Why doesn't North America have train sheds / pleasant platforms?

[williamn]

It always strikes me that the design of US commuter rail is basically stuck in the 1950's.

 

[StephenHunter]

It always strikes me that the design of US commuter rail is basically stuck in the 1950's.

Still very much into loco haulage when most people use MUs.

 

[williamn]

Still very much into loco haulage when most people use MUs.

That's true but I meant more the interiors.

 

[ac6000cw]

Still very much into loco haulage when most people use MUs.

There are a few commuter rail routes using modern European-style DMUs, but they don't normally share tracks with other 'heavy' trains e.g. freight is only allowed to run when the DMUs aren't. That allows the DMUs to have European-style collision energy absorption, instead of having to meet normal US end-loading requirements for passenger cars.

That's true but I meant more the interiors.

It's a different culture and it varies with the part of country you are in e.g. East Coast versus West Coast.

 

[yorksrob]

As explained above already, why would they spend money on the platform area? In North American practice, generally passengers wait in the nice part of the station and only start boarding when the train has arrived. The platform is functionally the same as a corridor, as an airbridge at the airport - a 'platform' from which you board or alight the train. Passengers only spend time transiting the platform. Our closest railway example is probably Euston.

Indeed. You can see similar practices with the UK Southern Railway terminals where we have grandiose booking halls at Ramsgate, Margate and Hastings* with more standard platform areas.

*Demolished in 2005 much to my shock and sadness.

 

[styles]

I think it's more to do with the general attitude and obscurity of rail travel in USA. Something that is not important and not very much used does not deserve investment and maintenance.

I think this is it. Railroads in the US/Canada and to an extent Mexico are more about freight, with passenger services being a bit of an afterthought. The passenger network map for Amtrak is pitiful.

It's no surprise therefore that little investment is made in passenger facilities at stations.

 

[ac6000cw]

Indeed. You can see similar practices with the UK Southern Railway terminals where we have grandiose booking halls at Ramsgate, Margate and Hastings* with more standard platform areas.

*Demolished in 2005 much to my shock and sadness.

It's the same at Cambridge - a nice, listed facade and high-ceilinged booking hall behind it, but most of the platforms have minimal length, utilitarian canopies. The longest and most stylish ones are actually on the modern P7 & P8 island.

It's no surprise therefore that little investment is made in passenger facilities at stations.

Hence the derogatory 'Amshack' term that was applied to the tiny stations, often on the edge of town, that replaced much larger downtown terminals in the 1970s, served by the one train a day (or less) service that remained.

 

[yorksrob]

It's the same at Cambridge - a nice, listed facade and high-ceilinged booking hall behind it, but most of the platforms have minimal length, utilitarian canopies. The longest and most stylish ones are actually on the modern P7 & P8 island.


Hence the derogatory 'Amshack' term that was applied to the tiny stations, often on the edge of town, that replaced much larger downtown terminals in the 1970s, served by the one train a day (or less) service that remained.

Indeed, for Cambridge it didn't even have the island platform until recently.

 

[AdamWW]

I think this is it. Railroads in the US/Canada and to an extent Mexico are more about freight, with passenger services being a bit of an afterthought. The passenger network map for Amtrak is pitiful.

It's no surprise therefore that little investment is made in passenger facilities at stations.

In the present day yes most of the rail network in North America is owned by freight companies with a few passenger trains as (often somewhat unwelcome) guests.
Mexico got rid of almost all its passenger rail some time ago though it seems to be making a bit of a comeback.

But that certainly wasn't the case when the stations discussed at the start of the thread were built and in any case the point as I understood it was not that there was a lack of facilities, just that there are stations with fairly grand buildings but utilitarian platform areas.

Also, while the Amtrak network is certainly sparse, all the stations mentioned in the first post have reasonably frequent services, with local trains as well as long distance ones.

 

[williamn]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Sep 2026 ==

But that certainly wasn't the case when the stations discussed at the start of the thread were built and in any case the point as I understood it was not that there was a lack of facilities, just that there are stations with fairly grand buildings but utilitarian platform areas.

Thanks, yes that was exactly my point!

I’m sadly very familiar with the later ‘Amshack’ stations, though in recent years there have been some notable improvements such as the new Rochester NY building (though take a look at the original one and weep at what was lost).

Quote Reply
Report •••