Photo by Oran

The problem with an airport train is, inevitably, what to do with all the luggage. Although Link’s floors are nearly spotless, under the seats doesn’t seem very popular.

Photo by Oran

The other preferred solution is to put a suitcase in the bike bays. As someone who brings a bike on Link a couple of times a week, that’s not exactly my favorite, especially when they’re running one car so that there’s only two spots.

As Link becomes more crowded over the years, this will be more and more of a problem, although four car trains will help. Luckily, there’s a lot of volume over our heads in a very tall Link car. Are overhead luggage racks the answer? I asked ST spokesman Bruce Gray about this, and his reply is below the jump:

Back when the trains designs were specified in the early 2000s we went with industry standards that have emphasized the roomy, open feel and extra space provided by not having overhead luggage racks. This approach also emphasizes having more room for standing passengers when the trains are at capacity.   As our system grows, this will become more and more important.

On a practical note many LRV luggage racks are too small for any kind of luggage larger than a brief case.  In many cases folks leave their belongings behind or hit their head on the overhead luggage racks.  Technically speaking there are no mounting plates inside the wall waiting for luggage racks to be installed and a retrofit would be very costly.

So there it is. At it is, folks should stack their bags in the bike/luggage area, stow them under their seats or stand with them by the doors. Too often I see the folding seat / ADA seat areas stacked with bags.

I’m relaxed enough about this issue that I find that response adequate, but what do you think about this?

123 Replies to “Luggage Racks”

  1. I think there should be more encouragement to store them under the seats first before going to the “bike/luggage” area.

    1. I agree. Most people are basically courteous but it has not occurred to them that (1) there is an option to place baggage under a many of seats, e.g. the ones that fold down, and (2) the “bike/luggage” area is for bicycles too, and actually gets used. Once luggage is stowed and people are settled in for the duration, it becomes a burden to reallocate the space. The result is, a standee with a bike, which is unnecessarily annoying to the bicyclist and potentially others as well.

      As gas prices trend higher, bicycling becomes more popular, and Link gets extended to such places as Capitol Hill and UW, I anticipate that the desire to bring bikes on board will grow more quickly than the number of spaces available. Trains are expensive. Signs are cheap. Revise the sign.

  2. When I take the 560 to the airport I find it terribly annoying that there’s not a place for luggage. Yes, I know, it’s unreasonable for me to expect a place to put luggage on a commuter bus, but it’s the only reasonable way to get to the airport via transit. If I were riding “the airport train” I’d be more annoyed.

    I know I shouldn’t criticize them for lack of foresight–after all, not everything I do in life is perfect. But maybe they can retrofit the trains to acknowledge that people going to an airport often carry luggage?

      1. That’s not a 560. The bus I ride has briefcase racks. Luckily, there are always empty seats for my luggage.

      2. That photo is on the 550 and I have ridden the 560 a few times. All of Sound Transit’s buses have overhead racks but I guess they are more suited to “briefcases” than carry on luggage as you call it.

      3. The overhead racks on the 550 are puzzling. It makes it look like a long-distance bus. I’ve never seen anybody put anything in the overhead rack.

      4. There are two styles of luggage racks. I’ve never seen anyone use the closed ones. The open rail racks, I’ve used them. It’s harder to leave stuff behind as it’s very visible. In an accident it may go flying more easily but that’s pretty rare. (accidents.)

        As for LINK, most folks seem to use the handicap seating area for luggage, because you can also sit across from it and keep an eye on it. I’ve never seen anyone put their luggage under the seats. The floor may be clean, but I doubt folks think that it is. And in rainy Seattle, it’s often wet from people’s shoes.

      5. While overhead luggage racks sound great on paper, my limited experience in actually using the luggage racks on the ST buses have been full of close calls when I start to exit the bus, then have to run back to my seat realizing I forgot my stuff. In some cases, I’ve depended on the generosity of other passengers to alert me. Now, I always put everything on or under my seat or on the adjacent seat to be sure I don’t forget it.

      6. I agree that leaving your belongings behind on the rack on a commute is somewhat likely, but I’d think most people going to the airport with a suitcase would remember that they’d brought it.

      7. Overhead racks make more sense on a long-distance trip than a short-distance trip. On a long-distance trip there are only a few people getting off every hour or several hours. On a short-distance trip there are people getting on and off every few minutes, and if people are unloading the rack every time the bus/train will have to wait and give them time to, because it’s too dangerous to unload large bags while the bus is moving. Also, people would be more worried about forgetting their luggage on a short-distance trip, or at least I would be.

  3. We are looking for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Most people who take Link aren’t going to the airport. And most people going to the airport don’t take this much luggage.

