Is rail travel really more expensive?

[PerRock]

I think one of the other big issues on why people would rather fly is simply time. They would much rather go thru all the humiliation, stripping, lines, etc because it'll only be a couple hours on a flight and then they are at the airport where they need to be. Rather then spend a couple days enjoying a relaxing trip across the country by train.

peter

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I think one of the other big issues on why people would rather fly is simply time. They would much rather go thru all the humiliation, stripping, lines, etc because it'll only be a couple hours on a flight and then they are at the airport where they need to be. Rather then spend a couple days enjoying a relaxing trip across the country by train.

I hate what happens in airports these days and I would completely avoid it if I could, but it's not that simple for many of us. Try telling your boss that you need an extra two or three days of travel time each way for double the cost of a plane ticket. Even when I'm just visiting relatives I can either spend two days with them and two days on the train or four days with them by plane. Which would you choose? Taking the train is a sacrifice for many of us and just because other folks choose the plane doesn't mean that they don't mind being groped or irradiated.

 

[dlagrua]

I think one of the other big issues on why people would rather fly is simply time. They would much rather go thru all the humiliation, stripping, lines, etc because it'll only be a couple hours on a flight and then they are at the airport where they need to be. Rather then spend a couple days enjoying a relaxing trip across the country by train.

I hate what happens in airports these days and I would completely avoid it if I could, but it's not that simple for many of us. Try telling your boss that you need an extra two or three days of travel time each way for double the cost of a plane ticket. Even when I'm just visiting relatives I can either spend two days with them and two days on the train or four days with them by plane. Which would you choose? Taking the train is a sacrifice for many of us and just because other folks choose the plane doesn't mean that they don't mind being groped or irradiated.

As they say I've been there done that when I had a position managing the mid West and Eastern Seaboard areas. I was on a plane three times per month but that was back in the early 90's when all you had to do was go through the metal detector and on occasion submit your attache case to the "sniffer" I really didn't mind that but when they started with making you go barefoot, removing belts, jewelry and now scanner X-rays that show you completely naked I said enough is enough and stopped flying. I dislike being touched intimately by a man and won't tolerate it.

I realize that there are those in positions where they must fly. For those people I recommend "passive resistance" where you say no to the X Ray machine and ask 100's of questions to slow the line down to a crawl. If everyone did this it would force change but change may be coming. You cannot pat down, undress or grope Muslims especially women. It then becomes ironic that those that we are trying to protect ourselves against may end up enjoying the most freedom.

Unless they relax the security requirements I'm a 100% train travler for the forseeable future. I don't always want the slow route but most of our trips are overnight and you need to sleep someplace. As for the expense; it is irrelevant right now as flying is not an option. We book our tain trips way in advance and usually get a good low bucket deal.

 

[MrFSS]

. . . You cannot pat down, undress or grope Muslims especially women.

Simply because I have not heard this before, how are they checking them, if they refuse the full body scanner? Or, do they tell them they can't fly if they refuse both ways?

 

[PerRock]

I think one of the other big issues on why people would rather fly is simply time. They would much rather go thru all the humiliation, stripping, lines, etc because it'll only be a couple hours on a flight and then they are at the airport where they need to be. Rather then spend a couple days enjoying a relaxing trip across the country by train.

I hate what happens in airports these days and I would completely avoid it if I could, but it's not that simple for many of us. Try telling your boss that you need an extra two or three days of travel time each way for double the cost of a plane ticket. Even when I'm just visiting relatives I can either spend two days with them and two days on the train or four days with them by plane. Which would you choose? Taking the train is a sacrifice for many of us and just because other folks choose the plane doesn't mean that they don't mind being groped or irradiated.

I've actually been told by some people (and I'll quote the most recent one) "I'll happily put up with all the security stuff & lines to get to my destination in a couple hours rather then a couple days."

peter

 

[fredevad]

I was just noticing PerRock's signature which reads (for those that have signatures turned off):

Given the choice; I fly Amtrak.

Given my post above, just let me clarify - I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. But as Neo says, "The problem is choice.".

More than not, at least for me, the tough choice is about time. I only get so much vacation time from work, which needs to be split with spending time with my kids, visiting family, family vacations, and a little for my yearly Amtrak adventure. So yes, a big issue for me is time (off work).

In my post above, I had the time, but the tough choice was about money. Sure, I'd rather not deal with the airports, lines, security, and I just flat out prefer taking the train. However, I can't in any good conscience cause our family to get behind in our bills or take away from my kids' Christmas just so that I can ride the train for a few days. My family and kids must come first. I get my train time making runs every now and then on the Hiawatha to Chicago and my yearly Amtrak adventure.