8 ms·

Why an eight-hour bus ride from Los Angeles to San Francisco might beat a flight

126 points by edward 9y ago

mschuster91 9y ago
In Germany, we have had a quite extensive network of night trains with proper beds (and the more expensive tickets also have a shower in the carriage); unfortunately the network got massively thinned out in the last years and only the profitable core routes are in service now by Austrian ÖBB. Shouldn't something like this be possible in America, especially between far-away cities? Could at least be more profitable because you don't need to shunt around carriages every couple hours and if it gets kept between hubs there's no need for inter-route stops either.
- totalZero 9y ago
  shrug https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/08/economist-explains-18 https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/08/e... These guys tried to answer that question. Still, it seems to me that even they didn't touch on any good answers. shrug
- the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
  FWIW OeBB is investing into new night trains for routes between Austria and Italy. If they get popular they want to expand that. https://www.oebb.at/en/news/nightjet-der-zukunft https://www.oebb.at/en/news/nightjet-der-zukunft I generally really like nighttrains but there are not enough routes i need to take.
- FTA 9y ago
  Amtrak offers this with "roomettes" all the way up to 4-person rooms, though whether it's an overnight or a day trip depends on your origin and destination (for example, Chicago to Dallas is an overnight). You mention that Germany had eliminated all but the profitable ones--well, the U.S. government loses money on these routes to keep them running even in spite of the high prices. I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; meals _are_ included and you get I believe up to two carry-ons and two checked bags for free. I will say it is definitely a lower stress option. You can show up 30 minutes before your train is leaving and there's no security lines. Depending on the station, it could be just an empty train station in a rural town or a large station interconnected with other transport services (e.g. Boston, Chicago). The population you are traveling with is much different compared not only to airlines but also coach on the train. Generally your sleeper carmates are retired folks who don't want to deal with the hassle of TSA, running between connections, arriving three hours early, and so on. I've met some extremely nice people with amazing stories (you are seated with strangers at meals, so this is almost forced on you). If you are not in a hurry and have a few extra bucks, it's worth it at least once to experience the journey, especially across the Upper Midwest or coasts.
  - mschuster91 9y ago
    > I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; By car (and Google Maps measuring) that's about 3.000km total. Hamburg-Munich is about 1.500km total, so half the distance. But ÖBB Nightjet tickets start for ~160€ to 250€ roundtrip, about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? How is that even possible?
    - SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
      Probably because the trains never fill up.
    - chrischen 9y ago
      They're losing money because that's a ridiculously expensive price and people looking to just get from point A to B would not pay that.
      - ghaff 9y ago
        So they should cut their prices and lose even more money? The basic problem is that outside of the Northeast Corridor--which is very popular, profitable, and getting new infrastructure investment--there are very few city pairs in the US that have the right combination of density and distance. Effectively the Northeast Corridor makes all the money that Amtrak then loses in the rest of the country. This is a few years old but summarizes Amtrak profit (or lack thereof) by route: http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014-cost-recovery.html http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014...
        chrischen 9y ago
        Sometimes something is just obsolete. Their uncompetitive price reflects that.
        ghaff 9y ago
        Yes. But, it's not politically tenable to simply shut down rail service in the US outside of the Northeast Corridor. (Nor is it obvious that would be a good decision at a national level for many reasons.)
- _delirium 9y ago
  Amtrak does run a number of night trains, mostly on the routes where the trip is too long to plausibly do it as a day train, though. For example the NYC-Chicago night train (Lake Shore Limited) departs NYC at 15:40 and arrives in Chicago at 09:45 the next day (19 hours). And Chicago-SF is a 2-night trip (51 hours).
  - ghaff 9y ago
    You can also do Boston to DC as an overnight but I don't think they have any sleeper cars on that route. (Even with Acela, few people do that full route.)
- bpye 9y ago
  I took a few of the night trains in Europe this year, Krakow - Prague and Prague - Zurich (both CD, Czech, I think) were great, Verona - Paris kinda sucked though (Thello, private)
- matthewowen 9y ago
  The USA is really big. I took the train from Chicago to San Francisco. I loved it, but it took the best part of three days. Flying is always going to be more compelling for functional travel like this.
kwhitefoot 9y ago
