NYC to DC - city centre to city centre - Rail or Plane?

I've got to travel from NYC to DC on December the 19th. I'm going from
Greenwich Village to Union Station and I'm wondering do I fly or do I take
the train? I'm tempted to do the train option just because I think it
actually will probably work out faster just because I don't have to get out
to an airport, find a check in desk, sit around until the flight, get the
luggage checked in etc etc and then do the same at the other end before
getting public transport to Union station. Anyone else have any thoughts?
Before that leg I'm in Atlanta and then from there going to NY - I was
planning on flying that part as I figured it would be quicker than the train
unless anyone can advise otherwise? I'm from the UK so I don't really know a
great deal about the journey times involved.
Cheers,
R.

Rowan wrote:
I've got to travel from NYC to DC on December the 19th. I'm going from
Greenwich Village to Union Station and I'm wondering do I fly or do I take
the train? I'm tempted to do the train option just because I think it
actually will probably work out faster just because I don't have to get
out to an airport, find a check in desk, sit around until the flight, get
the luggage checked in etc etc and then do the same at the other end
before getting public transport to Union station. Anyone else have any
thoughts?

Flying and train times are roughly the same on that run. I find flying
slightly faster because I get to the airport 20 minutes prior to departure
and I don't check luggage.

The cost is pretty similar. With advance booking, flying is a tad cheaper,
but at the last minute it can be a lot more (or could be the same, it's just
luck).

The train is simpler; you just go to the station 15 before departure, pick
your internet-booked ticket up from the machine, and get on. Then you get
off and you're in the middle of the city.

On the other hand flying is a lot less boring. With all the cell phones on
the train it's difficult to work or read or sleep unless extremely tired or
focused, so you just look out the window, which gets very old after the
hundredth trip. If it's your first trip it might be a little less boring but
frankly it's a pretty ugly route except for a couple dramatic river
crossings and part of Philadelphia. When you fly, you get to keep doing
things (subway, airport, plane, etc.) so the time passes much more quickly.

Before that leg I'm in Atlanta and then from there going to NY - I was
planning on flying that part as I figured it would be quicker than the
train unless anyone can advise otherwise?

Yes, flying Atlanta - NYC is much faster than taking the train.

miguel
--
See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 21:18:43 -0000, "Rowan"
wrote:

I've got to travel from NYC to DC on December the 19th. I'm going from
Greenwich Village to Union Station and I'm wondering do I fly or do I take
the train? I'm tempted to do the train option just because I think it
actually will probably work out faster just because I don't have to get out
to an airport, find a check in desk, sit around until the flight, get the
luggage checked in etc etc and then do the same at the other end before
getting public transport to Union station. Anyone else have any thoughts?
[snip]

I agree. And it'll be more comfortable.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the TRASH, so to speak. Please do not email me something which you also posted.

Rowan Bridge:
I've got to travel from NYC to DC on December the 19th. I'm going from
Greenwich Village to Union Station and I'm wondering do I fly or do I take
the train? ...

Flying might be a little faster, but the train will certainly be more
convenient. Of course, that's a busy time for travel, so delays are
possible by either mode.

I note if you happen to be starting from the *west* side of Greenwich
Village, there are two more alternatives for getting to Penn Station
besides the obvious subway and taxi. The #20 bus runs along Hudson Street
and up 8th Avenue. And there is the PATH subway line, which primarily
connects New York with points in New Jersey and is not part of the New
York transit system. PATH trains, coming from New Jersey, stop first
at Greenwich and Christopher Streets, then at 9th Street and 6th Avenue,
and continue north along 6th to terminate at 33rd Street, which is one
long block from Penn Station.

At http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/maps/manbus.pdf is a PDF Manhattan
bus map which also shows both PATH and the New York subway lines,
although of course the buses are more prominently marked.
--
Mark Brader "People who think for a living have always
Toronto been especially prone to confuse thinking
with living." -- G. L. Sicherman

My text in this article is in the public domain.

