Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Want airline food? Take Amtrak

railwayage.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 225 posts

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#181

Post by rdl »

anderber wrote: post #137
rdl wrote: post #67

Taxpayers (and freight customers) shouldn't be subsidizing a novelty form of transportation for rail fans. If there's a subset of people who want this service, they should pay sufficient fares to cover the cost of service. Amtrak isn't doing that.

"Yes, Amtrak is subsidized. So are all competing forms of transportation. Highways cover only 51 percent of their costs from all user fees, including the gas tax. The rest is paid by subsidies of one form or another, especially from local property taxes. Airlines receive massive subsidies in the form of airports and the air traffic control system. The day after 9/11, the airlines ran to Capitol Hill and were immediat…

Airports are largely self-funded by user fees (or via federal funds which come from other user fees and fuel taxes), and airlines (except for bailouts in 2008-2009) are almost entirely commercially funded.

http://airportsforthefuture.org/did-you-know/

Air is the true competitor to the long-haul train in the US. It is cheaper and faster. There are separate arguments for/against transit and regional trains, but long-haul passenger rail, which is what is discussed in TFA, is essentially a novelty.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#182

Post by fulafel »

rdl wrote: post #181
anderber wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yes, Amtrak is subsidized. So are all competing forms of transportation. Highways cover only 51 percent of their costs from all user fees, including the gas tax. The rest is paid by subsidies of one form or another, especially from local property taxes. Airlines receive massive subsidies in the form of airports and the air traffic control system. The day after 9/11, the airlines ran to Capitol Hill and were immediat…

Airports are largely self-funded by user fees (or via federal funds which come from other user fees and fuel taxes), and airlines (except for bailouts in 2008-2009) are almost entirely commercially funded. http://airportsforthefuture.org/did-you-know/ Air is the true competitor to the long-haul train in the US. It is cheaper and faster. There are separate arguments for/against transit and regional trains, but long-ha…

There's the small problem that air travel is environmentally unsustainable, with no fix in sight. It should be heavily taxed to account for the env. externalities.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#183

Post by theBobBob »

dominotw wrote: post #177
tspike wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with your comment, but the thing that often gets lost in these discussions is that at least for the Empire Builder, people generally aren't using it to go from Chicago to Portland or Seattle. Sure, a flight from Chicago to Seattle would be much faster and cheaper. But what about getting from Minot to Whitefish? Or Spokane to Wenatchee? I personally use it 2-3 times a week to go between Bingen and Por…

I take it from chicago to kansas city couple of times a year and I see lots of Amish people on the train. Seems like a good option for people who can't take the plane. I would have never spoken to the amish if not for amtrak.

My knowledge of the Amish is obviously rather slim but why can't they take a plane but can take the bus? I know I that they shun most modern technology suite h as cars etc but I would have thought if they can't take a plane that they also wouldn't be able to take the train.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#184

Post by wenc »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #114
scyclow wrote: post #61

I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weir…

I was considering taking a trip from NYC, since I like railway journeys. The NYC-Montreal (10.5 hours) and NYC-Toronto (12.5 hours) trips would be perfect... but they only have the café cars, which means microwaved, pre-made airline food. Apparently Amtrak considers these to be "short-distance" journeys, which don't have dining cars. I don't know if these ever had dining cars, but the idea of spending an entire day w…

> The NYC-Montreal (10.5 hours) and NYC-Toronto (12.5 hours) trips

Budget 2 extra hours due to the border. It can take up to 2 hours to for the train to clear customs. Source: been there, done that.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#185

Post by brianwawok »

ng12 wrote: post #144
niftich wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're driving alone -- a reasonable assumption if you'd be in the market for a train -- a 31-hour "Google Maps" roadtrip takes 3 days, assuming ~10 hours of "map-time" driving, followed by 6+ hours of civilized sleep. The biggest constraint is "civilized" sleep, which is best had in a real bed at a real hotel, whose locations are constrained by settlements and whose typical availability hours begin at 15:00 local…

Yes, but trains don't need to sleep. I'm not saying I'd recommend driving 31h at a time, I'm saying I don't understand why that would be so much faster.

Driving you don't need to pull over to the side of the road for 2h and let semis pass you.

On the train, you will often have to pull over to let freight trains pass you.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#186

Post by ant6n »

mschuster91 wrote: post #7

As a regular rider of Germany's night trains: what's the problem with eating in a roomette (sleeper car cabin)? First of all I already hate it when the cabin mates see me totally groggy - much less a whole fucking dining car. In addition, no dining car can fit as many people as there fit in a single sleeper car, much less a whole train composed of 10-15 sleeper cars.

DB doesn't operate night trains since 2016.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#187

Post by redorb »

dima55 wrote: post #27
redorb wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do live in a bad spot for trains (Oklahoma) however they keep trying to build more rails (which make no sense in our region).. to determine how much sense they made to me personally I studied a trip to chicago from oklahoma city. Turns out I couldn't find any destination where trains beat driving or flying in the metrics of time or cost even. I do get that trains work in some regions in the US ~ but we should defin…

Building roads is also a money losing operation. Complain about something else. There's plenty here.

A larger percentage of people who pay taxes use roads than the percentage that pay for trains and don't use them.

Only place trains win are very specific regions and for cargo

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#188

Post by lionhearted »

I logged in to post my ode to the San FranciscoChicago California Zephyr... but looks like it's already pretty well-covered.

It's really incredibly beautiful and great for thinking. SFSeattle on the Coast Starlight is also wonderful, those two routes are absolute gems.

Worth doing them now if you're at all interested; they might well not operate in a few years. Amtrak USA Rail Pass is also an exceptionally good value if you're looking to see a lot of the USA in a short period of time —

https://www.amtrak.com/take-the-trains-across-america-with-u...

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#189

Post by lionhearted »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #114
scyclow wrote: post #61

I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weir…

I was considering taking a trip from NYC, since I like railway journeys. The NYC-Montreal (10.5 hours) and NYC-Toronto (12.5 hours) trips would be perfect... but they only have the café cars, which means microwaved, pre-made airline food. Apparently Amtrak considers these to be "short-distance" journeys, which don't have dining cars. I don't know if these ever had dining cars, but the idea of spending an entire day w…

Go to the grocery store beforehand — they don't mind you bringing food onboard.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#190

Post by noonespecial »

closeparen wrote: post #149
noonespecial wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's got an unpopular opinion (and calling out the ADA specifically is probably the worst of the examples that can be chosen) but its worth a thought. When the choice is forced to be "perfect, or none at all", a possible outcome is none at all. On the balance, I find most of these rules to be acceptable most of the time, but it should always be considered that it can be taken too far.

Regulation is a commitment that we prefer "none at all" to the status quo. No more, no less. We talk about regulation creating desirable outcomes, but that's an oversimplification - the ADA does not hire or conscript anyone into the business of creating accessible infrastructure. It threatens that if they won't make their infrastructure accessible, they can't have any. The threat of "none at all" is the whole mechani…

Which is just fine so long as we remember that none at all is inaccessible to everyone.
Post reply on HN