would you give up the planes for the trains?
2007-10-03 08:33:55 · 9 answers · asked by amazed we've survived this l 4 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Rail
I'd ride the train anyway, because I'm not real keene on flying.
2007-10-03 09:42:20 · answer #1 · answered by Mike M. 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, I rarely use my truck here in the San Francisco Bay Area. CalTrain is terrific for my commute, and many of my weekend shopping trips. It travels at an average speed of 70mph. I also use ACE to make the 120 mile trip out to visit my brother's ranch... both are on time, clean, and comfortable.
I am strongly behind plans to get a High-Speed rail system going here in California... I think SUV's registered in a urban / suburban area should be taxed twice as much.
Oh, I used to be a Naval Aircrewman... I still fly occasionally over LONG distances, but I take a train if at ALL possible.
2007-10-04 04:23:08 · answer #2 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the travelling time...
Here in Spain, we have in the larger Madrid area suburb trains at a max. speed of 250 km/h. The domestic airlines cutted down their traffic on the routs where you also have high speed train service.
In Preferente (first class) you get on the train also a (large) snack, which is included in the price of the ticket.
Here, the airlines try to counterfight with discounts. But what does a discount help, if you have to be at the airport 60 to 90 minutes prior to departure for a flight of 50 minutes (Madrid-Barcelona), and the train needs just 4 hours from towncenter to towncenter.
2007-10-04 01:37:00 · answer #3 · answered by finestrat1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I already have. I can't get comfortable on airplanes. I'm 6'5" and between the lack of leg and head room, and fact that head rests are way too low, its imposooble for me to have an enjoyable flight. I haven flown in 15 years, I love the train. I don't mind the delays. It gives me time to relax. On the train you can walk around, socialize with other passengers, play a game of cards or watch a movie. I always get a sleeping car for overnight trips. Well worth the extra cost. I highly recommend train travel.
2007-10-03 10:24:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only thing that keeps me from riding now when I travel (in the USA) is they rarely go where I want to go and even when they do they seem to always have an 8 hour layover somewhere.
So 150 MPH is not important to me. Clean is. But what I would need to see before I ride would be going to more locations. If it took the same time as a car that would be fine with me.
2007-10-04 01:24:29 · answer #5 · answered by tamarack58 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i cleaned up derailments for five years, that is a busy job. you couldn't get me on a train that went 150 mph in the USA. even if you shut down every airport in the country
2007-10-04 18:28:01 · answer #6 · answered by ron s 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not entirely but for short or even imtermediate trips, yes indeed.
In Europe this has been demonstrated tiem and time again.
2007-10-03 11:05:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, and I think a lot of people would, especially since airline service is so poor these days.
2007-10-03 09:54:40 · answer #8 · answered by Alco83 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe, especially considering the wait times at the airports. Of course it will probably never happen so we really will not have to decide.
2007-10-03 08:38:07 · answer #9 · answered by victorschool1 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