      1. Tim, if you are saying that most people who take Link are going to or coming from the airport, you are factually incorrect. Also, if you are saying that of those who are going to or coming from the airport, commonly carry as much luggage as in the post pic, again, you are incorrect.

        Once again, this is basically an made-up problem. It is so rare that someone gets on with 4 or more oversized suitcases, that is is essentially not a problem.

        I’ve just run the numbers, and in my estimation, 1 out of every 178,000 Link riders have more than 4 suitcases.

      2. I can’t tell if you are being sarcastic, or not, but those 4 suitcases almost certainly belong to 3 different passengers. It’s not uncommon at all on Link trains to see a dozen or more large bags on one car. They don’t belong to just one passenger, of course. In the summer, its not unusual to see 30 or more passengers board or deboard at SeaTac from one Link car. There will very likely be a dozen or more large bags total among those 30 passengers.

      3. If you were to sit and watch the amount of passengers getting on and off at Seatac, you would be surprised at the amount of people who come with luggage. It’s blatantly obvious that they do not make up the majority of riders, but they are there and do have luggage that needs to be stored somewhere. If they would like to sit in the raised area, it is not physically possible to put stuff under some of those seats, as there are heaters and what not under them. The space under the seats that has it is extremely limited. The best bet are the sideways fold up seats, but the vertical clearance under the seat can still be an issue. There is also the space that is for bikes to hang, but it wont work if there is a bike there. They need to get a designated luggage area on there. Period.

    2. Minneapolis uses cars built by Bombardier, not Kinki-Sharyo. Ours are close to the current generation of cars the VTA has on their light rail lines.

      1. Yes, there are luggage racks on Metro Transit’s Bombardier LRVs, but people don’t seem to use them much. If you have a large bag that is obtrusive, it is probably going to be too big to reasonably lift up onto the rack. I almost always take the Light Rail to MSP airport, and when it is crowded, I usually just stand by my bag and move it out of people’s way as needed. Our next batch of LRVs will be from Siemens, I’m not sure if they will have luggage racks.

  5. I agree with their response. The Picadilly line has no luggage racks, but people manage to get to Heathrow airport anyway. Also, speaking as a 6’5″ man, the lack of things to smack my head on is appreciated.

    Another thing to keep in mind: as Link builds out and becomes increasingly useful for in-city travel, the percentage of riders using it purely as an airport shuttle will drop (it’s already pretty low), while the number of cars in the consists will double (which will double the available floor space.)

    1. I spend a few pounds and get to the airport in 15 minutes of comfort – Heathrow Express trains from Paddington. They also accept many railcards for discounted travel.

      It always seemed to me that the Picadilly line was used more by the backpack crowd.

      1. I’m usually traveling through London, going out via St Pancras. If I went into Paddington I’d end up taking the tube anyway. Besides, I’m somewhat a member of the backpack crowd, myself.

      2. The Picadilly line has substantial open (empty, no seats) spaces near the doors, much larger than on the other lines in the London Underground.

        This was specifically intended for luggage. Though I think they’re using them for wheelchair access too now.

    2. I rode link to the airport today. I group of 15 teenagers each with a single roll on style luggage (the kind just small enough to take onboard your flight) boarded with us at Westlake and rode the full length to the airport. The train had 10-15 standees until Beacon Hill and all had seats by Rainier Beach. The luggage appeared to present no problem to any one. The Teen mostly stood by their luggage in the large space my the doors and chatted away as teens do. It was a most lively and fun atmosphere. I always see luggage on the train. It is not a big deal.

    3. umm…Link even at build-out will not do a whole lot to facilitate in-city trips. Most of Link will be in the suburbs, and will function as commuter rail would in a more functional metropolis.

      1. A lot of people are waiting to ride Link in the downtown-to-Northgate axis. And in time I think Rainier Valley-to-UW and Rainier Valley-to-Northgate will also be popular. Most of Link’s miles may be in the suburbs, but that’s just because most of the region’s area is in the suburbs. Yes, Link is more BART-like rather than a city subway (MUNI), but that’s because both the city and suburbs have a common need to tie the region together. And it’s not like Link won’t stop at Roosevelt and Beacon Hill for in-city trips. If the suggested additional lines are built (45th and westside), they’ll be more city-focused and will raise the percentage of miles within the city.

      2. Most of Link will be in the suburbs

        If you think that, you aren’t familiar with Metro’s ridership stats. Downtown to Northgate will dwarf the rest of the system’s ridership. I would agree with Mike’s comment above.

