A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » USA & Canada
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Opinions on trains and planes.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 18th, 2008, 03:57 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
James Silverton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

Hello All!

Given the current cattle-car, skinflint conditions, two hour check-ins
and waits including security, etc. I wonder how long a journey people
would undertake by train if fast European or Japanese style trains were
available (say, 400 kph)? I would think that Washington DC to San
Francisco might be a bit far. The journey would take about 10 hours as
the unstopping crow flies but more likely 15 with a few stops and as the
track is laid.

I don't like to get up early in the morning but, allowing time to drive
to the airport, get thro' security, fly on a plane leaving at noon and
drive a rental car to my hotel or other destination, I have to allocate
most of a day (certainly at least 12 hours) to get to San Francisco.
I've never been able to sleep on planes so "red eyes" are really that!

--


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

  #2  
Old August 18th, 2008, 04:39 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
PeterL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,471
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Aug 18, 7:57*am, "James Silverton"
wrote:
Hello All!

Given the current cattle-car, skinflint conditions, two hour check-ins
and waits including security, etc. I wonder how long a journey people
would undertake by train if fast European or Japanese style trains were
available (say, 400 kph)? I would think that Washington DC to San
Francisco might be a bit far. The journey would take about 10 hours as
the unstopping crow flies but more likely 15 with a few stops and as the
track is laid.

I don't like to get up early in the morning but, allowing time to drive
to the airport, get thro' security, fly on a plane leaving at noon *and
drive a rental car to my hotel or other destination, I have to allocate
most of a day (certainly at least 12 hours) to get to San Francisco.
I've never been able to sleep on planes so "red eyes" are really that!

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not



I just ask Scotty to beam me there.

Even if there were 400k/h trains, it would take more than 10 hrs from
DC to SF. There'll be stops along the way and huge mountain ranges to
go over.
  #3  
Old August 18th, 2008, 04:58 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Jochen Kriegerowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

"PeterL" schrieb

There'll be stops along the way and huge mountain ranges to
go over.


Or tunnels to go right through the mountains. The fast trains in Europe
don't bother to climb up the Alps - ok, the Rockies would need longer
tunnels, but when you can build one 60 km long, you can just as well
dig twice as far while you're at it.

Big advantage over planes: You can take your car with you on many
trains (I just found one auto train in the US: From Lorton, VA to
Sanford, FL): No need to rent one at your destination.

Jochen
  #4  
Old August 18th, 2008, 05:32 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:58:44 +0200, "Jochen Kriegerowski"
wrote:

"PeterL" schrieb

There'll be stops along the way and huge mountain ranges to
go over.


Or tunnels to go right through the mountains. The fast trains in Europe
don't bother to climb up the Alps - ok, the Rockies would need longer
tunnels, but when you can build one 60 km long, you can just as well
dig twice as far while you're at it.

Big advantage over planes: You can take your car with you on many
trains (I just found one auto train in the US: From Lorton, VA to
Sanford, FL): No need to rent one at your destination.


At $191 and up each way for the car, I think it might be cheaper
and more convenient to rent a car at the other end.

Thre's also the cost of getting your car to Lorton to put it on
the train when you could have just taken the train all the way
from wherever.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #5  
Old August 18th, 2008, 06:03 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Dave Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 655
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

James Silverton wrote:
Hello All!

Given the current cattle-car, skinflint conditions, two hour check-ins
and waits including security, etc. I wonder how long a journey people
would undertake by train if fast European or Japanese style trains were
available (say, 400 kph)? I would think that Washington DC to San
Francisco might be a bit far. The journey would take about 10 hours as
the unstopping crow flies but more likely 15 with a few stops and as the
track is laid.

I don't like to get up early in the morning but, allowing time to drive
to the airport, get thro' security, fly on a plane leaving at noon and
drive a rental car to my hotel or other destination, I have to allocate
most of a day (certainly at least 12 hours) to get to San Francisco.
I've never been able to sleep on planes so "red eyes" are really that!

Fifteen years ago I traveled around Europe on rail pass and had a great
time. The TGV from Nice to Paris was about 8 hours, going the top speed
for only part of the trip. There are a lot of advantages to train over
there. It is a very popular mode of transport because they have more
frequent service and the passenger trains service so many more towns,
unlike train travel here in Canada which is infrequent and services only
the main corridors.

Most European train stations are located downtown and there are lots of
good hotels and restaurants close to the station. You don't have to be
there for hours before your departure, and even if you have to wait
there are usually good and affordable restaurants in the station
Airports OTOH, are generally way out of city so you have spend the extra
money and time to get there and to be there at least an hour before
departure time to check in and go through security. When I went to
Europe back in June I was advised to be there three hours before
departure.
  #6  
Old August 18th, 2008, 06:42 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
PeterL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,471
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Aug 18, 10:03*am, Dave Smith wrote:
James Silverton wrote:
Hello All!


Given the current cattle-car, skinflint conditions, two hour check-ins
and waits including security, etc. I wonder how long a journey people
would undertake by train if fast European or Japanese style trains were
available (say, 400 kph)? I would think that Washington DC to San
Francisco might be a bit far. The journey would take about 10 hours as
the unstopping crow flies but more likely 15 with a few stops and as the
track is laid.


I don't like to get up early in the morning but, allowing time to drive
to the airport, get thro' security, fly on a plane leaving at noon *and
drive a rental car to my hotel or other destination, I have to allocate
most of a day (certainly at least 12 hours) to get to San Francisco.
I've never been able to sleep on planes so "red eyes" are really that!


