Amtrak vs Air Travel

The ability to move around

Number 14

It's an approved method of travel for the Amish.

Number 15.

Tadman wrote:

benboston wrote:9-If going on the Acela the trip from say BOS-NYP is faster than planes.

Well said. Even the midwest corridors can be faster than flying if travelling from midpoints. I sometimes stay two hours out of Chicago, near New Buffalo. It's much easier to catch a Wolverine than it is to drive to Midway and catch a Detroit flight. Don't even think about O'Hare...

In other words, timing!

I've expounded on this before in other places, and if you're on the East Coast, it's a weighting game. Do mind the sarcasm, it's all in fun.

Take BWI-NYP using the cheapest airline, Southwest... um, you can't. The closest you get is Long Island/Islip. If you're stubborn enough, you'll be facing this: Having to get to the airport two hours before your flight so you can get your ticket or your bags checked and be able to get through the lines (DO NOT PET THE K-9 OFFICER WHO IS SNIFFING YOUR BUTT FOR CONTRABAND) before boarding. You then get on board, have about an hour or so flight, get off at Islip, wait upwards of 30 minutes to get your bags (if you have any), travel to the LIRR station (10 minutes per LIRR), and then wait at Ronkonkoma LIRR for up to an hour waiting for train that takes upwards of an hour an a half to get to Penn Station. So at worst case, that's over SIX hours!

But lets be sensible! Take Amtrak's Northwest Regional, just get on board, have the conductor zap your ticket, you're at Penn Station in 2-3 hours.

My outer limit would be BWI-PIT/PGH. Once again, two hours early to get to the terminal, check bags in, deal with the TSA rolling their eyes because that guy wearing a tail has a FREAKIN' DEVIL'S HOUND HEAD as a carry on, wait for the plane to come in, have a 45 minute ride WITH ALL THOSE FREAKS, get off, get to the luggage return, deal with that tail-wearing guy having SIX BAGS?!? while waiting for yours to pop out in about 20 minutes (they're quick at Pittsburgh), then grab a SuperShuttle to speed down to Downtown Pittsburgh because it's really out in the boondocks, taking 30-60 minutes to get there, and the city is going nuts for them when all you want is to go see the O's get pounded by the Pirates and to check your server at a colocation facility nearby.

But with Amtrak, it's get on board at BWI, transfer at PHL to the Pennsylvanian (bring lunch), wonder what some of the yapping is about, OH GAWD SOMEBODY DRESSED IN A DOG OUTFIT BUT CONDUCTOR UNIFORM AND... oh, the kids are getting entertained. Huh, maybe it won't be so bad for the next six hours. Wait, why are the Amish getting on board? Gee this train's getting full... oh, it emptied out a bit... and we're winding around and ooooooohhhh Horseshoe Curve and the scenery and why don't we just put away our laptop and just watch the world go by? Yeah, that would be nice. Maybe a nap as well... oh we're here already? That was pleasant! Oh hey, we're in downtown Pittsburgh already! Not bad for an eight hour trip.

One of these days I'll overnight on the train to Chicago for another convention...

STrRedWolf wrote:One of these days I'll overnight on the train to Chicago for another convention...

Same, but on my way to visit family instead of to a convention. Wish they could take a few more hours out of the Capitol Limited schedule though!

I find that taking the train considerably eases the time zone transition. When I fly to California from the East Coast, I'm usually sleepier for the first few days due to the 3 hour time change. If I arrive on the train, I don't notice the time change nearly as much.

More comfortable, less stressful, can be faster door to door if you don't live close to origin airport &/or have destination far from airport, more productive (as espoused by prior posters)...overall, more "humane". Also, no one has mentioned...(16) often but not always more scenic. 3" dirty scratched airplane window at 30-something K ft, vs giant ground window with large comfy chair.

ExCon90 wrote:I recall that back around the time the Metroliners were being introduced in 1968 a group of academics made a study of what they termed the "anxiety factor"--the anxiety being not about safety but rather the number of connections involved in air travel that all have to work; i.e., road traffic en route to the airport, getting checked in on time (and this long before TSA), listening for the departure announcement, having a gate available at destination, traffic en route from the airport into town, etc., all of which chop up the journey into sections, whereas by train once you're in your seat you're all set until it's time to get off and you can work or snooze or whatever you like. I don't know whether they figured out a way of quantifying that, but they considered it significant.

That's a good point, but also true with trains. You still have to get to the station, the train could be delayed by weather or myriad other issues, you could also get delayed. I've been on many a delayed Regional, to say nothing of LD performance! That said, still less hoops to jump through overall.

AC4619 wrote:

(16) often but not always more scenic.

Yep!
16- Often but not always more scenic.

AC4619 wrote:That's a good point, but also true with trains. You still have to get to the station, the train could be delayed by weather or myriad other issues, you could also get delayed. I've been on many a delayed Regional, to say nothing of LD performance! That said, still less hoops to jump through overall.