        More generally, suburban Light Rail lines don’t perform particularly well. Suburban commuters generate at most two boardings a day, and almost always have to transfer from a bus or use a P&R stall to do so. That’s not the case with Downtown to Northgate, and to a lesser extent with the RV.

  6. There are quite a few seats on Link cars which have NO room under them for luggage, because of heating units under the seats. For example, all 10 seats in the middle of each car have zero room under them. Some seats at each end of the cars have zero room under them.

    Then, a lot of the other seats have diagonal metal braces under them which reduce the space under those seats so that nothing but a small bag would fit. Even the seats with nothing under them don’t have space for some of the large bags people take on Link.

    So, storing bags under the seats is impossible for many seats, and, for large bags, impossible under any seat.

    And bicycles take up the space of one passenger, if they are stored vertically in the rack, or the space of more than one passenger if they are just sitting on the floor by the door or in an aisle. Passengers with bicycles should have to pay two fares, since their bicycle takes the space of a passenger. People with bicycles should ride them! Not put them on trains or buses.

    1. And a baggage fare, if space usage is the metric. Cyclists often will ride to where they’re going, but time is a consideration for cyclists too, when transit centers lose their parking lots then cyclists can be asked to forgo the bike.

      2. Motorists don’t take their cars with them on the train. Why don’t bicyclists leave their bikes in the parking lots like motorists leave their cars? Cars are not taking up space on the trains. Bikes are.

      3. Why bikes on the train? So that they can continue their journey by bike on the other end of the train ride. Or to have an alternative way home in case of bad weather, flat tires, etc.

  7. You’ll also notice that most of the bags pictured above won’t fit under the seat.

  8. Ummm, learn to pack efficiently; whose bags are those in Oran’s picture anyway? Some diva’s I’m assuming. Either way, if you have that much luggage hopefully you have help, stand up with your bags until you get to the airport because chances are you’ll be seated for a while on the plane.

    1. I don’t think anyone assumes all those bags in Oran’s picture belong to just one passenger.

      1. I was being somewhat sarcastic; that’s why I said if someone had that many bags they would need help…

  9. http://www.flickr.com/photos/51332149@N02/sets/72157624623653562/with/4847236988/

    I have seen a lot of luggage on Link trains, and some of it very large. The large pieces of luggage would not fit under any seat, or on a luggage rack. They just take up space, which reduces the capacity of Link cars to even less than the 132 passengers per car that they can carry comfortably with no luggage or bicycles.

    Why doesn’t some enterprising young man (hey! maybe an STB blogger!) start counting luggage on Link trains and come up with some sort of average number of bags and bicycles per Link car during different times of day — peak hours, off-peak midday, off-peak evening. Then we can subtract the number of large bags and bicycles from 132 to see what the “real-world” capacity of Link cars really is.

    1. Electric railroads used to have frieght motors. Mabye some link cars hald passenger car half frieght motor? Pretty common in electric railroads way back when

      2. I wonder if they could add a Standing-Only car as part of four-car trains. I don’t know if that would be a safe place for luggage, but more of the crushload passengers could take that car, leaving a little more breathing space for luggage, bikes, wheelchairs, etc. Maybe even incentivize the standing car with a lower fare.

  11. What’s the point of the partition between the door and the bike/bag zone? Why not remove it, and remount the bike hooks so bikes hang parallel rather than perpendicular. Even with a bike hung up, there’d be more available floor space for people and their absurdly large bags to occupy.

    1. (In other words, of course, I’m saying they should copy MAX. Which is what they should’ve done from the get-go. But why borrow a wheel when you can reinvent it?)

  12. Reverse the springs on the ADA seats so their “default” position is down, and with a little bit of effort it flips up. Then it looks like just another seat which discourages putting luggage there.

    Out of all the times I’ve been on Link, I’ve only seen one person use that area for a mobility device. A few times I have seen perfectly able bodied people fold the seat down and sit there.
    The most annoying one was a guy in a power chair that decided he needed to stay in the doorways the entire length of his trip. He was right next to those fold down seats, but instead just moved from one side of the car to the other as the train entered side/center platform stations. He would have had plenty of room to move in to that huge open space next to the fold down seat, but chose to get in the way of passengers instead (even when backed up against the door he still took up more than 50% of the width of the car).

    1. I think ST has already switched back to two-car trains at some of the times they’ve been running one-cars. If overcrowding becomes a routine issue, I’m sure they’ll make that change more widespread.

      Besides, however bad the luggage situation might be on Link, I’m quite confident it is better than the old 194 Norman loved so much.

    2. Eek! Did you spend any time on that page you linked?

      I can’t for the life of me figure out why they’d go to the trouble of setting up such a site, only to fill it with garbled, unhelpful, and frequently flat-out incorrect information?

