Average Folks...

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
As of late, I've been on a lot less trains than I'd like. The reason is that I took a job in the airline industry and can subsequently fly for free. But lately, I've been longing to get back out on the rails. I finish college in December, and will be leaving my airline position for better opportunities elsewhere.

My reasoning for riding Amtrak is multi-fold - it is relaxing, (generally) stress-free, it is the only mode that allows one to actively move around the vehicle while one is in transit, it is environmentally friendly, and in general, it is just one of the most fulfilling ways to get around. Traveling by air is about getting to your destination, traveling by rail is about the trip as much as the destination.

However, working in an airport five days a week has really given me tremendous perspective on how far superior train travel is. I work for what I consider to be one of the best airlines around (think 'Blue') and we really do a lot to make air travel less of a hassle. But the reality is that air travel involves getting to the airport early for security, the hassle of security (which I tend to bypass by using employee security lines), constant delays due to airports being pushed beyond their capacity, and is highly variable due to weather.

Train travel has its faults and its delays, but one of the largest benefits of a train is that I can get up and walk around. On a plane, I'm crammed in a small seat where I'm pretty much forced to sit for the duration of the flight. Not exactly a fun experience. Train travel may take longer, but on trips that would normally be completed by short haul flight (ESX-BRP, my usual route, but there are hundreds of city pairs), I can get far more done. On a train, I get ample space to work and a power outlet. I usually have internet through my Blackberry, which I connect to my laptop. On an eight hour train ride, I can get immense amounts done. Just last weekend, a friend of mine took the Vermonter from NHV to ESX specifically because he had an essay to write, and the train would given him time to work on it.

On longer distance services, the train simply adds to the trip. It may take longer, but if I can find the time, I'll look forward to the trip as much as the destination. Trains provide an opportunity to be social and meet other passengers, to see the country in a way that can never be seen from a highway, and to provide an opportunity to rest and relax. In the last two years (all before my airline employment), I've probably taken 15-20 Amtrak trips. I remember every one of them, even the dozen or so that were just the Vermonter. I fly with great frequency (at least 1-2 times a month) and I can't distinguish one flight from another in my mind. When I get on an airline, I just one to get where I'm going and get off.

To put this in perspective, I love flying. Not commercial air travel, but flying in general. I did some flight lessons two years ago, working to get my private pilot's license. I didn't finish, but do plan to at some point - the time that I spent in the air was absolutely incredible. I understand that some people ride trains because they're not comfortable flying - I definitely don't fall into that category. It's just that commercial air travel is just a terrible way to get anywhere, unless you just need to go a long distance and get there very quickly.

I don't always have the luxury of time to take the train. Part of that is a reflection on the rail system in this country (if we built true high speed rail between, say, New York and Chicago, the trip could be made in 6.5 hours - marginally more than what it takes to fly, considering a 2.5 hour flight time and the time needed to get to the airport, go through security, etc). But when I do, Amtrak is my first and foremost choice. I don't really even consider driving, which is stressful, tiring, and (compared to other modes) dangerous. I'll consider driving on trips less than 200 miles, beyond that I'd rather take a train, and actually get something done or relax while I get to where I'm going.

There's been a few times where I've been flying and have massive delays and cancelations due to weather. It's amazing how many times I've had conversations with flight attendants and pilots, who, unable to get home, lament that there isn't faster and more frequent rail service in this country. Even those of us who are in aviation realize it. All we need to do now is create more frequency and upgrade routes for higher speeds, so that one doesn't have to make decisions about whether to take a train for eight hours or drive the same distance in four (at least that's the Vermonter's plight), or be unable to take the train because the service is so infrequent.
 
Don't forget another factor. Man, woman, hopefully in love and lust with each other. Small space, not much to do on the overnight train except be with each other... Need I say more?
I think this aspect is way overlooked.