This is like the night train I used to take from Oslo to Trondheim. It's about 660 km and takes less than an hour by air. But I live a taxi and train ride from the airport and my final destination is a two hour drive north of Trondheim. To get there before lunch I would have to get up before five in the morning and I would arrive tired or I could leave home at 21:00 the night before catch the night train at 23:30 and arrive in Trondheim at 07:00 catch the train to Steinkjer and be there by 10:30 refreshed after a good night's sleep and a civilized breakfast.
- brockwhittaker 9y ago
  Not to mention the trains are incredibly smooth. Took the train from Trondheim to Bodø, woke up a few hours in and didn’t know we were moving until I took a snapchat of my face in the dark train and saw a speed of over 200km/h.
clamprecht 9y ago
"The drivers intentionally go slowly and take back roads so that the trip, normally six hours, lasts eight." Why not just get there 2 hours early, park, and sit for 2 hours. This would (1) reduce vehicle motion, so you can sleep better, and (2) allow people who aren't asleep anyway to get out early if they want. It may also save gas, although once buses are electric, this becomes less of a factor.
- cwilson 9y ago
  I've taken quite a few overnight buses during a 6 month trip through South America. Even when paying for the luxury option (which is literally $10-$15 more, totally worth it) and having fully reclining comfortable seats, it all comes down to one thing, the drivers. If the drivers are maximizing for time you're not going to sleep very well because they are driving like a maniac. Sudden halts, near misses, and sharp corners make for a particularly terrifying experience when you're attempting to sleep. The fact that this endeavor is focusing on drivers that go slow is 100% a positive for me and I would now consider trying it. This is an issue that really just exists with overnight buses, as trains don't make sudden stops and they are not competing with other trains for a lane.
  - Brakenshire 9y ago
    Buses like this should be fitted with accelerometers, and drivers be rewarded for good driving. Actually the same applies to ordinary buses, a careful driver makes the journey much more comfortable.
    - kolinko 9y ago
      Do we really want to measure drivers by smoothness only, ignoring other factors like safety? When a difficult situation on the road arises, the drivers may be less likely to hit breaks, knowing they are being constantly watched. A better option would be to allow passengers to rate the drivers easily, Uber style. Such system would count in more factors, and (I guess) would be less likely to optimise for just one factor.
    - 9y ago
archagon 9y ago
I’ve taken Megabus from LA to SF (for like $20) and it’s one of the most beautiful routes I’ve ever been on, especially from the observation seats on the second floor. Just miles and miles of rolling, golden hills. Sleeping through it seems like a waste.
- seanp2k2 9y ago
  The 5 is horribly boring once you've done it a couple of times. It also smells very badly (like cow blood + poop) for a long stretch. Hot, dry, high winds, farms on both sides, just 2 lanes, cops around, many semis... Door to door, driving is the same as the airport, but having a car in LA is nice given the lack of public transit (Bay Area too).
  - tesseract 9y ago
    I usually opt for 101 if I can afford the slight extra driving time. I find it much more pleasant in terms of both scenery (maybe that is the Megabus route? "Rolling hills" sounds about right) and normal traffic conditions (significantly less truck traffic).
    - dver23 9y ago
      I do the same with 99. Much of it has three lanes now so less issues being stuck and mad passing by others. Ass in the chance for more stops along the way. My cutoff is LA area, I'll drive there, but fly to San Diego.
nfriedly 9y ago
My wife and I got a room on the California Zephyr train from SF to Chicago one year and we loved it. So much less hassle than flying. Better food and scenery too.
- ghaff 9y ago
  I don't think I'd have the patience to go all the way from San Francisco to Chicago. But I've definitely had my sights on doing the San Francisco to Denver leg (or vice versa) at some point if the travel stars even lined up in a way that made sense. I've also thought about the Empire Builder route as part of a trip to Glacier.
  - matthewowen 9y ago
    That leg is definitely the most scenic part (although going through Burlington, IA is also surprisingly neat).
Doctor_Fegg 9y ago
> the current route is a perfect example of that awkward travel distance to which there is no good solution. Others abound, such as Washington-Boston or London-Edinburgh There is a very good sleeper train, the Caledonian Sleeper, between London and Edinburgh (and several other points in Scotland). That's a "good solution" for that route, and I'm more than a little surprised that the London-based Economist seems not to have heard of it. https://www.sleeper.scot/ https://www.sleeper.scot/
- jbg_ 9y ago
  The Caledonian Sleeper is quite good, and has a great restaurant car, but it's generally considerably more expensive than flying unless you book very far in advance, and they do some shunting of carriages at one of the stops during the night that generally interrupts your sleep. It's still a good choice between those two cities, especially if you can replace a hotel night with the train, or can book very far in advance.
- rustoo 9y ago