      It’s misguided, half-way geekery. They’ve obsessively cataloged every agency in the world that runs even marginal service to/near an airport, but as we’ve all said before, travelers don’t give a ham about administrative entities; what they need is to ascertain the form, frequency, speed, cost, and time-of-day availability of the service! (This is the same reason Metro route maps with no core-route distinctions are worthless, and why multi-agency situations can be improved through unified regional branding.)

      The only useful column on that site is the “rail link type,” which could at least imply to the impending traveler what form the service will take, and the distances and frequencies involved.

      Unfortunately, the info in that column is wrong a lot! Just among the United States entries, MARTA’s subway and the MBTA’s blue line are both called “suburban” (i.e. commuter) rail, while SEPTA’s actual suburban rail is called “metro.” And while the “bus link to station” option is incredibly helpful information, it is applied inconsistently more often then not (see BWI, FLL, LIJ, LAX, MKE, PBI, and probably more), and frankly, the bus shuttle info is only helpful if you also know type of service and vice versa, so they shouldn’t be either/or entries.

      In a few weeks, I’ll be going to Germany for the very first time. Here’s what that link teaches me about Flughafen Berlin-Tegel:

      Rail Operator: BVG
      Phone: +49 030 19 44 9
      E-mail: info@bvg.de
      Website: http://www.bvg.de/e_index.html
      Rail Link Type: Metro

      Who calls or e-mails an agency for basic information? The website link is broken. And guess what? All of the U-Bahn or S-Bahn options require multi-mile bus connections (but I had to find that out elsewhere).

      1. The X9 offers frequent service from Tegel to the U7 at Jakob-Kaiser-Platz, takes all of 5 minutes to get there, and there’s a TVM right at the bus stop so no worry about having to buy a cash fare on board.

  14. I don’t think three sentences in all caps in one typeface is the best way to communicate the restriction. Maybe a “headline” of some sort followed by explanatory text in a smaller typeface (“please do not store luggage in this area”) along with “no baggage” symbols on the undersides of the folding seats would more clearly communicate the policy.

  15. It seems like the majority of folks are taking one bag to the airport with them that will fit in an overhead compartment on the airplane. Those bags will fit on the seat next to you if the train isn’t crowded or on your lap (or between your legs) if it is.

    1. I took a single carry-on bag with me on my flight to San Francisco, it fits underneath Link’s seats. When I got to SFO. BART doesn’t have luggage racks either.

      1. 30 of the 74 seats on each Link car have zero room under them. About half of the rest have diagonal supports which restrict the space under the seats. That leaves only about 25 seats out of 74 on each Link car which have space under them for a small bag. It those 25 seats are taken, then you won’t have room under your seat for even a small bag.

        The fact is, as the photos I linked to show, that passengers on Link trains do take large bags which do not fit under any of the seats. And lots of Link seats have zero room under them, and other Link seats have little room under them.

      2. “30 of the 74 seats on each Link car have zero room under them.”

        First counting people, now you’re looking under Link seats and scrutinizing available space for luggage? Seriously Norman, you’ve got too much time on your hands.

    2. If people at the library refuse to set their bags on the floor, good luck getting people to hold their luggage in their lap.

      1. You could implement a fare policy like the one Metro supposedly uses for animals. If the animal, or luggage, fits on your lap there is no charge. If, however, the animal has to sit on the floor, you are supposed to pay an additional fare. Yes, that’s the policy as outlined here.

        I say supposedly because I rarely see passengers pay an extra fare for their animal, even after being informed of the policy. (Although there was one dog that had it’s own PugetPass hanging around it’s neck. No word on what this dog is doing today with the ORCA card)

    1. That is what Link cars are: half seats and almost half standing spots. There are 74 seats and room for 68 standees. Of course, every large bag or bicycle reduces the number of passengers who can comfortably fit in a Link car by one.

  17. This is one of many reasons why “airport trains” rarely make sense in the first place. Here we have a mostly urban light rail line that makes a huge detour to the wrong side of Tukwila and to the airport, just so a pretty small number of people can take it to the airport. I say that as someone who always takes Link when I need to go to the airport. Even though I use it, it still strikes me as a big waste. For most people, taking a taxi or a shuttle or getting a friend to drive will always make more sense. For the rest of us, a good bus is sufficient. The long and short of it is, airports are always way out in the middle of nowhere, which is not where you want light rail to go. Maybe heavy rail, but not light rail. I think Sound Transit recognizes that Link is primarily a way for people to get around the city, and therefore rightfully decided against luggage racks.

