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

There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 468 posts

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#31

Post by chrisseaton »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #18

My wife and I did this several years back, New York to Chicago to San Francisco, and it really was a wonderful experience. But get a sleeper compartment, don't sit with the cattle. It's worth it, really. And that's even though we spent little time in our compartment almost the whole trip we were up in the observation car watching the American landscape roll by. One highlight of the trip was when storms over Helper, U…

> While waiting, there was a guy with a guitar in the observation car, and we had a nice sing-along.

That bit sounds like hell to me but I'm glad you had fun! In the UK we have special carriages where you're not allowed to make a noise so you can avoid that kind of thing.

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#32

Post by criddell »

Kiro wrote: post #19

This article shows how culturally different Sweden and U.S. are. In Sweden it has become taboo to use the plane for any travel destination where you can go by train, to the level where we see the complete opposite headlines here ("There is no reason to fly when you can take the train"). You need to have a very good reason to fly at all or the pitchforks will get you. I've personally completely stopped flying.

Yeah, but Sweden is small. In the US, people routinely drive distances where you would be flying or using the train. The mountains make things a bit different, but I think in general it's true.

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#33

Post by elbasti »

Kiro wrote: post #19

This article shows how culturally different Sweden and U.S. are. In Sweden it has become taboo to use the plane for any travel destination where you can go by train, to the level where we see the complete opposite headlines here ("There is no reason to fly when you can take the train"). You need to have a very good reason to fly at all or the pitchforks will get you. I've personally completely stopped flying.

To be fair, NY → LA is over 4,000 KM. Would you fly to say, Bulgaria? Southern Italy?

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#34

Post by RightMillennial »

gk1 wrote: post #12

For anyone interested in more train-travel stories I've written (partially) about my trip across Russia, starting with: https://www.gregkogan.com/journal/russia-trans-siberian-rail... Still have half the trip left to write about, which I'll do bit by bit.

I just tried some borscht a couple weeks ago. It was made by an older Russian gentleman at my church (in the U.S.). It was definitely a different flavor but it was pretty good.

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#35

Post by csomar »

I tried the Amtrack against advice not to. I went from DC to NYC and then to Boston. The train was not luxurious but it was "fine". I took the cheapest option (which was not cheap given the train was slow and the distance is short). [I'm comparing prices to EU].

- The seats were large and comfortable enough. But I'm a small sized person.

- The trains were on time.

- The stations were not renovated or nice but functional. Boston station was good enough. NYC, a bit confusing.

- There was food on board. It was okay for 3-4 hours ride.

- Wifi didn't work. Data will disconnect near big buildings or under tunnels.

- It's not clear which station we are in. Maybe they could have a digital screen that shows some info?

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#37

Post by lupire »

Kiro wrote: post #19

This article shows how culturally different Sweden and U.S. are. In Sweden it has become taboo to use the plane for any travel destination where you can go by train, to the level where we see the complete opposite headlines here ("There is no reason to fly when you can take the train"). You need to have a very good reason to fly at all or the pitchforks will get you. I've personally completely stopped flying.

How often do you take 3-day train journeys from Sweden?

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#38

Post by truncj »

chrisseaton wrote: post #31
CWuestefeld wrote: post #18

My wife and I did this several years back, New York to Chicago to San Francisco, and it really was a wonderful experience. But get a sleeper compartment, don't sit with the cattle. It's worth it, really. And that's even though we spent little time in our compartment almost the whole trip we were up in the observation car watching the American landscape roll by. One highlight of the trip was when storms over Helper, U…

> While waiting, there was a guy with a guitar in the observation car, and we had a nice sing-along. That bit sounds like hell to me but I'm glad you had fun! In the UK we have special carriages where you're not allowed to make a noise so you can avoid that kind of thing.

After 14 hours of silence you might think twice!

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#39

Post by lifeisstillgood »

chrisseaton wrote: post #29
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #24

I'm planning to take my family on an RV across the US (The Lincoln Highway in other words) partly cos it's always been a dream of mine, and partly to get the kids introduced to real travelling rather than holidays. I had never considered it by train - seems harder to just stop off and meet people, something I consider the point of travelling (yes landscapes are lovely but I am a Homo Sapiens Bigot)

> I had never considered it by train - seems harder to just stop off and meet people Could you take the train, but instead of a non-stop journey just jump off when you pass through an interesting town, and then resume your journey the next day?

It seems to lack the flexibility I was hoping for - lunch in this town, dinner in that. plus i suspect it entails excitingly expensive tickets and fun timetable management :-)

Re: There is no reason to cross the U.S. by train, but I did it anyway

#40

Post by ineedasername »

Kiro wrote: post #19

This article shows how culturally different Sweden and U.S. are. In Sweden it has become taboo to use the plane for any travel destination where you can go by train, to the level where we see the complete opposite headlines here ("There is no reason to fly when you can take the train"). You need to have a very good reason to fly at all or the pitchforks will get you. I've personally completely stopped flying.

Undoubtedly there are cultural differences. However, you are attributing to cultural difference things that are more directly linked to geographical differences that have contributed to limited rail infrastructure and route availability.

First & foremost, US rail is minimal in terms of routes offered and significantly more expensive. Compared to planes, it's at least double the cost, and 4x to 5x the cost if you want a bed and shower throughout the multi-day trip.

Second, the US is also significantly larger, making train travel much less practical. The longest trip through Sweden is roughly 1,000 miles top to bottom. That's most of a full 24 hours day in a train. In the US, it's about 3x that from New York City to California.

Post reply on HN