On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 03:06:51 -0000, (Mark Brader) wrote:

[snip]
I note if you happen to be starting from the *west* side of Greenwich
Village
[snip]

There is no other side, really. I live in the "East Village," which is
really part of the Lower East Side and _never_ was part of Greenwich
Village.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the TRASH, so to speak. Please do not email me something which you also posted.

Miguel Cruz wrote:

On the other hand flying is a lot less boring. With all the cell phones on
the train it's difficult to work or read or sleep unless extremely tired or
focused, so you just look out the window, which gets very old after the
hundredth trip.

That's interesting. I haven't been on that route (NYC-DC) in ages- maybe
3 or 4 years, and cell phone use didn't seem too bad then. (Are you
exaggerating a bit, or is it really that bad?) If the UK is anything to
go by, you'll find that this passes. On longer train journeys nowadays,
I don't tend to get bothered by mobile phone conversations- I think
people, generally, are more considerate than they used to be, and
frankly, there's no longer a 'show off' factor involved. Everyone has
one, after all.

From a purely acoustic point of view, the actual volume on an aircraft
(admittedly more of a white noise) is far worse than on a train- because
of that, you appreciate the jumps in volume more.

I'd also argue, given the choice on that route, about the environmental
impact of plane over train.

David

--
David Horne- website under re-construction
davidhorne (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

David Horne wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
On the other hand flying is a lot less boring. With all the cell phones on
the train it's difficult to work or read or sleep unless extremely tired or
focused, so you just look out the window, which gets very old after the
hundredth trip.

That's interesting. I haven't been on that route (NYC-DC) in ages- maybe
3 or 4 years, and cell phone use didn't seem too bad then. (Are you
exaggerating a bit, or is it really that bad?)

On Amtrak in the northeast? It's truly horrible. A more inconsiderate pack
of loudmouthed blathering wretches you could not find. People scream utter
inanities into their phone every second of the trip when they're not
occupied playing with ringtones.

If the UK is anything to go by, you'll find that this passes.

I sure hope so. The US has always been a ways behind in the cell phone thing
so I'm encouraged to hear there's a light at the end of the tunnel.

From a purely acoustic point of view, the actual volume on an aircraft
(admittedly more of a white noise) is far worse than on a train- because
of that, you appreciate the jumps in volume more.

Yes - on a plane, though, a pair of earplugs and that's it. The white noise
from the engines masks almost everything else before it gets to the
earplugs, and they take care of the rest.

I'd also argue, given the choice on that route, about the environmental
impact of plane over train.

Fair point. The train definitely wins there, especially on a marginal basis
(since the tracks are long built).

miguel
--
See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/

With all the cell phones on
the train

I've taken the train from Washington to New York a few times and sat
in what was called the quiet car, where no cell phones, boom boxes, or other
noisy things were permitted.

j. sterling wrote:
With all the cell phones on the train

I've taken the train from Washington to New York a few times and sat in
what was called the quiet car, where no cell phones, boom boxes, or other
noisy things were permitted.

Sometimes it's enforced, but often not. And many trains have no quiet car.
I agree that when it works it's great but it's hard to count on.

(The quiet car, when one is designated, is the frontmost car of the train).

miguel
--
See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/

In article ,
"Rowan" wrote:

I've got to travel from NYC to DC on December the 19th. I'm going from
Greenwich Village to Union Station and I'm wondering do I fly or do I take
the train? I'm tempted to do the train option just because I think it
actually will probably work out faster just because I don't have to get out
to an airport, find a check in desk, sit around until the flight, get the
luggage checked in etc etc and then do the same at the other end before
getting public transport to Union station. Anyone else have any thoughts?
Before that leg I'm in Atlanta and then from there going to NY - I was
planning on flying that part as I figured it would be quicker than the train
unless anyone can advise otherwise? I'm from the UK so I don't really know a
great deal about the journey times involved.

Defintely rail. In NYC, you'll spend nearly as much time just getting to
the airport as you will on the train to Washington.