  Such buses are quite common in India too. Many people prefer sleeper buses even though the prices are similar to flights. One reason is that they have to travel to the airport (city a) and then travel from the airport (city b). A couple of interesting links: http://www.indiatimes.com/boyz-toyz/cars-and-bikes/sleeper-ac-volvo-bus-service-from-maharashtra-to-bangalore-rolls-out-81803-1.html http://www.indiatimes.com/boyz-toyz/cars-and-bikes/sleeper-a... http://www.deccanherald.com/content/599348/scania-drive-1st-sleeper-bus.html http://www.deccanherald.com/content/599348/scania-drive-1st-...
  - visarga 9y ago
    I'm wondering why airports don't try to monopolize airport taxi business. It's the logical extension of traveling from point A to B end-to-end.
    - Nrsolis 9y ago
      What makes you think they haven't? In the DC area, there is a single provider of taxi service from Dulles Airport (IAD). http://www.flydulles.com/iad/washington-flyer-taxi-service http://www.flydulles.com/iad/washington-flyer-taxi-service Any other taxi service trying to pick up fares from IAD are violating the contract between the Metro Washington Airport Authority and Dulles Taxi.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dopeboy 9y ago
I make this commute pretty often (albeit to Orange County, not LA) and I've been following these guys for awhile. I was under the impression their price would be a lot less than a flight. Their price roundtrip is $230. A roundtrip flight from SF to LA usually runs $160-$350 depending on how far in advance you book it. Taking the $350 ceiling - is a $120 savings enough to justify a ~6 hour difference? It's still a great idea - but price it cheaper like < 100 RT.
- cvsh 9y ago
  It also potentially eliminates the need for 1-2 nights of hotel rooms. Depending on your travel situation, that might be more convenient.
  - sologoub 9y ago
    The main advantage seems to be no travel the morning of and no need for a hotel for previous night. However, I usually do 6-7am flights and get there before 9am, 10am to office after BART from SFO. Flights back go as late as 9pm. In the end, southwest will set you back less than $120 if you book in advance. I also much prefer my own bed, as opposed to hotels or buses, but that's a personal preference.
  - et-al 9y ago
    Except in this case we're talking about SF/LA, which is only an hour-long flight. I do this flight every other month or so and it's a breeze. You leave work a bit early on Friday, get to the airport in about an hour, board the plane, they serve you a drink, and the captain tells you to fasten your seatbelt because we're descending. It's 1 hour to the airport, 45 minutes through security, 1 hour in the air, and another 45 min to my friend's house. So 3.5 hours, but round it up to 4 hours door to door. Sure, summer months have weather delays like low ceilings at SFO, but otherwise it's one of the smoother journeys one can have. I guess if you party in SF on Friday, and sleep and sober up on a midnight bus, and go HAM all weekend in LA, then recharge on the return leg for Monday. However, I'm too old for that and would much rather sleep in a proper bed.
    - 9y ago
aphextron 9y ago
This is an advertisement, and it's been re-posted in a few different forms now.
sixQuarks 9y ago
I'd be too worried about a tired driver causing an accident while I'm in a "sleeping pod" with no seatbelts, and potentially ramming head first into a wall. Honestly, I would consider this with a self-driving bus when the time comes. For now, I know human nature too well to assume that all drivers had a nice rest and can easily stay up 3rd shift fully alert.
- chrischen 9y ago
  They could have done this as reclining seat overnight buses like they already have in the rest of the world. Also, buses have a large mass so collisions aren't that bad. That's why school buses don't need seat belts.
  - arnarbi 9y ago
    That's only true if you hit smaller vehicles. Hitting other busses, trucks, traffic structures, trees, or rolling over, is going to be just as bad.
lulu_rowe 9y ago
While I think the sleeper bus is an interesting niche offering, I can't help but wonder: why would anyone in their right mind want to travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles? The other way round, I can totally understand. But intentionally going to one of the world's least appealing cities is beyond my ken.
marquis_wyman 9y ago
There's something similar in Russia with trains. Minsk, Moscow and St Petersburg form a triangle with about 8 hours of train time between each. A colleague based in Minsk used to do week long trips with with only a night or two in a hotel. I seem to recall that there were many trains to Moscow from St Petersburg leaving between 11:00 PM and 1:00 AM.
ricky_kutch 9y ago
It would be a great business between Sydney and Melbourne or Sydney and Brisbane. When I was on secondment from London in Sydney I would often drive to Melbourne. By the time I added up arising early, 45 minute taco ride to airport, check in, clearing security, having brekkie then the flight, and massive taxi queue plus 45 min ride into Melbourne it was less than 1hr difference. I was comfortable, could stop and eat, see countryside on roads with little traffic it was a joy!
ecollier 9y ago
The time comparison is larger than you think - you still have to get to the boarding point of the bus and get to your final destination when you arrive on the other side. Given that you arrive at your destination just in time for rush hour traffic, this may be significant
herzog_gilberto 9y ago
Rail sleepers (eg London-Edinburgh) offer lounge cars and cabins you can stand in and are far superior to air travel.
cstoltenberg 9y ago
It would be appropriate to compare this service to the under-construction California High-Speed Rail. A more real comparison than the hyperloop.