:D
I really hope that it is not the case in THIS given example:

a good train trip for his 10 year old daughter and himself
:eek: :eek:
 
constant delays due to airports being pushed beyond their capacity
It's interesting that you say this, and it's driving the point home to me that every single mode of transportation we have in this country has capacity problems. The roads are congested during peak travel times in big cities, the rails don't have enough capacity in many places (even on the Northeast Corridor, the Connecticut River bridge is a bottleneck), and the major airports are congested.

Rail has the potential to be faster than the automobile. In practice, there probably are few trips where trains run faster in practice on our existing rail system than you can travel by Interstate Highway if the roads happen to be uncongested, but I don't think we're likely to see automobile travel beyond the 55-75 MPH range anytime soon in the US. By contrast, we have trains capable of 150 MPH, and we might well be able to go somewhat beyond that.

I think more widely available and faster rail has the potential to benefit the airline industry. I understand that the airports close to New York City have severe capacity problems. Faster rail service could increase the range of airports a New York City resident would consider using. However, I'm not sure if that's ultimately the most cost effective way to increase the airport capacity available to New York City residents.
 
I've been called a simpleton, but I don't go around advertising it. HAHAHA!!
I can imagine.

5) Between DEN and GSC, both your daughter and you can sit back and enjoy IMHO the best scenery on Amtrak, while still moving! B) Can you both do that while still
I've seen far too many people try.

Don't forget another factor. Man, woman, hopefully in love and lust with each other. Small space, not much to do on the overnight train except be with each other... Need I say more?
I think this aspect is way overlooked.
Try that in a roomette. I dare you.
Dude, GML, it's not my fault that you're uncreative. My condolences to your girlfriend or the inflatable doll. Roomettes rule, and full bedrooms are even better. Maybe someday you'll find out for yourself.
 
"Try that in a roomette. I dare you."

....already a member of that club. ^_^
 
constant delays due to airports being pushed beyond their capacity
It's interesting that you say this, and it's driving the point home to me that every single mode of transportation we have in this country has capacity problems. The roads are congested during peak travel times in big cities, the rails don't have enough capacity in many places (even on the Northeast Corridor, the Connecticut River bridge is a bottleneck), and the major airports are congested.

Rail has the potential to be faster than the automobile. In practice, there probably are few trips where trains run faster in practice on our existing rail system than you can travel by Interstate Highway if the roads happen to be uncongested, but I don't think we're likely to see automobile travel beyond the 55-75 MPH range anytime soon in the US. By contrast, we have trains capable of 150 MPH, and we might well be able to go somewhat beyond that.

I think more widely available and faster rail has the potential to benefit the airline industry. I understand that the airports close to New York City have severe capacity problems. Faster rail service could increase the range of airports a New York City resident would consider using. However, I'm not sure if that's ultimately the most cost effective way to increase the airport capacity available to New York City residents.
I do 90 on the NJTP fairly routinely, and I tend to follow traffic...
 
There's been a few times where I've been flying and have massive delays and cancellations due to weather. It's amazing how many times I've had conversations with flight attendants and pilots, who, unable to get home, lament that there isn't faster and more frequent rail service in this country. Even those of us who are in aviation realize it. All we need to do now is create more frequency and upgrade routes for higher speeds, so that one doesn't have to make decisions about whether to take a train for eight hours or drive the same distance in four (at least that's the Vermonter's plight), or be unable to take the train because the service is so infrequent.
Most Airlines in Europe love high speed rail, it allows them to cancel short distance flights that make little money to create space for long distance international/overseas that are highly profitable. In the US there are serious talks about building a high speed line between ATL and Chattanooga that would primarily serve as a high speed inter-airport flight transfer connector (the best term I could come up with for it), It would be used to alleviate congestion at ATL by sending air passengers to the large under-utilized airport in Chattanooga. It would work in 2 distinctly different ways first by someone doing a direct flight-flight connection coming into Atlanta/Chattanooga with an Airline transfer ticket they present this at the train station and receive free travel to Chattanooga for the next leg of their journey. The other situation would be for someone in the Atlanta purchasing a single stop flight ticket that would essentially read depart ATL for their destination but the boarding information would be for the Chattanooga Airport in this case it would work as a terminal-terminal shuttle.

