3 ms·
There are countries (like the U.S.) where long-distance train travel is impractical compared to catching a plane or simply driving. This becomes especially obvi
by maxaf 9y ago
There are countries (like the U.S.) where long-distance train travel is impractical compared to catching a plane or simply driving. This becomes especially obvious when considered in stark contrast with Europe, Japan or even gasp Russia.
- reaperducer 9y agoTravel isn't always about what's practical. I take the train instead of a plane within the U.S. whenever possible. Most commonly between Chicago and Seattle, Seattle and Vancouver or Los Angeles, and Los Angeles and Houston. If you define popularity by capacity, in my experience long-distance train travel is very popular in the United States. It is VERY rare that I take one of these trips when the sleeping cars ("first class"), business class[0] (when offered), and often even coach, aren't completely full. [0] Except the runs between Chicago and Saint Louis, where I'm often the only person is business class, when business class is offered.
- tomjen3 9y agoIt is much more practical to fly to pretty much any destination in Europe, or to drive their by car, than it is to take the train - often it is cheaper too. However the trains still run, so you can absolutely do it.