AMTRAK vs. Airlines

[AlanB]

Don't forget the "hybrid" option of trains that carry passengers' motor vehicles aboard.

I've never really seen the appeal of this over renting a car at the destination. I guess if you're taking a trip of more than a week or so, then the auto-train like approach might be cheaper. Or if you've got to transport a lot of stuff... But are those demographics really all that large? I tend to take short trips (< 7 days) and pack lightly, and so do most of the other people I know (although the packing lightly does vary from person to person )

For a solo traveler, the Auto Train may hold less appeal, even though I have done the AT by myself. However for a family the AT holds a lot of charm. Families typically have far more luggage, car seats, need a van/SUV often harder to rent and more expensive. You also get that "are we there yet?" question in the car. On a train it's easier to distract the kids, they can move around, and you're not rushing to find the next rest area. So for a family it makes more sense to consider an AT service to reach a major destination.

The question/problem is, does that provide enough business to sustain the train. Frankly I'm not so sure that it would. The current AT's saving grace is the snow bird migrations each fall and spring. It's the additional revenue from that which really puts the AT over the top and into the black on operating expenses. So something like that needs to be found to make such a venture successful. One can't just rely on family vacations to provide revenue.

 

[cbender]

Unlike cbender, I think figures show that the Auto-Train service is popular. I don't know how it would work on the West Coast, though.

It's obviously popular. I just don't understand why. I have a hard time reconciling the cost vs just renting. I just randomly picked a pair of dates in September (LOR-SFA: 9/14; SFA-LOR: 9/21), and the car carrier cost is $304. Putting the same dates into a travelocity search near the Orlando Amtrak station returns rates of $220 - $230. The auto train is more expensive than renting, and I'd be worried about damage to my car due to mishandling.

edited to add...

The current AT's saving grace is the snow bird migrations each fall and spring.

I guess it does make sense for long trips. I've never understood the whole "vacation home" phenomenon, but recognize that a lot of people do seem to enjoy it.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

its popular cause maybe allot of people don't want to drive the distance and put ware and tare on there car + some people prefer to have there own car instead of renting one.

 

[delvyrails]

Between the Northeast and Central Florida, Auto Train averages over 300 passengers and 150 vehicles per trip. That's roughly about the same number who travel the Silver trains between those areas. Amtrak's market research. according to reports, has indicated that the Auto Train passengers do not consider the Silver trains; the Auto Train is a hybrid mode for people who otherwise would drive. It's a separate market that adds to what Amtrak already carries.

If auto carrier cars could be added to existing Amtrak trains that run over 855 miles. ridership on those trains could be boosted. That principle offers a way to grow a large-scale system of autos on trains by a gradual addition of ramps in other cities and by addition of a few auto rack cars to the Amtrak trains which link them.

 

[NETrainfan]

Picked up my brother yesterday @ ABI/hed flown from SAC to AUS,stop in Vegas,due to weather the flight took 8 hrs./he was singled out by the TSA("thousands stand around" :lol: )for special screening in SAC,upon arrival in Austin his bag was "delayed"

(ie LOST! )and I couldnt stop in front of the terminal to pick him up(just isnt done in Austin!)had to keep circling during a T-Storm

(the only good news here!(along with hundreds of others) or else pay NY prices for parking in our garage!Its a remeinder of just how

good most of us have it @ our stations and getting on /off trains even though we like to ***** and complain,sort of like the service eh!

Me, Ill take Amtrak anyday and Ive flown probably as much if not more than anyone on this forum with the possible exception of Airline

Pilots or Diplomatic Couriers!(and once upon a time I did that job!)Amtrak yes!Airports and TSA,NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

We'll take Amtrak any day also. Have posted about this on another thread, but want to repeat that so many people have mentioned problems with flying these days and several "short" airline trips have ended up being longer than train trips due to delays. And we'll take any train delays in stride- at least they are comfortable.

 

[saxman]

To me, Amtrak vs. Airlines is just apples and oranges. I've taken so many intermodal trips over the past few years, involving Amtrak and flying. On one hand many of you know I [use to] work for the airlines. And everyone always asks me why I'm riding the train, and its because trains are my hobby. Even though I like airports I don't necessarily like sitting at them when I don't have to. It's kind of like working at the chocolate factory and never wanting to eat chocolate. However, even though I might take the train only for fun, I've also taken it for many practical purposes as well, even though I [use to] easily fly for free.

