4 ms·

> The main issue with train travel in the US is that many passengers are going to need a car when they reach their destination. It's not a big issue as you may

by amf12 4y ago

> The main issue with train travel in the US is that many passengers are going to need a car when they reach their destination. It's not a big issue as you may think. This is the case with air travel too, but people would gladly fly and then rent a car. The biggest barrier is the cost and the time it takes.

ghaff 4y ago
It depends. It's definitely usually easier to get to your hotel (often by walking) in NYC from Penn than from any of the airports. Less true in Boston (though there is a suburban stop south of the city) and in DC Reagan is pretty convenient on the metro. But, generally, downtown train stations with good transit tilt towards train travel relative to airports an hour out, especially without good transit.
cormacrelf 4y ago
Unless you make the trains go 900km/h, you are talking about very different things. “I need to rent a car at the end of this train journey, which itself is about the speed of a car” is dumb — just rent the car, don’t waste money buying a train ticket as well, and travel on your own terms. So the only thing it offers is being cheaper than renting a car for one extra day for long journeys.
- petre 4y ago
  > So the only thing it offers is being cheaper than renting a car for one extra day for long journeys Nope. It also offers not having to drive. I can read a book on a train, which I can't do in a small car even if I don't drive because I'll get car sick. I can even walk around and have luch in the train restaurant, go to the bathroom without having to stop.
- pawsforthought 4y ago
  Going by train still has the benefit of being able to do something while you travel. Especially relevant for solo business trips.
- xdfgh1112 4y ago
  If they were the same cost I'd pick the train every time. I can relax, sleep, read a book or get some work done.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    I really wanted to take a train or greyhound, wasn't super picky, for my last two trips but it was stupid. I had naively assumed the tradeoff was going to be adding about two days to the trip for travel there and back but in exchange it would be a lot cheaper than a flight. Nope. I guess. For some reason. Same travel days, same destinations. Not only were flights, obviously, faster but they were cheaper too. Pay more for fewer departure/arrival options and turn a few hour hours into +1 day on each end seemed not worth the vibe.
    - xdfgh1112 4y ago
      Yeah if you live in the US then the trains and buses aren't really an option I guess.
  - Mawr 4y ago
    It's substantially safer as well.

by amf12 4y ago

ghaff 4y ago

It depends. It's definitely usually easier to get to your hotel (often by walking) in NYC from Penn than from any of the airports. Less true in Boston (though there is a suburban stop south of the city) and in DC Reagan is pretty convenient on the metro. But, generally, downtown train stations with good transit tilt towards train travel relative to airports an hour out, especially without good transit.

cormacrelf 4y ago

Unless you make the trains go 900km/h, you are talking about very different things. “I need to rent a car at the end of this train journey, which itself is about the speed of a car” is dumb — just rent the car, don’t waste money buying a train ticket as well, and travel on your own terms. So the only thing it offers is being cheaper than renting a car for one extra day for long journeys.

petre 4y ago
> So the only thing it offers is being cheaper than renting a car for one extra day for long journeys Nope. It also offers not having to drive. I can read a book on a train, which I can't do in a small car even if I don't drive because I'll get car sick. I can even walk around and have luch in the train restaurant, go to the bathroom without having to stop.
pawsforthought 4y ago
Going by train still has the benefit of being able to do something while you travel. Especially relevant for solo business trips.
xdfgh1112 4y ago
If they were the same cost I'd pick the train every time. I can relax, sleep, read a book or get some work done.
- Spivak 4y ago
  I really wanted to take a train or greyhound, wasn't super picky, for my last two trips but it was stupid. I had naively assumed the tradeoff was going to be adding about two days to the trip for travel there and back but in exchange it would be a lot cheaper than a flight. Nope. I guess. For some reason. Same travel days, same destinations. Not only were flights, obviously, faster but they were cheaper too. Pay more for fewer departure/arrival options and turn a few hour hours into +1 day on each end seemed not worth the vibe.
  - xdfgh1112 4y ago
    Yeah if you live in the US then the trains and buses aren't really an option I guess.
- Mawr 4y ago
  It's substantially safer as well.