      1. I thought it was established that many, if not most, of the airport trips are employees rather than passengers.

        I agree with Zef. Airport trains are often inferior for large groups of passengers or passengers with large luggage. But it works for me because I rarely fly with more than a simple carryon.

      2. Apparently, Kyle, you have never been to SeaTac/Airport station. And if this has been “established”, please cite your source. Otherwise, you’re just making crap up.

      3. Tim, I take Link to and from the airport for the purpose of flying at least four times a year.

        Perhaps I’m confusing the proportion of Airport Link ridership with 194 ridership. But I do recall seeing on this blog that transit to the airport is primarily designed around serving employees first and customers second, since it’s not the most convenient mode for many customers.

      4. I can’t remember the last time I took anything other than public transit to or from an airport, and the same goes for most of my friends. If you have kids and masses of luggage, it makes sense to take a cab, but otherwise, Link is a great option.

      5. There’s nothing wrong if airport/airline employees take Link to the airport.

        It’s a wrong assumption that “airport trains” don’t make sense. Airport trains are effective in many cities worldwide and they contribute to creating a transportation network. The Seatac station is one of Link’s busiest outside downtown, and after most every train arrival there is a significant wave of passengers heading through the garage on the walkway toward the terminal. It’s clear looking at luggage being carried that it’s a mix of travelers and airport employees.

      6. Although I took public transportation last time I flew, Doug Fox Parking had a great $25 for 3 days coupon that couldn’t be beat. That’s cheaper than a cab or Shuttle Express for just one way!

    2. Airports are also the largest public transportation centers/pedestrian destinations in a region. One of the main purposes of a metro is to serve large pedestrian destinations such as malls and stadiums — AND airports. One person may go to the airport only once or twice a year, but in aggregate more people are going there than to any other single destination. Especially since “one resident going to the airport” doesn’t include any of the visitors or airport workers who make up 2/3 of the traffic.

      We can worry about capacity problems when we get there. The solution to full trains is to run more trains or longer trains, or to build a parallel line to divert half the traffic. But kicking people with luggage out of the system is not a solution to the transportation problem.

  18. I hate luggage racks. Whenever I ride the 550 I see people bump their heads getting up from the seats that are under them. Happened to myself a few times.

    Using public transport solo or with a partner and having one luggage each is fine. But if you have tons of luggage then you should just take a cab or have a friend drive you.

    2. The fully enclosed racks are terrible, they are too low as well, and don’t appear to be bolted in place well either as they squeak and rattle on every bump in the road. The open racks are better, and I use them to help pull myself up and out of the seat. Lots of good grab spots for walking down the aisle as well.

  19. This looks like the perfect place to post an idea I’ve had for a while: The seats across from the bike hook are uncomfortable and awkwardly placed, and you usually have at most one person using the pair. My vision is that they be removed and replaced with a luggage rack in that space. I do think there is enough luggage on a typical Link train to justify this, and the overall impact of this change, though it eliminates seats, would be a considerable increase in onboard space.

    1. Also a potentially practical idea. I now count two practical suggestions in this thread!

      1. This is completely unacceptable. We can’t just have practical ideas willy-nilly! The voters should decide this! ;-)

        I do like this idea though. On my last trip to/from Sea-Tac I put my bag in the bike space and sat in those seats. You’re right, they’re very uncomfortable and awkward. I’m only 6′ tall, and I would have been hard-pressed to fit into a single seat if someone else had wanted the other.

    1. Yes, Schipol has an international heavy rail station serving Brussels, Lille, Paris, Franfurt, etc in addition to local service to Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Den Haag, Breda, and others. It’s magnificently integrated. It literally is right underneath the main hall in the airport. For local trains, GVB uses trains similar to Sounder and they get you to Amsterdam Centraal in about 20 minutes. From there, you have about 8 tram lines that intersect with about 10 more and countless buses. (God I love Amsterdam.)

      They also have buses from the airport, but take 3 times as long as the trains and are really more for people living around Schipol or south Amsterdam.

      1. I might add that the GVB local trains do have luggage areas in between cars, but most people just keep their bags with them on their laps.

      2. The train service from Schipol is great. When I was there last summer I wasn’t clear that there were luggage areas (I thought it was just another seating area) and it was a bit awkward to drag bags up or down from the entry level to the main seating area. Not a huge deal though – as at SeaTac most folks do fine just keeping their bags with them.

  21. Meh. Doesn’t seem like a huge problem for now. I usually see people steal an extra seat for their luggage (that’s effectively what I do, but would give up my seats if the train became standing room only). Plus people with bikes don’t have to use the racks. Of course this will become a larger and larger problem as ridership increases, but hopefully we add more trains by then. Or use [L. Smith]’s idea.

