1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Train travel

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Big Buckin' agate_monkey, Jul 8, 2008.

  1. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    I've looked at train travel for a number of trips, and at those prices and with that schedule, it really makes no sense to me, either. Takes up half of your vacation just to get anywhere, especially out West.

    Which is sad, because otherwise I'd love to travel by train more.
     
  2. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

    Yeah, I mean what kind of idiot would use ground transportation to go across the country?
     
  3. novelist_wannabe

    novelist_wannabe Well-Known Member

    The one train trip I took was on the Eurorail in the mid-1980s. I don't remember it being all that expensive. I do remember having designs on taking in the German countryside, but the train rocked me to sleep. Best sleep I've had in my adult life. I've pondered taking a trip on Amtrak but it's prohibitively expensive.
     
  4. goalmouth

    goalmouth Well-Known Member

    There is no plausible business plan that would make Amtrak viable outside of a few business units linking high-density metropolitan corridors. Forget freight congestion, track upgrades, poor service -- train travel began its decline with the rise of jet travel and interstate highways after WW2. When Washington switched mail from trains to planes in 1968, that was the last nail in the coffin for privately-operated passenger service, and the beginnings of Amtrak.

    Europeans grew up with most people living in large cities with little use for highways, thus the development of high-speed interurban rail service. It's not a good comparison for the U.S.

    Railroads are incredibly capital-intensive, low-margin businesses. They are remarkably efficient for hauling coal, lumber, chemicals and other commodities long distances -- but not people.
     
  5. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Not to mention . . . look at a map of Europe.

    Look at a map of the U. S.

    Them wide-open spaces are expensive to cover.
     
  6. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    Trains vs. driving in Germany were about equal in cost (tickets vs. gas) when I was there last. All things being equal, I'd rather drive.
     
  7. Jesus_Muscatel

    Jesus_Muscatel Well-Known Member

    The train is an efficient way of traveling in the Northeast. Cost effective too.

    I dropped my folks off at BWI on my way to Philly and then NYC last week. Took the New Jersey Transit to the city from Trenton. Round trip, $21. Parking (two days), $18. A lot less headaches, at least for me.

    If you want a picturesque train ride, go from L.A. to San Diego sometime. Spectacular.

    Amtrak has its issues, but sometimes it makes sense.
     
  8. Smasher_Sloan

    Smasher_Sloan Active Member

    They still move tons of mail on trains.
     
  9. crimsonace

    crimsonace Well-Known Member

    Amtrak is the largest carrier of the U.S. Mail in the country. Still.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page