- burntrelish1273 9y ago
  California High-Speed Rail is better known as Obsolete, Slow-Speed Rail, Pork-Barrel-Wealth Transfer Edition. Even Homer Simpson could build a safer, cheaper and more usable transport line than the unfortunate, wasteful abomination that is CHSR.
buro9 9y ago
This seems a little odd. I fall asleep in vehicles as a passenger sometimes, but have that peace of mind of being in a safety belt and with some air bags around me. On a plane, an accident is unlikely to occur... same with a train. I don't think I'd want to fully trust my life to a bus driver (and all of the third parties out on the road that could trigger an incident on the road) without some means to mitigate that risk. But nothing on their site or literature seems to provide information on personal safety were an incident to occur. It seems bizarre to me that people would get into a vehicle for a long overnight drive, and not demand a minimum degree of safety. For a bus, maybe this would be something like airline style seats that fully recline and offer comfortable belts and a single airbag. This is all probably good for the US, but would be a non-starter in Europe.
- koide 9y ago
  You know there are overnight busses in Europe, right? With barely a seat belt.
  - buro9 9y ago
    Must be older vehicles. Seat belt installation has been mandatory for a number of years via EU legislation (though each country had their own timetable I believe all do now require new vehicles to be fitted with seat belts). Seat belt use is mandatory on coaches (all passenger carrying vehicles), and no exception would allow for permanently lying down... the only coach exception is if temporarily out of seat. Air bags are not mandatory other than in the cabin. Required fitting directive (member states applied it in 2006): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l24274 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:... Mandatory use: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/seat_belts_en https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/s...
  - the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
    Still against the law. So is lying in beds in a bus. This keeps coming up sometimes with tour busses.
- rwallace 9y ago
ringaroundthetx 9y ago
so after reading the article it reveals that it might beat a flight except in time, cost and convenience?
ForHackernews 9y ago
This article mentions the theoretical "hyperloop" but not normal, actually-existent high speed rail as a solution for trips of this distance?
jtraffic 9y ago
The article says $230, but https://www.ridecabin.com/ https://www.ridecabin.com/ says $115. Am I missing something? This makes quite a difference.
- andbberger 9y ago
  Roundtrip
  - jtraffic 9y ago
    Yeah. When I looked initially, I didn't go far enough into checkout.
    - tomjakubowski 9y ago
      Their site's fare calendar is a dark pattern. Normally when searching for round trip fares on, say, Google Flights, selecting the departure date from the calendar shows the (lowest) round trip fare departing that date. When you then select the return date, the (lowest) round trip fare departing on your departure date and returning on your return date is shown. Cabin's site shows you the one-way price both times even when booking a round-trip. It's not until you click through that you see it's $115 each way.
valuearb 9y ago
There is going to be a lot of sex in those pods. I'm not sure I want to be next in one after.
- Retric 9y ago
  The Same is true of hotel beds and that's generally not a problem.
  - MiddleEndian 9y ago
    It's kind of a problem, we just ignore it. I like staying at hotels but if I try not to think too much about the state of the comforter.
- johan_larson 9y ago
  Maybe sell that as a feature? "All aboard the All-Night Express! It's not exactly sleeper service, you know? <wink>"
williamle8300 9y ago
One of the missing points: convenience. Taking a bus "feels" like less of a hassle. Nobody likes having to deal with authorities (check-in people, the TSA). Taking a bus means you have more control over the terms of your trip. While raw time-to-destination is important, people are also looking for emotional expenditure savings too.
awjr 9y ago
Ok I'm confused. Yes the journey is normally 6 hours, but the bus takes an 8 hour longer route. I've tried sleeper buses and one of the problems can be the odd pothole nudging you awake. I'd be happier for a bus to take the more direct route and then let me disembark as I choose when I wake up or park up somewhere quiet for a couple of hours.
SubiculumCode 9y ago
Why has this story been pushed so hard? I've seen it in local stories all the way to WaPost
johan_larson 9y ago
If the problem with air travel on that distance isn't the flight itself but the futzing around getting to and from the airport at each end, maybe that is the problem that needs solving.
- ghaff 9y ago
  Well, part of it is security. Which, whatever the specific faults of TSA, isn't about to go away for air travel. Fortunately, in the US, trains are still largely exempt. The other issue is that airports tend to be just big and sprawling locations well outside of city cores. So you have to build in lots of buffer for things like parking. Or, if they're near cities, parking's expensive and often scarce. Finally (which COULD be dealt with to some degree) load factors and cancellation policies are such that you really don't want to miss most flights in a way that isn't typically as big a problem with trains.
efader 9y ago
What about safety if the bus crashes?