Very true. I'm a short distance from BWI (both station and airport). Pittsburgh's station is right down town. The first year I took it was rather smooth as I got to Pittsburgh with an hour to spare. The second year they had to reverse over two switches, and I got into the city on time.

Train travel vs air travel from Texas:
San Antonio to Chicago takes almost 30.9 hours when it runs on time, Southwest Airlines takes 2.75 hours.
Flying saves the traveler over 28 hours - that's 1 day and 4 hours......
No amount of traffic jams not weather related will take 24 hours between the airport and downtown - in both San Antonio and Chicago. Weather can affect both trains and planes. it seems trains are canceled just as quickly as planes anymore.
Worse yet, when traveling by train from Texas to either coast, sunny California or the Big Apple, the train looses even more time to the plane. Double that time lost when traveling coast to coast!

In California, between Memorial Day and Labor Day, taking the train between LAUS and San Diego is SO MUCH faster. The drive from Orange County to San Diego during the summer months are a good 5+ hours vs 2:45 on the Pacific Surfliner.

electricron wrote:Train travel vs air travel from Texas:
San Antonio to Chicago takes almost 30.9 hours when it runs on time, Southwest Airlines takes 2.75 hours.
Flying saves the traveler over 28 hours - that's 1 day and 4 hours......
No amount of traffic jams not weather related will take 24 hours between the airport and downtown - in both San Antonio and Chicago. Weather can affect both trains and planes. it seems trains are canceled just as quickly as planes anymore.
Worse yet, when traveling by train from Texas to either coast, sunny California or the Big Apple, the train looses even more time to the plane. Double that time lost when traveling coast to coast!

Agreed. BWI to SJC (San Jose, CA) via Southwest is aprox 8 hours. The same route by Amtrak is nearly 80 hours (over three days!). That essentially makes for a two week vacation.

For those who are comparing speed of travel please refer to item 4 in the original post:

4- They are not in a hurry

The only reason speed should be the issue on Amtrak is typically for business travel. Most of this concentrated on the NEC and a few other routes. LD routes mostly fall under item 4(above).

R&DB wrote: The only reason speed should be the issue on Amtrak is typically for business travel.

Or you don't have a lot of vacation time, and you would like to spend that time at your destination.

electricron wrote:Train travel vs air travel from Texas:
San Antonio to Chicago takes almost 30.9 hours when it runs on time, Southwest Airlines takes 2.75 hours.
Flying saves the traveler over 28 hours - that's 1 day and 4 hours......
No amount of traffic jams not weather related will take 24 hours between the airport and downtown - in both San Antonio and Chicago. Weather can affect both trains and planes. it seems trains are canceled just as quickly as planes anymore.
Worse yet, when traveling by train from Texas to either coast, sunny California or the Big Apple, the train looses even more time to the plane. Double that time lost when traveling coast to coast!

Try looking at Amtrak service from the midwest to Florida. The best Amtrak can do for Chicago to Orlando is 38 hours and 26 minutes. Airlines do it in 2 hours and 45 minutes. Does being able to walk around while traveling for that extra day and a half really make that much of a difference to people?

spatcher wrote:

electricron wrote:Train travel vs air travel from Texas:
San Antonio to Chicago takes almost 30.9 hours when it runs on time, Southwest Airlines takes 2.75 hours.
Flying saves the traveler over 28 hours - that's 1 day and 4 hours......
No amount of traffic jams not weather related will take 24 hours between the airport and downtown - in both San Antonio and Chicago. Weather can affect both trains and planes. it seems trains are canceled just as quickly as planes anymore.
Worse yet, when traveling by train from Texas to either coast, sunny California or the Big Apple, the train looses even more time to the plane. Double that time lost when traveling coast to coast!

Try looking at Amtrak service from the midwest to Florida. The best Amtrak can do for Chicago to Orlando is 38 hours and 26 minutes. Airlines do it in 2 hours and 45 minutes. Does being able to walk around while traveling for that extra day and a half really make that much of a difference to people?

Well said. If I was happily retired, I might consider it, but time has become a more precious commodity not just in business, but in taking care of other obligations as well. I am looking at certain legs to try and get the "best of both worlds" (i.e. fly to DEN, and train it from DEN to EMY next time I have a chance to go to the Bay Area, but the scheduling isn't quite perfect, might have to spend a day in DEN). In addition, each time you connect to a different line/service with a train (any mode, bus etc) adds a chunk of time as well vs a direct line.
I know full well, I will not take the train from north jersey to south jersey connecting at SEC, if it means the trip will take 2 hours when I can drive in 45-50 min and listen to a podcast, and on top of it costs more than driving. Same with flying. Amtrak used to have an additional appeal when their coach fares were actually cheaper than flying (for LD). Now it's not so much anymore. I have looked at the train from NYP to Newton, KS to visit my brother in Wichita. The train gets there at around 2:45am, with a Thruway bus connection getting me there at close to 4am. It's not feasible and unfortunately, not cheap as well.