There are also stops planned in the downtown areas and a few possible intermediate stops, the plan is to have separate or partitioned trains for air passengers so that they won't need to go through security again. Trains carrying airport passengers would have priority over the other trains. Trains similar to the TGV LaPoste woud carry luggage and cargo between the aiports at high speed as well. Depending on the routes chosen the travel times would be between 60-90mins.

During the recent drought it was also proposed that a water pipeline between the Tennesee river in Chattanooga and downtow Atlanta be included to help offset costs of each project, as well as sharing infrastructure and ROW of the roads and interstates along the way.

Here's the news story:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_113736.asp
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Travel Day" is the term used by those flying from home to their vacation destination. It's a wasted day of hurrying, craming into confined quarters for several hours, then doing the same thing to go back home.

On Amtrak, there is no "Travel Day". The train ride is part of the vacation. The time spent on a train is like bonus vacation time.
 
I've been called a simpleton, but I don't go around advertising it. HAHAHA!!
I can imagine.

5) Between DEN and GSC, both your daughter and you can sit back and enjoy IMHO the best scenery on Amtrak, while still moving! B) Can you both do that while still
I've seen far too many people try.

Don't forget another factor. Man, woman, hopefully in love and lust with each other. Small space, not much to do on the overnight train except be with each other... Need I say more?
I think this aspect is way overlooked.
Try that in a roomette. I dare you.
I am 6'8" and a roomette works just fine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most Airlines in Europe love high speed rail, it allows them to cancel short distance flights that make little money to create space for long distance international/overseas that are highly profitable. In the US there are serious talks about building a high speed line between ATL and Chattanooga that would primarily serve as a high speed inter-airport flight transfer connector (the best term I could come up with for it), It would be used to alleviate congestion at ATL by sending air passengers to the large under-utilized airport in Chattanooga. It would work in 2 distinctly different ways first by someone doing a direct flight-flight connection coming into Atlanta/Chattanooga with an Airline transfer ticket they present this at the train station and receive free travel to Chattanooga for the next leg of their journey. The other situation would be for someone in the Atlanta purchasing a single stop flight ticket that would essentially read depart ATL for their destination but the boarding information would be for the Chattanooga Airport in this case it would work as a terminal-terminal shuttle.
Why in the world wouldn't someone just fly to a different hub that didn't have this 60-90 minute train ride? In general, when I've flown from point A to point C in the past, a point B has been selected (if there needs to be one at all) where I can transfer as directly as possible. I'm really curious if there's any sample iternerary based on current flights where this train ride between an ATL flight and a Chattanooga flight would end up providing the fastest route.

There are also stops planned in the downtown areas and a few possible intermediate stops, the plan is to have separate or partitioned trains for air passengers so that they won't need to go through security again. Trains carrying airport passengers would have priority over the other trains. Trains similar to the TGV LaPoste woud carry luggage and cargo between the aiports at high speed as well. Depending on the routes chosen the travel times would be between 60-90mins.
During the recent drought it was also proposed that a water pipeline between the Tennesee river in Chattanooga and downtow Atlanta be included to help offset costs of each project, as well as sharing infrastructure and ROW of the roads and interstates along the way.

Here's the news story:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_113736.asp
The other thing I'm curious about is whether the intention is for this railroad to be a part of the national rail system. As I've thought about things like maglev technology, I'm convinced that rail that goes between cities really ought to be constructed so that it can be shared between commuter rail and Amtrak, because trains that can run both on the new corridors and on old track end up providing a much better return on investment for the new corridors. Within cities, using unusual technology for a subway system does not really cause problems, though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most Airlines in Europe love high speed rail, it allows them to cancel short distance flights that make little money to create space for long distance international/overseas that are highly profitable. In the US there are serious talks about building a high speed line between ATL and Chattanooga that would primarily serve as a high speed inter-airport flight transfer connector (the best term I could come up with for it), It would be used to alleviate congestion at ATL by sending air passengers to the large under-utilized airport in Chattanooga. It would work in 2 distinctly different ways first by someone doing a direct flight-flight connection coming into Atlanta/Chattanooga with an Airline transfer ticket they present this at the train station and receive free travel to Chattanooga for the next leg of their journey. The other situation would be for someone in the Atlanta purchasing a single stop flight ticket that would essentially read depart ATL for their destination but the boarding information would be for the Chattanooga Airport in this case it would work as a terminal-terminal shuttle.
Why in the world wouldn't someone just fly to a different hub that didn't have this 60-90 minute train ride? In general, when I've flown from point A to point C in the past, a point B has been selected (if there needs to be one at all) where I can transfer as directly as possible. I'm really curious if there's any sample iternerary based on current flights where this train ride between an ATL flight and a Chattanooga flight would end up providing the fastest route.