  22. Oh sorry, PLUS Amsterdam Metro doesn’t go to the airport, but it doesn’t matter because no one uses it anyway. It’s basically a commuter service. Everyone bikes, uses the trams, or uses heavy rail.

    1. Frankfurt and Zurich have train stations at the airport, serviced by local and long distance trains (Frankfurt Flughaffen, Zurich Flughaffen) Zurich even recently has had a streetcar line extended there.

  23. To me, this sounds like an issue that would best be solved through social action.

    I’ve seen the ideas that suggest charging an extra fare per bag, installing luggage racks, etc., and I agree, those ideas are good.

    However, what I think would be best; trust riders to be considerate of others when using Central Link to get to the airport. Please, bring a reasonably sized bag, and one that is least obtrusive to passengers. That’s all. :)

    Also, if anyone spots anyone else generally abusing the system; politely talk with them. Just inform them that space is limited, and suggest alternative methods of transporting that much stuff.

    Why reinvent the wheel when you’re on a boat? :)

    1. Yes, let’s implement lots of ways to kill ridership by nickel and diming people for things that should be free.

      1. This method would give our visitors an introduction to our passive aggressive method of solving disagreements.

  24. When I ride Link to the airport, I ride with my bag on my goddamn lap. Most people are traveling with a carryon-sized bag these days, which fits on a lap or in the footwell. For the slim minority that carry extra bags, they can keep cramming them in the isle or the bike space or wherever.

    Also, I had no idea the bike-hanging space was actually the “bike/luggage” area.

    No matter what, it’s infinitely preferable to the 194. Thank god that’s over.

    1. If you need a U Haul to take you and your stuff to Sea-Tac, rent a U Haul, for gawd’s sake.

  25. Luggage racks on trains are almost always too small. I’ve never used one. When riding link to the airport I often put my bag in the door area and use it as a seat.

  26. if transit serves an airport it seems that there should be some tailoring for luggage beyond a bus floor under the seat for the busses or trams that fan out or specifically serve the airport. areas in europe or larger denser areas may have that already if the seattle transit doesnt.

    beyond the point from the airport, cabs or rides travelers hotels may be close by.

    2. Many times, I’ve had to inform passengers who load up the front of my bus like this that I cannot move the coach until the isle is clear. If the coach isn’t completely packed, I’ll request that the ADA seating area be cleared for their luggage – not optimal, but it works in a pinch.

      Even if the photo is staged, it’s hardly a “sad liar”. I’ve also been on multiple Link trains where the ADA seating was taken up entirely by luggage with a person in a wheelchair parked in the doorway. Both were in those really heavy motorized chairs so it seemed safe enough and they seemed content, but still…

    3. There’s nothing staged about this photo. That’s too much work. I don’t stage photos; I shoot them as I see them. Don’t think this is common? Then you’ve apparently haven’t ridden Link enough to see it.

  28. The seats should be reconfigured so that passengers sit with backs against the windows.

    1. I hate getting rag dolled the entire trip.

      If you like staring at someone across from you the entire trip, try sitting in the middle of the train. There are 10 seats configured like that just for you.

      1. You will hate many metro systems around the world, like the NYC subway or the Tube or Tokyo Metro, they all got sideways seating. Ragdolling isn’t as noticeable on trains, the same cannot be said for buses.

      2. I really don’t understand why we went for forward seating on Link. I see it as a reflection of Link’s identity crisis. It wants to simultaneously serve as a commuter rail, express metro, and light rail, but takes the worst elements of all these designs (wide stop spacing with big parking lots, expensive tunneling, catenary power).

        The next phase of Link to come online will be serving the “express metro” crowd. We should really give thought to going for a standard side-facing configuration. And we should do the same for the Streetcar.

      3. Which parking lots would those be? I count one, at TIBS — and it’s not an expensive parking structure, just a typical suburban lot. The only big publicly-funded P&R slated for Link is S 200th St, and it makes sense there. I don’t see the problem with OCS, either. We’d have to fully grade-separate for third rail and we can’t afford that. And you can’t whine about expensive tunneling and then complain that we should’ve built fully grade separated.

        I do wish everyone would stop freaking out about Link’s putative identity crisis. Yes, it’s a hybrid system, but it’s working reasonably well in Downtown Once we start seriously discussing ST3, we’ll have to address this issue. But we’re a decade away from Northgate, so let’s all calm down.

      4. I’m not complaining about the cost of tunneling. I would prefer more tunnels, complete grade separation, third-rail power, and no space in the cars taken up by staircases. Yes, it would cost more. It would be worth it.

