KAUSpilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1955 posts, RR: 37 Posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1491 times:
Hi, I was on cnn.com and noticed a video segment in which a cnn reporter takes a delta shuttle flight from La Guardia to Washington Reagan, and then takes a high speed train on the way back in order to compare the two forms of travel.
His conclusion? The train took almost the exact same amount of time and ended up being 100 bucks cheaper.
Hoffa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1381 times:
Well, usually the major Fortune 100 corporations that have their companies on the LGA-DCA-BOS shuttles on a daily or weekly basis have negotiated substantial volume discounts...so in that sense this wouldn't be the case.
However, for ordinary joes like you and me, midweek walkup fares can be over $300 which makes the train a very attractive option. I have sat on the runway at LGA on a 3 hour weather delay for a 35 minute flight to DCA so yes the train can actually be faster plus it takes you right to Midtown Manhattan.
The Acela service is probably all that will be left of Amtrak after it goes bust. They offer very plush 2-class service but its nothing compared to the German ICE or French TGV trains.
Delta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 7 Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1359 times:
Well, you can't argue facts. Trains work better for a lot of people, not so well for others. The shorter the distance, the less attractive is flying.
I am sure the fuel burn per passenger-mile is a lot lower for a train than a plane.
Delta777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 654 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1343 times:
Phlflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 851 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1331 times:
If you compare going from city center to city center, NYC to WAS the train is going to be much quicker, especially now when you consider how far in advance you need to check in. I am sure it is much cheaper also.
Phlflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 851 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1316 times:
Trains in the US are not as fun, but a TGV or ICE train in France or Germany is just as fun a plane.
Nonrevman From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1289 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1310 times:
Magyar From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 596 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1280 times:
As a matter of fact the CNN just discovered one of the
reason why the superfast trains were invented. The
fast trains in Europe where the distances are much
shorter can actually compete with the airtravel.
And just consider one thing. On a train you can get up
have long walk to the restaurant car, sit down at a very
comfortable table, order some food or drink and have
lunch while you travel. There is no plane, not even the
A380, which can provide this comfort for you!
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1258 times:
I was just in France, and let me tell you, the TGV is so much easier than flying. You can order your tickets just as easily as with the airlines, phone, net, etc. Plus, the walkup fares are affordable. The station is in the middle of town, not out in the middle of nowhere like most airports. You arrive maybe 15 minutes early if you already have your ticket, you composte the ticket in the machine, and go up to the proper pier, then get on the train.
BWIrwy4 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 940 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1235 times:
The Washington Post had a race like this over the summer. At 6:00 AM, they pulled four reporters into the editors office. One was to take the USAirways Shuttle, one took Acela, one drove, and the last one took the bus. The plane beat the train by about 30 minutes to the New York office of the Post. The consensus was that the train was a much better method of travel, and cheaper too.
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5338 posts, RR: 11 Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1235 times:
I just got back from Italy. I can't imagine anyone flying there. The trains are so easy. You walk up to an automated machine to buy your ticket- cash or credit card is fine, and the machine "speaks" in six languages (thankfully including ENGLISH). And it's quick and cheap. I went from Viterbo (100 miles northwest of Rome) to Pisa (in the North of Italy) for $45 round trip. Not bad.
Of course, it would have been faster had we taken the high speed train direct to Milan and then done something else, but that was more expensive...
Hoffa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1219 times:
Trouble is Amtrak is apparently now going bust. The Acela service was supposed to be the model of the future for fast city-to-city travel like the California corridor, etc. The track is old and cannot support something on the level of TGV/ICE unless an outside investor steps in.
There was even a proposal in the early 1990's to develop a Texas TGV before Southwest Airlines lobbyists killed the idea. Almost happened too:
Its such a shame considering this country was literally built around railroads. In 1890, for example, the number of passengers carried on American street railways (including cable and elevated systems) was over 2 billion per year, or more than twice that of the rest of the world combined. In the 1870's the US had 7 times the amount of track than the rest of Europe combined!
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1199 times:
On TGV and other bullettrains you DO have to book in advance just like with airtravel.
Normal trains (at least here) are highly uncomfortable and crowded.
Johnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2470 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
Seems things are moving ahead at a glacial pace, but moving ahead nonetheless in California.
Haven't heard much yet from the airlines...methinks they're taking a wait and see attitude, hoping that this will die a slow death without any "intervention."
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
I've used Amtrak quite a bit in the US during my holidays, and I have to say, they are quite comfortable compared to what is on offer in Britain.
Nevertheless, 'public transport' in the US is abysmal, when compared to that available in Europe-if you're not travelling to a major city-you're stuffed. Probably as a result of the popularity of the automobile & plane.
I think the secret with LGA-BOS shuttles (and such routes) is to either get the very first early-bird flight out, or don't take the plane at all-go by train. This is what I was told by a Delta FA on just such a flight!
Ah well, at least there are some honest airline employees around....