126 points by edward 9y ago

In Germany, we have had a quite extensive network of night trains with proper beds (and the more expensive tickets also have a shower in the carriage); unfortunately the network got massively thinned out in the last years and only the profitable core routes are in service now by Austrian ÖBB. Shouldn't something like this be possible in America, especially between far-away cities? Could at least be more profitable because you don't need to shunt around carriages every couple hours and if it gets kept between hubs there's no need for inter-route stops either.

totalZero 9y ago
shrug https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/08/economist-explains-18 https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/08/e... These guys tried to answer that question. Still, it seems to me that even they didn't touch on any good answers. shrug
the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
FWIW OeBB is investing into new night trains for routes between Austria and Italy. If they get popular they want to expand that. https://www.oebb.at/en/news/nightjet-der-zukunft https://www.oebb.at/en/news/nightjet-der-zukunft I generally really like nighttrains but there are not enough routes i need to take.
FTA 9y ago
Amtrak offers this with "roomettes" all the way up to 4-person rooms, though whether it's an overnight or a day trip depends on your origin and destination (for example, Chicago to Dallas is an overnight). You mention that Germany had eliminated all but the profitable ones--well, the U.S. government loses money on these routes to keep them running even in spite of the high prices. I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; meals _are_ included and you get I believe up to two carry-ons and two checked bags for free. I will say it is definitely a lower stress option. You can show up 30 minutes before your train is leaving and there's no security lines. Depending on the station, it could be just an empty train station in a rural town or a large station interconnected with other transport services (e.g. Boston, Chicago). The population you are traveling with is much different compared not only to airlines but also coach on the train. Generally your sleeper carmates are retired folks who don't want to deal with the hassle of TSA, running between connections, arriving three hours early, and so on. I've met some extremely nice people with amazing stories (you are seated with strangers at meals, so this is almost forced on you). If you are not in a hurry and have a few extra bucks, it's worth it at least once to experience the journey, especially across the Upper Midwest or coasts.
- mschuster91 9y ago
  > I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; By car (and Google Maps measuring) that's about 3.000km total. Hamburg-Munich is about 1.500km total, so half the distance. But ÖBB Nightjet tickets start for ~160€ to 250€ roundtrip, about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? How is that even possible?
  - SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
    Probably because the trains never fill up.
  - chrischen 9y ago
    They're losing money because that's a ridiculously expensive price and people looking to just get from point A to B would not pay that.
    - ghaff 9y ago
      So they should cut their prices and lose even more money? The basic problem is that outside of the Northeast Corridor--which is very popular, profitable, and getting new infrastructure investment--there are very few city pairs in the US that have the right combination of density and distance. Effectively the Northeast Corridor makes all the money that Amtrak then loses in the rest of the country. This is a few years old but summarizes Amtrak profit (or lack thereof) by route: http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014-cost-recovery.html http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014...
      - chrischen 9y ago
        Sometimes something is just obsolete. Their uncompetitive price reflects that.
        ghaff 9y ago
        Yes. But, it's not politically tenable to simply shut down rail service in the US outside of the Northeast Corridor. (Nor is it obvious that would be a good decision at a national level for many reasons.)
_delirium 9y ago
Amtrak does run a number of night trains, mostly on the routes where the trip is too long to plausibly do it as a day train, though. For example the NYC-Chicago night train (Lake Shore Limited) departs NYC at 15:40 and arrives in Chicago at 09:45 the next day (19 hours). And Chicago-SF is a 2-night trip (51 hours).
- ghaff 9y ago
  You can also do Boston to DC as an overnight but I don't think they have any sleeper cars on that route. (Even with Acela, few people do that full route.)
bpye 9y ago
I took a few of the night trains in Europe this year, Krakow - Prague and Prague - Zurich (both CD, Czech, I think) were great, Verona - Paris kinda sucked though (Thello, private)
matthewowen 9y ago
The USA is really big. I took the train from Chicago to San Francisco. I loved it, but it took the best part of three days. Flying is always going to be more compelling for functional travel like this.

kwhitefoot 9y ago

This is like the night train I used to take from Oslo to Trondheim. It's about 660 km and takes less than an hour by air. But I live a taxi and train ride from the airport and my final destination is a two hour drive north of Trondheim. To get there before lunch I would have to get up before five in the morning and I would arrive tired or I could leave home at 21:00 the night before catch the night train at 23:30 and arrive in Trondheim at 07:00 catch the train to Steinkjer and be there by 10:30 refreshed after a good night's sleep and a civilized breakfast.

