I took Amtrak between Seattle and Vancouver recently. Great trip, stellar views, and overall just a super easy way to cross the border. No crazy invasive checks or waiting in lines, it was just like getting off a plane, but in the middle of downtown.
Ha, literally saw this while waiting for my Amtrak.
For medium-short trips, beats air travel hands down, cheaper, loads of space, reliable and limited security theater.
great, now all we need is more fucking trains
the money is always going to get in the way. its just not profitable… because thats the end-all be-all of the untie states. profits above anything else whatsoever.
don’t forget you also have to beg the freight companies to let you run those trains
While I would also love that, it’s really not the best choice for most travelers. Currently we err in only driving or flying, but even in a well balanced system with a complete rail network that let everyone pick the best means of travel, flying will have the advantage for longer distances.
Even with how slow Acela is, it beats both flying and driving Boston —> NYC. If we had high speed trains, they could be most effective over longer distances, but flying will always be much faster Miami —> LA
If we optimize for time, the world is fucked. There’s things more important, especially if the trains have WiFi on board and you can work and read.
Loads of folks would take the train from NY to FL and didn’t complain that it took a few days. The journey becomes part of the trip. Enjoy it.
Took a high speed between Philadelphia and Newark, NJ. Got a deal for less than $30. It was a great ride at 120mph. Wish we had more of that.
120mph is not high speed though. It is 10mph below where the Shinkansen (130 mph) was (1964–1986) 37 years ago. Since 2014, Shinkansen trains run up to 200 mph on the Tōhoku Shinkansen.
if you think the bumpy Acela Express is a great ride you should try the Shinkansen.
It’s high speed for the US. It was a comfotrable ride. It wasn’t intended to be a comparison to other countries.
This is a race to the bottom. The rest of the world exists and lagging in infrastructure has practical impacts including apparently having no frame of reference to how harsh and noisy “high speed” trains are in the US.
May as well define 80mph as high speed rail and have a massive network with the stroke of a pen.
Shinkansen was doing a top speed of 130 mph. At that time, the Hikari express service was making an average speed of 80 mph. Acela has a top speed of 150 mph and an average speed of 67 mph, comparable to the initial average speed of the Shinkansen Kodama (64 mph). It’s definitely not great by today’s standards, but Acela is essentially equivalent to the initial operating standards of Shinkansen (by average speed. Ride quality, reliability, etc. probably don’t compare as favorably thanks to the aging infrastructure of the NEC). People making unfair comparisons against American train service are well intentioned in pointing out that we need to do better and to modernize, but can make train travel appear less viable than it actually is in today’s conditions by doing so
The Kodama and Hikari have more frequent stops. The Nozomi is more comparable to the Acela Express in number of stops.
At most intermediate stations, Kodama trains wait for faster trains, including the Nozomi, Hikari, Sakura, and Mizuho, to pass through before resuming their journeys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodama_(train)
The numbers alone don’t tell you the full story. The difference in punctuality, ride quality, and reliability has to be experienced. This video of a high speed in China shows what I mean, and if anything the Japanese are better at it.
I always feel like instead of interviewing the CEOs of stories of interest, they should instead interview the people involved in the story.
The CEO is just saying “people want to take the train”. Oh, really? That’s what you think, guy who stands to profit if people take the train?
Instead, interview the passengers. THEY can tell you why they actually took the train. And no one passenger has the full story. So you need to interview hundreds of passengers, and probably get repeating redundant answers. THAT’S when you know you’ve got to the heart of the matter through good old fashioned investigative reporting.
Ah, but who am I kidding? Real journalism is dead. They’ll just interview the CEO, and make it a fluff piece.
Earlier today I wondered if Twit.tv was still in operation. It’s a podcast network about technology. I would watch back in 2005. I remember they built a dedicated streaming studio in 2010. Then in 2012 or so, I stopped watching after a controversial series of decisions. Today I googled to see if they still existed. Turns out back in July they closed their studio, and are now streaming remote via zoom. The CEO tried putting a positive spin on it in a letter that began “Beginning July q6th, we’re excited to begin a new chapter in remote streaming!”. This is what the CEO wrote.
So I’m SURE even if Amtrak business were down instead of up, he’d try to frame it as some kind of noble act of pollution saving, or some corporate speak to say they’re consolidating their trips to serve more people (despite serving far less). The CEO is NOT the person to interview in these stories.
The CEO is just saying “people want to take the train”. Oh, really? That’s what you think, guy who stands to profit if people take the train?
It’s not the CEO, it’s the chair of the board of directors. Amtrak is government chartered and majority owned by the US government, and its board of directors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, essentially making it a government position.
And it’s two paragraphs out of like 10, where several other experts were interviewed and quoted.
I have my beef with Newsweek, but your criticism here misses the mark.
