3 ms·

> The fact that it takes six hours to get from Baltimore to Boston, when a faster train can cover the longer distance between Paris and Marseille in four, does

> The fact that it takes six hours to get from Baltimore to Boston, when a faster train can cover the longer distance between Paris and Marseille in four, does not move us to protest the obvious failure of ambition. By this logic, since planes can cover longer distances in shorter times than trains, should we quit trains in favor of planes?

dfinninger 3y ago
When you factor in a couple hours of wading through security checkpoints (at least in the US), it flips the timescale again for the short/medium trips.
- some_random 3y ago
  Where do you live that takes multiple hours to get through security?? Also, https://www.tsa.gov/precheck https://www.tsa.gov/precheck
  - dijit 3y ago
    You have to arrive at least 1hr early before your scheduled boarding time. 30 minutes boarding, means your "6hr" flight is actually more like 7.5hrs because you need to be at the airport. Then you need to factor the fact that airports are not often in easy to reach places. (exception: LCY and JFK). That applies to both ends. The times stack up very rapidly. In theory it's 2hrs to Birmingham from Copenhagen, but that trip will take approx 5hrs when you factor in all the "early arrive" and last mile shenanigans.
    - josephcsible 3y ago
      > You have to arrive at least 1hr early before your scheduled boarding time. You don't have to. It's a recommendation. The only true "have to" is that you have to be at the gate before the scheduled end of boarding, which is usually 15 minutes before takeoff.
      - dijit 3y ago
        Perhaps it is not a universal truth but I have certainly been in situations where my boarding card was not accepted because I was at the entry gates to security (where you scan your boarding card) less than 30 minutes before boarding. This was in Amsterdam Schipol.
        josephcsible 3y ago
        That must have been some kind of local rule. There's no such rule in the US.
        dijit 3y ago
        Not a compelling argument, I will always make sure this doesn't happen. And I also distinctly remember being unable to drop my bag at EWR for being "too late" to do so. Always better to be early, so people will factor that in.
        josephcsible 3y ago
        > And I also distinctly remember being unable to drop my bag at EWR for being "too late" to do so. That is indeed a universal thing when you have bags to check. I just don't consider that a "have to" since you don't have to check a bag to fly.
      - bluGill 3y ago
        I've had to wait in the security line for over an hour before. That is proof security is not about terrorists - if it was you would not be allowed to stop until after they verify you don't have a bomb with you. Those lines are a perfect place for a terrorists to kill a lot of people.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    The airport in Seattle has had many 75 minute security lines lately. I think it has to do with a TSA labor shortage than anything.
- Someone 3y ago
  It’s not only that. Even ignoring security checkpoints, jet planes almost always take people from where they do not are to where they do not want to be. Using them to go from where you are to where you want to be means spending additional time to travel to and from the airport. Trains (most of the time) are a bit better in that regard because stations are more plentiful and often closer to where people want to be. Cars, bicycles, and feet (mostly in that order; depending on infrastructure, it may be faster to get into your car than to hop on pot your bicycle) are even better. Speed wise, it’s reversed. If there are no obstructions, speeds are feet < bicycle < car < train < jet plane. That means that, only looking at trip duration, the detour to an airport and from the destination airport only is worth it for fairly long trips. Similarly, walking can be faster than cycling if you don’t have to go far, cycling can be faster than taking the car, etc. Unfortunately, people also take trip costs into account, and those often are cheaper for air planes, compared to trains. So, to ‘quit’ cars, we have to make it easier for people to go to a train station or to hop onto their bicycle and/or have to make it more difficult to hop into their car. Banning on-street parking, requiring car drivers to walk a few hundred meters to a parking garage cuts multiple ways there. Using less space for parking allows for higher density, which leads to shorter travel distances, and increases the time to hop into one’s car.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    > we have to make it easier for people to go to a train station or to hop onto their bicycle and/or have to make it more difficult to hop into their car. The former is fine, since it's an improvement to society. The latter is not fine, since it's a worsening of society.
    - Someone 3y ago
      > The latter is not fine, since it's a worsening of society. That’s an opinion, not a fact. IMO, the negative effects for society of it being easy to hop into their cars for so many are plentiful. Cities get worse, the environment is worse of and the population gets less healthy.
    - UtopiaPunk 3y ago
dijit 3y ago
End-to-end the train travel between Stockholm and Malmo is almost exactly the same as the total time it would take to fly from Stockholm Arlanda to CPH and take the train across the bridge to Malmo. However, people very often are taking the plane instead of the train, partially because it's cheaper, and partially because on paper it looks faster. So... maybe?
Aloha 3y ago
We largely did. The long distance passenger train in North America is mostly a curiosity. Virtually no one is taking the train from Chicago to Seattle, even when the train is full, its to get on the train, go 4-5 stops and exit.
- r00fus 3y ago
  In the US, passenger takes lower priority to freight. This is why I rarely go by train.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    Isn't the Acela the big exception to that rule? And it just happens to run between the very two cities in the sentence I quoted, and still slower than air travel.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      The USA has TONS of intercity rail that nobody knows or cares about. Here's some by name: Pacific Surfliner, Cascades, Brightline. And that doesn't count things like Metrolink and other commuter rail. There are more and I don't know them because I don't live near them. Acela isn't the only one. Surfliner is about 3.5 hrs from LA to San Diego; ain't nobody gonna fly that, but lots of people drive it.