brockwhittaker 9y ago
Not to mention the trains are incredibly smooth. Took the train from Trondheim to Bodø, woke up a few hours in and didn’t know we were moving until I took a snapchat of my face in the dark train and saw a speed of over 200km/h.

clamprecht 9y ago

"The drivers intentionally go slowly and take back roads so that the trip, normally six hours, lasts eight." Why not just get there 2 hours early, park, and sit for 2 hours. This would (1) reduce vehicle motion, so you can sleep better, and (2) allow people who aren't asleep anyway to get out early if they want. It may also save gas, although once buses are electric, this becomes less of a factor.

cwilson 9y ago
I've taken quite a few overnight buses during a 6 month trip through South America. Even when paying for the luxury option (which is literally $10-$15 more, totally worth it) and having fully reclining comfortable seats, it all comes down to one thing, the drivers. If the drivers are maximizing for time you're not going to sleep very well because they are driving like a maniac. Sudden halts, near misses, and sharp corners make for a particularly terrifying experience when you're attempting to sleep. The fact that this endeavor is focusing on drivers that go slow is 100% a positive for me and I would now consider trying it. This is an issue that really just exists with overnight buses, as trains don't make sudden stops and they are not competing with other trains for a lane.
- Brakenshire 9y ago
  Buses like this should be fitted with accelerometers, and drivers be rewarded for good driving. Actually the same applies to ordinary buses, a careful driver makes the journey much more comfortable.
  - kolinko 9y ago
    Do we really want to measure drivers by smoothness only, ignoring other factors like safety? When a difficult situation on the road arises, the drivers may be less likely to hit breaks, knowing they are being constantly watched. A better option would be to allow passengers to rate the drivers easily, Uber style. Such system would count in more factors, and (I guess) would be less likely to optimise for just one factor.
  - 9y ago

archagon 9y ago

I’ve taken Megabus from LA to SF (for like $20) and it’s one of the most beautiful routes I’ve ever been on, especially from the observation seats on the second floor. Just miles and miles of rolling, golden hills. Sleeping through it seems like a waste.

seanp2k2 9y ago
The 5 is horribly boring once you've done it a couple of times. It also smells very badly (like cow blood + poop) for a long stretch. Hot, dry, high winds, farms on both sides, just 2 lanes, cops around, many semis... Door to door, driving is the same as the airport, but having a car in LA is nice given the lack of public transit (Bay Area too).
- tesseract 9y ago
  I usually opt for 101 if I can afford the slight extra driving time. I find it much more pleasant in terms of both scenery (maybe that is the Megabus route? "Rolling hills" sounds about right) and normal traffic conditions (significantly less truck traffic).
  - dver23 9y ago
    I do the same with 99. Much of it has three lanes now so less issues being stuck and mad passing by others. Ass in the chance for more stops along the way. My cutoff is LA area, I'll drive there, but fly to San Diego.

nfriedly 9y ago

My wife and I got a room on the California Zephyr train from SF to Chicago one year and we loved it. So much less hassle than flying. Better food and scenery too.

ghaff 9y ago
I don't think I'd have the patience to go all the way from San Francisco to Chicago. But I've definitely had my sights on doing the San Francisco to Denver leg (or vice versa) at some point if the travel stars even lined up in a way that made sense. I've also thought about the Empire Builder route as part of a trip to Glacier.
- matthewowen 9y ago
  That leg is definitely the most scenic part (although going through Burlington, IA is also surprisingly neat).

Doctor_Fegg 9y ago

> the current route is a perfect example of that awkward travel distance to which there is no good solution. Others abound, such as Washington-Boston or London-Edinburgh There is a very good sleeper train, the Caledonian Sleeper, between London and Edinburgh (and several other points in Scotland). That's a "good solution" for that route, and I'm more than a little surprised that the London-based Economist seems not to have heard of it. https://www.sleeper.scot/ https://www.sleeper.scot/

jbg_ 9y ago
The Caledonian Sleeper is quite good, and has a great restaurant car, but it's generally considerably more expensive than flying unless you book very far in advance, and they do some shunting of carriages at one of the stops during the night that generally interrupts your sleep. It's still a good choice between those two cities, especially if you can replace a hotel night with the train, or can book very far in advance.
rustoo 9y ago
Such buses are quite common in India too. Many people prefer sleeper buses even though the prices are similar to flights. One reason is that they have to travel to the airport (city a) and then travel from the airport (city b). A couple of interesting links: http://www.indiatimes.com/boyz-toyz/cars-and-bikes/sleeper-ac-volvo-bus-service-from-maharashtra-to-bangalore-rolls-out-81803-1.html http://www.indiatimes.com/boyz-toyz/cars-and-bikes/sleeper-a... http://www.deccanherald.com/content/599348/scania-drive-1st-sleeper-bus.html http://www.deccanherald.com/content/599348/scania-drive-1st-...
- visarga 9y ago
  I'm wondering why airports don't try to monopolize airport taxi business. It's the logical extension of traveling from point A to B end-to-end.
  - Nrsolis 9y ago
    What makes you think they haven't? In the DC area, there is a single provider of taxi service from Dulles Airport (IAD). http://www.flydulles.com/iad/washington-flyer-taxi-service http://www.flydulles.com/iad/washington-flyer-taxi-service Any other taxi service trying to pick up fares from IAD are violating the contract between the Metro Washington Airport Authority and Dulles Taxi.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

