someone violates it.

 

[daybeers]

The Acela trainsets have overhead bins for luggage.

 

[flitcraft]

Perhaps the extensive 'packing your luggage' instructions is more of a legal 'out' for the lawyers in that if anyone gets hit by one of these 'projectiles' or 'falling luggage', the owner of the 'luggage' gets sued, not Amtrak, as they had it all in the directions,  which the passenger obviously ignored.  And, of course, ignorance of the rules/law is NOT an excuse for violating it.

 

It’s almost certainly that. Anything they have in the “Terms and Conditions” can be used as an out if someone violates it.

OK, now we're in my wheelhouse. Amtrak is a 'common carrier' which means they have the duty to use 'utmost care' in transporting passengers safely. If another passenger ignores the rules on luggage and somebody else gets hurts as a result, that does not release Amtrak from liability in the slightest. They have a non-delegable duty to enforce appropriate safety rules, and if they allow a passenger to board luggage in violation of their own rules, Amtrak is liable. Period. In fact, even in the absence of the 50 pound rule, allowing a passenger to board with luggage that could provide a safety hazard to others would itself almost certainly create liability.  Of course, the injured party is free to sue the rule-breaking passenger as well (assuming that the injured party can identify him) but there's no question that Amtrak itself bears close to strict liability as a common carrier. Nothing in the Terms and Conditions can eliminate their legally mandated duty to ensure passenger safety through their obligation to use 'utmost care.'

 

[me_little_me]

Amtrak shouldn't prohibit any carry-on weight less than checked weight until they provide checked bagged service to/from the stations you are traveling.

 

[bratkinson]

Until Amtrak places a carry on 'size and weight' checker at each open train door with a conductor doing the checking, or at each major station gate like NYP or CHI, there's no way they can reasonably enforce the 50 pound limit.  Can you imaging multiple boarding passengers at an unstaffed station in the middle of the night causing a 15-20 minute delay to 'gate check' (pull needed stuff out, etc) their luggage into the baggage car?  Also, 1 conductor plus 2 asst conductors on a typical 8-car NEC train with 16 doors open at each stop (except the tiny stations like Aberdeen) can't possible check every carry on. 

Just yesterday, I saw a passenger boarding at NYP that had two GIANT 4-wheel rolling suitcases and a small suitcase on top of one of those!  I used my priority boarding privileges (old geezer & Select Executive) and was first one down the escalator.  So if he got stopped at the gate, I have no idea.  Maybe his wife was off buying something to eat and would take the 2nd monster case?

 

[PVD]

The carry-on weight and the checked weight are both 50 lbs. 

 

[bratkinson]

Just found this Bizarro cartoon... click here  that seems appropriate to this thread...

 

[Thirdrail7]

The shortest of short answers is "yes, Amtrak is getting stricter with the carry on policy."  Indeed, they got "strict" some time ago but like a lot of things, this policy that began under Mr. Boardman's watch wasn't widely enforced.

Now, they are not only attempting to enforce the policy, they are attempting to hold personnel accountable for not enforcing the policy.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The effect of extra large and/or heavy luggage on an aircraft's weight and performance is substantial.  The effect of large/heavy luggage on a train's weight and performance barely even registers.  There's a huge and mostly empty baggage car at the front of the train.  Or at least there used to be.  Maybe they're getting rid of that as well.  If Amtrak were serious about improving the checked baggage process they might have designed the floor to be well car level with a pneumatic ramp so luggage could be quickly rolled on and off with or without any station staff.  Or maybe the rarely used wheelchair lifts could be repurposed as luggage carriers?

 

[Thirdrail7]

With baggage lite finally taking off, I suspect they aren’t serious about checked bags. 

 

[neroden]

I firmly expect that Amtrak will not enforce the carry-on limits against anyone who isn't being ridiculous.

Due to some downright stupid decisions made by Amtrak (elimination of food, checked baggage, etc.), there are a pretty long list of ADA reasons why someone might need to *carry* more luggage than the official limits.  Medical equipment, special food, etc.  Amtrak has the choice of allowing this, or losing extremely expensive lawsuits and *then* allowing it.