        Of course, serving the suburbs with a grade-separated heavy rail system would be wasteful. There’s argument about what would constitute “suburbs;” I think it wouldn’t be controversial to serve Seattle and Bellevue, but it would be a tougher sell to tunnel along Bel-Red. Regardless, we’re anticipating significant growth along that corridor.

        But instead of serving areas of South King and Pierce with an hour-long light rail trip to Seattle, that we’re looking at grade separating anyway, we could instead be building a dedicated commuter rail infrastructure.

  29. Sorry Bruce, I’m not buying it. Rip out those two seats across from the bike rack on each car and label it the “luggage area”. If you could put one shelf in there, great. Otherwise just leave the whole space open. Put a line on the floor with a warning to not stack luggage outside the line and not block the isle. When not in use people can stand there.

    This fetish that ST & Metro have for more seating drives me nuts. Seats are fine for those who need them or are traveling longer distances, but losing 4 seats on a car won’t be the end of the world.

    1. More open space, with fewer seats if necessary, is the standard solution for things like this. Yours is L. Smith’s suggestion.

      Andreas’s suggestion of removing the pointless partition between the door and the ADA seating area is also a good one. Andreas’s suggestion might also convince the various people in power chairs to actually go into the ADA seating area rather than sitting in front of the door, which if this comment thread is anything to judge by happens frequently. (Having used a power chair once or twice, I can understand not wanting to maneuver around the partition.)

      Perhaps it will turn out that the pole the partition is mounted to is structural, but if not these seem like two simple suggestions which will substantially increase space in the train at little expense.

      1. I suspect that for safety reasons, you’re not allowed to have a side-facing bench without some sort of wall on each end. I’m imagining the whole line of people sliding off onto the floor in a collision. Or it might simply be to keep the people on the end of the bench from intruding into the doorway area. Incidentally, they do serve to make disembarking a bit more orderly, by restricting the width of the line before people actually get to the door itself.

        In any case, I wouldn’t want to remove those poles near the door. They’re critical, as they’re used by people lining up at the doors while the train is stopping.

  30. Don’t know if there are any ex-New Yorkers here, but do you remember the old “Train To The Plane”. They used charge about $5 (regular fare was still in the $1-$2 range. And they would run from Manhattan to JFK, but keep the doors shut all the way through Brooklyn and run it as an express. (Of course back then it didn’t actually go to the airport…it stopped at Aqueduct station and they took a shuttle bus to the airport!)

    Maybe that’s what LINK needs. A separate, Airport to Downtown train for just those travelers who want cheap airport to hotel service. Everyone else, take the milk run.

    1. John,

      For years we always had the Gray Line Airporter from the Olympic (Four Seasons) TO Seatac – when did that go away? Looks like it has been replaced recently by shuttle express (sad). Was this the work of LINK?

      It took us TO the airport unlike the JFK train (I tried once when I lived there) which only went NEAR the airport.

      1. Hah!

        Of course its a much different situation now, with a very robust AirTrain encircling JFK and hooking up with the subway and LIRR at Jamacia Station. Took it several times over the past two years when visiting back east. NY knows how to run a railroad.

    2. The E train Is pretty much this, with only a couple stops in Queens between Jamaica and Manhattan. Of course, NYC has enough ridership to justify 4-tracking the entire route.

      1. Except the E is local in Manhattan, and usually crush-load.

        I believe that was one of the motivations for CityTicket; people wanting to take transit to JFK could relieve pressure from the E and take a cheap LIRR ride to Jamaica instead.

    3. For those who ever travel to London via Heathrow airport, the Heathrow Express to Paddington station is an example of what premium airport rail service is like. Trains starting at 5:10am running every 15 minutes with only a 15 minute travel time to Central London. The trains are fast, quiet, and clean. The price is steep at a minimum of ~£16 per person each direction. Believe it or not, they even have “First Class” service. I’ve never felt the need as even “Express Class” is a vast improvement over other alternatives, including a private taxi. You can take the Piccadilly Line for only £5 but that takes about an hour and I’ve never done it – after 8 hours on a far more expensive and crowded flight, the extra 11 quid is worth it.

      1. An 11 quid I am fundamentally too cheap to pay. It’s also less of a deal if you have to take the tube afterward anyway. The Picadilly line isn’t bad at all, although I’ve never traveled with more than a backpack, so that probably skews my point of view.

      2. Whether to take the Piccadilly line or Heathrow Express (or Heathrow Connect!) partly depends on your destination within London. Sure Heathrow Express *to Paddington* is fast, but if your final origin/destination is on the Piccadilly line, you may well find it preferable to take the Piccadilly line. Even with a destination as far east as Russell Square, the multiple walking transfers to get to Paddington seem less worthwhile than the direct train.