dopeboy 9y ago

I make this commute pretty often (albeit to Orange County, not LA) and I've been following these guys for awhile. I was under the impression their price would be a lot less than a flight. Their price roundtrip is $230. A roundtrip flight from SF to LA usually runs $160-$350 depending on how far in advance you book it. Taking the $350 ceiling - is a $120 savings enough to justify a ~6 hour difference? It's still a great idea - but price it cheaper like < 100 RT.

cvsh 9y ago
It also potentially eliminates the need for 1-2 nights of hotel rooms. Depending on your travel situation, that might be more convenient.
- sologoub 9y ago
  The main advantage seems to be no travel the morning of and no need for a hotel for previous night. However, I usually do 6-7am flights and get there before 9am, 10am to office after BART from SFO. Flights back go as late as 9pm. In the end, southwest will set you back less than $120 if you book in advance. I also much prefer my own bed, as opposed to hotels or buses, but that's a personal preference.
- et-al 9y ago
  Except in this case we're talking about SF/LA, which is only an hour-long flight. I do this flight every other month or so and it's a breeze. You leave work a bit early on Friday, get to the airport in about an hour, board the plane, they serve you a drink, and the captain tells you to fasten your seatbelt because we're descending. It's 1 hour to the airport, 45 minutes through security, 1 hour in the air, and another 45 min to my friend's house. So 3.5 hours, but round it up to 4 hours door to door. Sure, summer months have weather delays like low ceilings at SFO, but otherwise it's one of the smoother journeys one can have. I guess if you party in SF on Friday, and sleep and sober up on a midnight bus, and go HAM all weekend in LA, then recharge on the return leg for Monday. However, I'm too old for that and would much rather sleep in a proper bed.
  - 9y ago

aphextron 9y ago

This is an advertisement, and it's been re-posted in a few different forms now.

sixQuarks 9y ago

I'd be too worried about a tired driver causing an accident while I'm in a "sleeping pod" with no seatbelts, and potentially ramming head first into a wall. Honestly, I would consider this with a self-driving bus when the time comes. For now, I know human nature too well to assume that all drivers had a nice rest and can easily stay up 3rd shift fully alert.

chrischen 9y ago
They could have done this as reclining seat overnight buses like they already have in the rest of the world. Also, buses have a large mass so collisions aren't that bad. That's why school buses don't need seat belts.
- arnarbi 9y ago
  That's only true if you hit smaller vehicles. Hitting other busses, trucks, traffic structures, trees, or rolling over, is going to be just as bad.

lulu_rowe 9y ago

While I think the sleeper bus is an interesting niche offering, I can't help but wonder: why would anyone in their right mind want to travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles? The other way round, I can totally understand. But intentionally going to one of the world's least appealing cities is beyond my ken.

marquis_wyman 9y ago

There's something similar in Russia with trains. Minsk, Moscow and St Petersburg form a triangle with about 8 hours of train time between each. A colleague based in Minsk used to do week long trips with with only a night or two in a hotel. I seem to recall that there were many trains to Moscow from St Petersburg leaving between 11:00 PM and 1:00 AM.

ricky_kutch 9y ago

It would be a great business between Sydney and Melbourne or Sydney and Brisbane. When I was on secondment from London in Sydney I would often drive to Melbourne. By the time I added up arising early, 45 minute taco ride to airport, check in, clearing security, having brekkie then the flight, and massive taxi queue plus 45 min ride into Melbourne it was less than 1hr difference. I was comfortable, could stop and eat, see countryside on roads with little traffic it was a joy!

ecollier 9y ago

The time comparison is larger than you think - you still have to get to the boarding point of the bus and get to your final destination when you arrive on the other side. Given that you arrive at your destination just in time for rush hour traffic, this may be significant

herzog_gilberto 9y ago

Rail sleepers (eg London-Edinburgh) offer lounge cars and cabins you can stand in and are far superior to air travel.