There are also stops planned in the downtown areas and a few possible intermediate stops, the plan is to have separate or partitioned trains for air passengers so that they won't need to go through security again. Trains carrying airport passengers would have priority over the other trains. Trains similar to the TGV LaPoste woud carry luggage and cargo between the aiports at high speed as well. Depending on the routes chosen the travel times would be between 60-90mins.
During the recent drought it was also proposed that a water pipeline between the Tennesee river in Chattanooga and downtow Atlanta be included to help offset costs of each project, as well as sharing infrastructure and ROW of the roads and interstates along the way.

Here's the news story:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_113736.asp
The other thing I'm curious about is whether the intention is for this railroad to be a part of the national rail system. As I've thought about things like maglev technology, I'm convinced that rail that goes between cities really ought to be constructed so that it can be shared between commuter rail and Amtrak, because trains that can run both on the new corridors and on old track end up providing a much better return on investment for the new corridors. Within cities, using unusual technology for a subway system does not really cause problems, though.
From the best I can understand from the article is that the Lovell Field in Chattanooga is essentially going to be an extension of the ATL airport. Your tickets may not even tell you the rail transfer is involved, the only way to tell would be the boarding gate. Basically this is just a cheaper alternative to easing congestion in the worlds busiest airport without tearing down buildings and buy large quantities of land in downtown. Mag-lev has been considered but is highly unlikely due to the cost and incompatibility with rail. The only commercial Mag-lev connects Shanghai International Airport with downtown it hits 267mph in service. Thats only 47mph faster than the TGV at much more cost so there is little benefit and I would be surprised if SNCF were to raise TGV speeds in the near future especially after the 357mph test run and the unveiling of the AGV.
 
"Basically this is just a cheaper alternative to easing congestion in the worlds busiest airport without tearing down buildings and buy large quantities of land in downtown."

Building an Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson extension in or near downtown Atlana would never be considered an option. Within the next few years the International Terminal (there is already an International Concourse) is scheduled to open. It will have a separate entrance from Interstate 75. Currently one accesses the passenger terminals from Interstate 85 and I understand that will continue. One (if not "the") of the busiest smaller airplane and corporate jet airports in the country already operates in northeast Atlanta. It is called Peachtree Dekalb (PDK). My house is in the flight path of both of these airports and looking up it sometimes appears like a highway as the lights appear and the planes line up for landing. My husband and I frequently use the phrase, "pull up", when we hear some of these fast jets. They are flying so low. We also are in the flight plan of the military planes landing at Dobbins near Marietta. We could almost set our clock by the sound of the C130's that fly over nightly. The other night was a C141. Occasionally one hears the faster military craft. (If you are traveling on I285 close to Hartsfield-Jackson the picture is clearer. It would be my opinion that the skies above Atlanta simply cannot handle more air traffic and there are no neighborhoods willing to tolerate the noise generated by additional airports. Both are dealing with sound ordinances as it is. Additionally, land in and around Atlanta is getting pricey. Add to the above the multitude of news and law enforcement helicopters and it is really busy above us. It simply makes sense to move some of the air traffic elsewhere. A new hub (what you are suggesting by flying directly in/out of Chattanooga) as close as Chattanooga might not make sense to the airlines. Therefore, it would be a better choice to move people there by a high speed train.