        We can only dream of such a profusion of options in the US. I can’t think of any airport in the US which has multiple choices for local train service. Of course, many airports in continental Europe have even more choices.

      3. According to a link earlier in the thread, O’Hare is served by both CTA and Metra. I only arrive at and leave ORD by airplane, so I don’t know myself.

      4. I’ve only flown to Gatwick, and there’s both the Gatwick Express and the local train (London-Brighton). The local train is considerably cheaper and makes only one or two stops. The express runs every fifteen minutes and I don’t see how they can find that many people to pay its premium fare. The only time I rode it was once when I would have missed my flight otherwise.

  31. OK, I’ve taken my bags on Link to the airport a coupel of times. Never been a problem, but then I only carry one bag, and it can fit on my lap or under a seat.

    What this shows is something I have long thought. LRV space needs to be more flexible. The best design I have seen is 100% flip-down center-facing seats. They are all up when the train is empty. People flip them donw to use if there is space, and as the train fills, the seats all end up folded to provide more standing space. However, this usually doesn’t work so well with low-floor vehicles, as the seats are needed to cover high floor areas.

  32. I mostly ride Link to get to and from the airport, with a rolling bag. This is to and from the Mount Baker station.

    Luggage is hardly ever an issue. Once I got on with car full of Sounders fans, leaving an exhibition game on a Sunday afternoon — that train was packed, and I could barely fit by the door.

    Otherwise this luggage deal seems like a serious non-issue. Much more important to me, is how to get people to just ride Link. SoundTransit is not making their projections. I think it’s time to actively encourage people to drive to Link and park for their commute. That might seem heretical to orthodox urban planning, but low ridership could start us on a death spiral of higher fares and more opposition.

    1. I agree that this luggage thing is a total non-issue and I’m totally shocked this thread has gone on for as long as it has.

      That said, your fears of a “death spiral” are totally unfounded. Link is overshooting its weekend ridership predictions and undershooting its weekday predictions; on net it comes out to about 14% under last year. By contrast, ST Express busses came out about 5% under predictions last year. The cost per boarding was $6.78 vs a budgeted $5.95 and vs $8.56 the previous year; and those ridership numbers appear to be going up, year on year. So really, there is nothing to worry about here. Do not allow the anti-rail trolls to put the wind up you.

      As for people parking to ride Link, they do not need to be encouraged, they are already doing that in droves at Tukwila station, and the S 200th St extension slated for 2016 will include a big P&R to serve South King commuters. The city just voted today to allow commercial parking to continue in station areas in the Ranier Valley on an interim basis.

      Keep in mind though, that the opposition to P&Rs from transit advocates is not generally rooted in orthodoxy. Large parking structures cost a lot to build and typically generate two rides per day for each space. Building urban stations in the city is far more productive, and that’s exactly what ST is doing right now with University Link and North Link. The increased boardings from the U-Link extension to Capitol Hill and Husky Stadium alone will far more than double Central Link’s ridership.

      So relax, don’t believe the FUD.

  33. This easy solution to the luggage problem is simply to add more cars to each train. This is already needed during weekend afternoons. Or run trains more often. Again, fewer airport riders per train.

    1. ST can only run two-car trains until U-Link is complete due to the length of the Pine St stub tunnel (although the wiki page claims three cars.) ST can’t add any more trains during peak period because of bus congestion in the tunnel, and as Metro controls the operation in the tunnel until 2016, ST can’t order those busses out of the tunnel until then. After 2016, all of those issues go away, and we’ll probably be running four-car trains during the day.

      1. I’m curious why the stub tunnel can’t be extended once the tunneling from Capitol Hill Station is done. It seems like it shouldn’t be that difficult to install a few more meters of track.

  34. I was on some kind of commuter train between the FLL airport and the Miami airport a few years back and I seem to remember there being a luggage area kind of like the ones on Amtrak at the ends of the cars. If I’m remembering right (and I’d just gotten off a red-eye so it’s entirely possible I’m wrong), the luggage area had room across for about 2-3 suitcases, then a shelf at about hip-height that you could put another 2-3 suitcases on. It was in an area near the door, kind of like where the bike/luggage area is on Link. I wouldn’t mind seeing a seat or two removed, and a luggage area like that installed. I mean, if people are taking up a seat for their luggage anyway (which I have seen on Link, and on Metro for that matter), it’s not like removing that seat and creating a luggage area is such a big loss anyway, right?

Comments are closed.