cstoltenberg 9y ago

It would be appropriate to compare this service to the under-construction California High-Speed Rail. A more real comparison than the hyperloop.

burntrelish1273 9y ago
California High-Speed Rail is better known as Obsolete, Slow-Speed Rail, Pork-Barrel-Wealth Transfer Edition. Even Homer Simpson could build a safer, cheaper and more usable transport line than the unfortunate, wasteful abomination that is CHSR.

buro9 9y ago

This seems a little odd. I fall asleep in vehicles as a passenger sometimes, but have that peace of mind of being in a safety belt and with some air bags around me. On a plane, an accident is unlikely to occur... same with a train. I don't think I'd want to fully trust my life to a bus driver (and all of the third parties out on the road that could trigger an incident on the road) without some means to mitigate that risk. But nothing on their site or literature seems to provide information on personal safety were an incident to occur. It seems bizarre to me that people would get into a vehicle for a long overnight drive, and not demand a minimum degree of safety. For a bus, maybe this would be something like airline style seats that fully recline and offer comfortable belts and a single airbag. This is all probably good for the US, but would be a non-starter in Europe.

koide 9y ago
You know there are overnight busses in Europe, right? With barely a seat belt.
- buro9 9y ago
  Must be older vehicles. Seat belt installation has been mandatory for a number of years via EU legislation (though each country had their own timetable I believe all do now require new vehicles to be fitted with seat belts). Seat belt use is mandatory on coaches (all passenger carrying vehicles), and no exception would allow for permanently lying down... the only coach exception is if temporarily out of seat. Air bags are not mandatory other than in the cabin. Required fitting directive (member states applied it in 2006): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l24274 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:... Mandatory use: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/seat_belts_en https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/s...
- the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
  Still against the law. So is lying in beds in a bus. This keeps coming up sometimes with tour busses.
rwallace 9y ago

ringaroundthetx 9y ago

so after reading the article it reveals that it might beat a flight except in time, cost and convenience?

ForHackernews 9y ago

This article mentions the theoretical "hyperloop" but not normal, actually-existent high speed rail as a solution for trips of this distance?

jtraffic 9y ago

The article says $230, but https://www.ridecabin.com/ https://www.ridecabin.com/ says $115. Am I missing something? This makes quite a difference.

andbberger 9y ago
Roundtrip
- jtraffic 9y ago
  Yeah. When I looked initially, I didn't go far enough into checkout.
  - tomjakubowski 9y ago
    Their site's fare calendar is a dark pattern. Normally when searching for round trip fares on, say, Google Flights, selecting the departure date from the calendar shows the (lowest) round trip fare departing that date. When you then select the return date, the (lowest) round trip fare departing on your departure date and returning on your return date is shown. Cabin's site shows you the one-way price both times even when booking a round-trip. It's not until you click through that you see it's $115 each way.

valuearb 9y ago

There is going to be a lot of sex in those pods. I'm not sure I want to be next in one after.

Retric 9y ago
The Same is true of hotel beds and that's generally not a problem.
- MiddleEndian 9y ago
  It's kind of a problem, we just ignore it. I like staying at hotels but if I try not to think too much about the state of the comforter.
johan_larson 9y ago
Maybe sell that as a feature? "All aboard the All-Night Express! It's not exactly sleeper service, you know? <wink>"

williamle8300 9y ago

One of the missing points: convenience. Taking a bus "feels" like less of a hassle. Nobody likes having to deal with authorities (check-in people, the TSA). Taking a bus means you have more control over the terms of your trip. While raw time-to-destination is important, people are also looking for emotional expenditure savings too.

awjr 9y ago

Ok I'm confused. Yes the journey is normally 6 hours, but the bus takes an 8 hour longer route. I've tried sleeper buses and one of the problems can be the odd pothole nudging you awake. I'd be happier for a bus to take the more direct route and then let me disembark as I choose when I wake up or park up somewhere quiet for a couple of hours.

SubiculumCode 9y ago

Why has this story been pushed so hard? I've seen it in local stories all the way to WaPost

johan_larson 9y ago

If the problem with air travel on that distance isn't the flight itself but the futzing around getting to and from the airport at each end, maybe that is the problem that needs solving.

ghaff 9y ago
Well, part of it is security. Which, whatever the specific faults of TSA, isn't about to go away for air travel. Fortunately, in the US, trains are still largely exempt. The other issue is that airports tend to be just big and sprawling locations well outside of city cores. So you have to build in lots of buffer for things like parking. Or, if they're near cities, parking's expensive and often scarce. Finally (which COULD be dealt with to some degree) load factors and cancellation policies are such that you really don't want to miss most flights in a way that isn't typically as big a problem with trains.

efader 9y ago

What about safety if the bus crashes?