BCal DC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 717 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1172 times:
when I used to work in Europe (mainly Amsterdam and Paris), certainly to get to Paris was much quicker on the Eurostar than taking the plane.
To get to Waterloo International from my flat 10 mins, then the train str8 to Paris Nord.
However the equivalent journey to London Heathrow, checkin, security queues, the flight, pick up bags at Charles de Gaulle, travel to central Paris... waaay more hassle.
And I thought that 1st class eurostar is very comfortable, room to stretch out, sleep, work whatever.
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1119 times:
The nice thing about the TGV is that first class is very affordable. We payed something like $130 per person for a rountrip from Paris to Perpignan (small city right on the Spanish border). Had we travelled coach, we would've payed maybe $100-$90. A plane in economy class would've been $250.
Ctbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 52 Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1108 times:
Very true!
When the first TGV was introduced from Paris to Lyon in 1981 (I think), flight bookins dropped by something in the range of 50%.
On Shorter and medium distance routes, the high-speed trains are definately better. They're cheaper, more convenient, and the time from city-center to city-center is about the same. No wonder Air France stopped flying CDG-BRU because of the competition from the high-speed Thalys.
Charles, SJ
The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
GoAllegheny From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 340 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1060 times:
So, how does air compare with rail on the London to Paris trip using the Chunnel? I assume that the plane is much quicker, but maybe not?
Hoffa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1047 times:
Surely most of the passengers on LHR/LGW-CDG are international transfer pax. BA do very well selling package holidays in France from the US and Canada.
Hoffa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1043 times:
Nevertheless, 'public transport' in the US is abysmal, when compared to that available in Europe-if you're not travelling to a major city-you're stuffed. Probably as a result of the popularity of the automobile & plane.
Sadly this is very true. Its actually a carefully orchestrated corporate plot stretching as far back as the 1930's when General Motors bought the tram lines in America's 20 largest cities and summarily ripped them up (this was in the days before antitrust legislation had teeth) only to later introduce "National Bus Lines" (and who do you think sold them the buses )
EIPremier From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1533 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1039 times:
Sterne82 From Belgium, joined May 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1014 times:
Hi all,
I'm living in Belgium (center of the Thalys network), and I'll show you one example...
To do a one round trip between Bruxelles-Midi (center of the city)to CDG it takes around 1h30 (travelling at 300Km/h on 90% of the journey). You can book the same day as you leave, they have NO need to be there 15 min before the departure!!!(But for the Eurostar you have to be there 15 min before). In second class it cost you around 25-30€, in first I don't know but it must be aroun 50-60€.
Figures? Since his launch in 1996, the Thalys have carried more than 10.000.000 people, and now carry yearly around 3.000.000 people!!!!
For the Eurostar that's a little bit more complicate to explain as the HSL is not yet ready in England. The first part will be open in 2003 and the next part in 2007!!! So this nervous nice horse is still limited at 120-140 Km/h in some places!!!
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1005 times:
It has to be said though, I currently live in Cambridge in the UK, so my local airport is Stansted.
The low-cost airline 'buzz' flies STN-CDG many times a day, and I have used this service myself many times. Why? Lack of congestion at STN (and CDG, before 0900) means flight time is merely 0:40!!
This sure as heck beats anything on the ground, especially given the low-cost nature of the flight!
Regards
25 FDXmech: The strange thing is, passenger train service is generally not profitable in the U.S., and from what I hear, Europe also. Any reason as to why?
26 9Q-CLI: Hoffa- You shouldn’t be emotional about public transportation disappearance if it’s not economically viable. When I was living in Los Angeles, I
27 Delta-flyer: 9Q-CLI -- you make an excellent point about rail subsidies. Another problem with trains (or for that matter, any form of ground transportation) is our
28 Lj: ehhhh maybe a stupid question but does someone also cares about the environment?
29 PROSA: 9Q-CLI -- you make an excellent point about rail subsidies. Another problem with trains (or for that matter, any form of ground transportation) is our
30 Asgeirs: I like airplane travels more than train travels (quite normal for an aviation enthusiast) but fact is, trains are much more environmentally friendly t
31 Vfw614: Some LH domestic routes in Germany will see the axe as soon as the new highspeed link between the Cologne/Dusseldorf area and Frankfurt will become op
32 PW100: Delta-flyer wrote: If one wants to travel on the earth's surface, one drives. Most people in Los Angeles won't ride the rails even if it were free! We
33 DesertJets: Clearly air travel, rail travel, and automobile travel all have their place. But the problem is, much more so in the US, is that there are few synergi
34 PW100: DesertJets Next time you visit Europe, check out AMS or FRA. At AMS, once you've picked up your lugage, take the escalators down to the -1 level, and
35 PROSA: I also have to conclude that the Dutch are investing close to 5 billion dollars for 100 miles of high speed rail track Well, heck. If New York City ev
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1955 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 596 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
)
From Belgium, joined May 2000, 397 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