...sitting here listening to flights passing over.
 
...all of this is yours for the viewing and really can't be experienced from 3000 feet up
Hey, if anybody finds an airline that flies cross-country at 3 thousand feet, let me know. I wanna be in place to get a picture of the plane crashing into the Sierras or Rockies. :lol:
Oh shoot,

I did again...I forgot to put the zero behind the three! :blink:
 
...all of this is yours for the viewing and really can't be experienced from 3000 feet up
Hey, if anybody finds an airline that flies cross-country at 3 thousand feet, let me know. I wanna be in place to get a picture of the plane crashing into the Sierras or Rockies. :lol:
Oh shoot,

I did again...I forgot to put the zero behind the three! :blink:
Talk about a fuel-inefficient method of travel... :p
 
...all of this is yours for the viewing and really can't be experienced from 3000 feet up
Hey, if anybody finds an airline that flies cross-country at 3 thousand feet, let me know. I wanna be in place to get a picture of the plane crashing into the Sierras or Rockies. :lol:
Oh shoot,

I did again...I forgot to put the zero behind the three! :blink:
This reminds me of the slogan for the Shanghai Mag-lev "In Shanghai air travel begins and ends with a flight at zero altitude in first class comfort". It wouldn't be economical here 19mi cost $1.33 billion to build. But 19mi in 7mins is pretty impressive, I guess thats why everybody considers it even though its not economical.

They have a good promotional video on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_QdYNWvcqc
 
Every year I go from St Louis to Massachusetts to visit my Mother - as Prof. Lehrer of Haaavrd said "a boy's best friend is his Mother"

My wife was lamenting that she really didn't enjoy the trip - I reminded her that an indication of my pleasure is the fact that she insists that I double my PAXIL dosage on the trip.

A good time is anticipated by all NOT

Then she had the GREAT idea of taking the train.

WOW - approximately 6 travel days become 4 vacation days - NOW we are looking forward to our trip :rolleyes:
 
Honestly, I talk about riding the train a lot more than I get to actually ride it. But there are LOTS of long distance passengers that choose the train over other methods of long distance rides.
Why?

What is it that lures those folks who actually spend more time riding the train than talking about it?
A couple of things for me. One, is it's a bit sentimental. My father took me on a train ride when I was about 8. I remember that I got him to myself for 3 whole days, which was quite rare. It is a cherished memory. When each of my 5 kids turned 8, I did the same. I booked a bedroom and took them each individually on an overnighter train. Just me and my kids. I hope they have the same fond memories that I do.

Second, I do it to tune out the world. My job/life is hectic. I regularly (maybe once a year) catch a 1-2 night train just to sit in my bedroom, read, play computer games and think/do anything other than work, kids, responsibilities, etc... I go for solitude time, to recharge. It's a great experience and I'm always very sad when it's over. Sitting back, watching the world go by.... getting off at some station at 3:15am and just watching the train load up.... I just love it for some reason. I'm off on the Texas Eagle in July... Chicago all the way to LA and looking soooo forward to it.
 
Its partly a luxury to me, I guess. The luxury of saying, "SCREW IT!" to everyone trying to get me and the world to rush RUSH RUSH! I'm saying to myself, I have the time to take a 3 day trip that can be done in a few hours.

And the lower stress factor.
 
Its partly a luxury to me, I guess. The luxury of saying, "SCREW IT!" to everyone trying to get me and the world to rush RUSH RUSH! I'm saying to myself, I have the time to take a 3 day trip that can be done in a few hours.
And the lower stress factor.
I agree the world is moving to fast, we all should take a break and relax every once in a while, Amtrak's a perfect way to do it. Sit back and watch the country roll by out of your window in a sleeping car and forget all your problems.
 
I agree the world is moving to fast, we all should take a break and relax every once in a while, Amtrak's a perfect way to do it. Sit back and watch the country roll by out of your window in a sleeping car and forget all your problems.
For me its the chance to meet people away from stresd

Aloha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top