Fifteen years ago I traveled around Europe on rail pass and had a great
time. The TGV from Nice to Paris was about 8 hours, going the top speed
for only part of the trip. There are a lot of advantages to train over
there. It is a very popular mode of transport because they have more
frequent service and the passenger trains service so many more towns,
unlike train travel here in Canada which is infrequent and services only
the main corridors.

Most European train stations are located downtown and there are lots of
good hotels and restaurants close to the station. You don't have to be
there for hours before your departure, and even if you have to wait
there are usually good and affordable restaurants in the station
Airports OTOH, are generally way out of city so you have spend the extra
money and time to get there and to be there at least an hour before
departure time to check in and go through security. *When I went to
Europe back in June I was advised to be there three hours before
departure.-


European trains and public transportation are supported by huge tax
subsidies. Also Europe as a whole are smaller geographically than
either the US or Canada. So the two cannot be compared.
  #7  
Old August 18th, 2008, 08:02 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:42:11 -0700 (PDT), PeterL
wrote:

On Aug 18, 10:03*am, Dave Smith wrote:


European trains and public transportation are supported by huge tax
subsidies. Also Europe as a whole are smaller geographically than
either the US or Canada. So the two cannot be compared.


That's a misconception. Taken as a whole Europe is not all that
much smaller than the USA. The road distance from Nordkapp to
Gibralter is on the order of 6000km or about 1440 miles, and the
air distance from Lisbon to Kiev is abbout 2100 miles. From
Lisbon to Moscow is about 2425 miles.

The area of Europe is about 3,930,000 sq mi while the area of the
Lower 48 states is about 3,119,884 sq mi. There's some mushiness
in these figures due to land area or water area, and all, but
clearly the Lower 48 and Europe are of comparable size.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #8  
Old August 18th, 2008, 09:12 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
PeterL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,471
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Aug 18, 12:02*pm, Hatunen wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:42:11 -0700 (PDT), PeterL

wrote:
On Aug 18, 10:03*am, Dave Smith wrote:
European trains and public transportation are supported by huge tax
subsidies. *Also Europe as a whole are smaller geographically than
either the US or Canada. *So the two cannot be compared.


That's a misconception. Taken as a whole Europe is not all that
much smaller than the USA. The road distance from Nordkapp to
Gibralter is on the order of 6000km or about 1440 miles, and the
air distance from Lisbon to Kiev is abbout 2100 miles. From
Lisbon to Moscow is about 2425 miles.

The area of Europe is about 3,930,000 sq mi while the area of the
Lower 48 states is about 3,119,884 sq mi. There's some mushiness
in these figures due to land area or water area, and all, but
clearly the Lower 48 and Europe are of comparable size.

--
* ************** DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* ** * * * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * * * *
* ** My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *



I should've said western europe.
  #9  
Old August 18th, 2008, 09:57 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:12:11 -0700 (PDT), PeterL
wrote:

On Aug 18, 12:02*pm, Hatunen wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:42:11 -0700 (PDT), PeterL

wrote:
On Aug 18, 10:03*am, Dave Smith wrote:
European trains and public transportation are supported by huge tax
subsidies. *Also Europe as a whole are smaller geographically than
either the US or Canada. *So the two cannot be compared.


That's a misconception. Taken as a whole Europe is not all that
much smaller than the USA. The road distance from Nordkapp to
Gibralter is on the order of 6000km or about 1440 miles, and the
air distance from Lisbon to Kiev is abbout 2100 miles. From
Lisbon to Moscow is about 2425 miles.

The area of Europe is about 3,930,000 sq mi while the area of the
Lower 48 states is about 3,119,884 sq mi. There's some mushiness
in these figures due to land area or water area, and all, but
clearly the Lower 48 and Europe are of comparable size.

I should've said western europe.


What do you man by "Western Europe"? The area outside the Iron
Curtain?

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #10  
Old August 18th, 2008, 09:43 PM posted to rec.travel.usa-canada
J. Clarke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 438
Default Opinions on trains and planes.

Hatunen wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:42:11 -0700 (PDT), PeterL
wrote:

On Aug 18, 10:03 am, Dave Smith wrote:


European trains and public transportation are supported by huge tax
subsidies. Also Europe as a whole are smaller geographically than
either the US or Canada. So the two cannot be compared.


That's a misconception. Taken as a whole Europe is not all that
much smaller than the USA. The road distance from Nordkapp to
Gibralter is on the order of 6000km or about 1440 miles, and the
air distance from Lisbon to Kiev is abbout 2100 miles. From
Lisbon to Moscow is about 2425 miles.

The area of Europe is about 3,930,000 sq mi while the area of the
Lower 48 states is about 3,119,884 sq mi. There's some mushiness
in these figures due to land area or water area, and all, but
clearly the Lower 48 and Europe are of comparable size.


You're comparing the continent, "Europe" with the nation "United
States". For a fair comparison either compare the US with the EU or
North America with Europe. Deadhorse, Alaska, USA, to Key West,
Florida, USA, is 5570 road miles or over 4000 air miles. That's not
the longest distance from one part of the North American portion of
the USA to another. Now want to compare any distance in Europe with
Dead Horse to Panama City, Panama?

Now, what part of Europe is actually served by your high speed fancy
trains and why is the rest not served by them if they are such an
ideal transportation solution?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trains or Planes from Barcelona to Florence MMM Europe 2 October 30th, 2005 05:12 PM
missing planes !! [email protected] Air travel 0 October 15th, 2005 11:56 AM
OT Low Planes [email protected] Cruises 2 October 5th, 2005 04:58 PM
Exercise on planes Frank F. Matthews Air travel 0 September 10th, 2004 02:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.