dfinninger 3y ago

When you factor in a couple hours of wading through security checkpoints (at least in the US), it flips the timescale again for the short/medium trips.

some_random 3y ago
Where do you live that takes multiple hours to get through security?? Also, https://www.tsa.gov/precheck https://www.tsa.gov/precheck
- dijit 3y ago
  You have to arrive at least 1hr early before your scheduled boarding time. 30 minutes boarding, means your "6hr" flight is actually more like 7.5hrs because you need to be at the airport. Then you need to factor the fact that airports are not often in easy to reach places. (exception: LCY and JFK). That applies to both ends. The times stack up very rapidly. In theory it's 2hrs to Birmingham from Copenhagen, but that trip will take approx 5hrs when you factor in all the "early arrive" and last mile shenanigans.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    > You have to arrive at least 1hr early before your scheduled boarding time. You don't have to. It's a recommendation. The only true "have to" is that you have to be at the gate before the scheduled end of boarding, which is usually 15 minutes before takeoff.
    - dijit 3y ago
      Perhaps it is not a universal truth but I have certainly been in situations where my boarding card was not accepted because I was at the entry gates to security (where you scan your boarding card) less than 30 minutes before boarding. This was in Amsterdam Schipol.
      - josephcsible 3y ago
        That must have been some kind of local rule. There's no such rule in the US.
        dijit 3y ago
        Not a compelling argument, I will always make sure this doesn't happen. And I also distinctly remember being unable to drop my bag at EWR for being "too late" to do so. Always better to be early, so people will factor that in.
        josephcsible 3y ago
        > And I also distinctly remember being unable to drop my bag at EWR for being "too late" to do so. That is indeed a universal thing when you have bags to check. I just don't consider that a "have to" since you don't have to check a bag to fly.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      I've had to wait in the security line for over an hour before. That is proof security is not about terrorists - if it was you would not be allowed to stop until after they verify you don't have a bomb with you. Those lines are a perfect place for a terrorists to kill a lot of people.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  The airport in Seattle has had many 75 minute security lines lately. I think it has to do with a TSA labor shortage than anything.
Someone 3y ago
It’s not only that. Even ignoring security checkpoints, jet planes almost always take people from where they do not are to where they do not want to be. Using them to go from where you are to where you want to be means spending additional time to travel to and from the airport. Trains (most of the time) are a bit better in that regard because stations are more plentiful and often closer to where people want to be. Cars, bicycles, and feet (mostly in that order; depending on infrastructure, it may be faster to get into your car than to hop on pot your bicycle) are even better. Speed wise, it’s reversed. If there are no obstructions, speeds are feet < bicycle < car < train < jet plane. That means that, only looking at trip duration, the detour to an airport and from the destination airport only is worth it for fairly long trips. Similarly, walking can be faster than cycling if you don’t have to go far, cycling can be faster than taking the car, etc. Unfortunately, people also take trip costs into account, and those often are cheaper for air planes, compared to trains. So, to ‘quit’ cars, we have to make it easier for people to go to a train station or to hop onto their bicycle and/or have to make it more difficult to hop into their car. Banning on-street parking, requiring car drivers to walk a few hundred meters to a parking garage cuts multiple ways there. Using less space for parking allows for higher density, which leads to shorter travel distances, and increases the time to hop into one’s car.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  > we have to make it easier for people to go to a train station or to hop onto their bicycle and/or have to make it more difficult to hop into their car. The former is fine, since it's an improvement to society. The latter is not fine, since it's a worsening of society.
  - Someone 3y ago
    > The latter is not fine, since it's a worsening of society. That’s an opinion, not a fact. IMO, the negative effects for society of it being easy to hop into their cars for so many are plentiful. Cities get worse, the environment is worse of and the population gets less healthy.
  - UtopiaPunk 3y ago

dijit 3y ago

End-to-end the train travel between Stockholm and Malmo is almost exactly the same as the total time it would take to fly from Stockholm Arlanda to CPH and take the train across the bridge to Malmo. However, people very often are taking the plane instead of the train, partially because it's cheaper, and partially because on paper it looks faster. So... maybe?

Aloha 3y ago

We largely did. The long distance passenger train in North America is mostly a curiosity. Virtually no one is taking the train from Chicago to Seattle, even when the train is full, its to get on the train, go 4-5 stops and exit.

r00fus 3y ago
In the US, passenger takes lower priority to freight. This is why I rarely go by train.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  Isn't the Acela the big exception to that rule? And it just happens to run between the very two cities in the sentence I quoted, and still slower than air travel.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    The USA has TONS of intercity rail that nobody knows or cares about. Here's some by name: Pacific Surfliner, Cascades, Brightline. And that doesn't count things like Metrolink and other commuter rail. There are more and I don't know them because I don't live near them. Acela isn't the only one. Surfliner is about 3.5 hrs from LA to San Diego; ain't nobody gonna fly that, but lots of people drive it.