One example is that I often go see my lady friend in Wisconsin Dells. Closest airport is Madison, which is about 50 miles away, and I could fly in there and I'd have to rent a car or she could come get me. But lo and behold, the Empire Builder stops right in downtown Wisconsin Dells! It couldn't be more perfect actually. So I can fly into Milwaukee, which has more choices to in flights, take the Hiawatha to Milwaukee, and then the Empire Builder takes me to WDL. It couldn't be easier to do it either. Sometimes I look at flying into Chicago, but simply because of the length of time it takes to get on the EL to get downtown takes a good hour.

Another example is that I use to live in Grand Forks, ND. While in college I didn't have a car for my first 3 years. Northwest is the only airline that serves GFK with 6 or 8 flights to MSP. Since they had a monopoly there, NW could charge whatever they wanted and being in college I couldn't afford the 400 or 500 tickets. Sometimes I got a cheap ticket, but usually not. Thankfully, the Empire Builder serves GFK and gets me to MSP for only $40 to $60, and I could do a bus to light rail connection to the airport. Hopefully that connection gets better in the future.

My point is intermobility. Some places are so easy to connect while others are not. And that is key to making our transportation system ready for the next generations.

 

[saxman]

It's obviously popular. I just don't understand why. I have a hard time reconciling the cost vs just renting. I just randomly picked a pair of dates in September (LOR-SFA: 9/14; SFA-LOR: 9/21), and the car carrier cost is $304. Putting the same dates into a travelocity search near the Orlando Amtrak station returns rates of $220 - $230. The auto train is more expensive than renting, and I'd be worried about damage to my car due to mishandling.
edited to add...

The current AT's saving grace is the snow bird migrations each fall and spring.

I guess it does make sense for long trips. I've never understood the whole "vacation home" phenomenon, but recognize that a lot of people do seem to enjoy it.

I think that most people on the AT have second homes in Florida or the Northeast. So it does make sense that most people come down and spend weeks if not months. Renting a car for that long gets pretty expensive.

 

[cbender]

I think that most people on the AT have second homes in Florida or the Northeast. So it does make sense that most people come down and spend weeks if not months. Renting a car for that long gets pretty expensive.

Yeah, that part makes sense. My confusion is of a more basic level (and not related to Amtrak): I can't comprehend why someone would want to tie their vacations to a single location by purchasing a second home. But, we're all different, and I'll just accept that many people do enjoy vacation homes in Florida and other warm locations. As Alan said, these passengers probably make the difference for the Auto train's viability. Making the train successful while relying primarily on short family vacations is a much harder prospect.

 

[AlanB]

I think that most people on the AT have second homes in Florida or the Northeast. So it does make sense that most people come down and spend weeks if not months. Renting a car for that long gets pretty expensive.

Yeah, that part makes sense. My confusion is of a more basic level (and not related to Amtrak): I can't comprehend why someone would want to tie their vacations to a single location by purchasing a second home. But, we're all different, and I'll just accept that many people do enjoy vacation homes in Florida and other warm locations. As Alan said, these passengers probably make the difference for the Auto train's viability. Making the train successful while relying primarily on short family vacations is a much harder prospect.

This is far more than a "vacation" home. Most people who buy a vacation home typically buy a condo either at a ski resort or maybe a beach, and probably spend if they're lucky 6 weeks a year in said condo. Even if they buy an actual house, again they still don't typically spend more than 6 to 8 weeks in said home.

In the case of Snow Birds, again it may be a condo or an actual house, but they typically spend 5 to 6 months in Florida from late fall thru early spring, returning to the northern climes in late spring and remaining thru early fall. So they are spending half the year in Florida and half the year up north. So renting a car for 6 months in Florida and/or up north, can get real expensive. Some also just own two cars, leaving one in each local. But cars aren't exactly happy just sitting around for 6 months straight without moving or being started.

Therefore for many, the answer is a nice relaxing trip on Amtrak's Auto Train, since it gets both them and their car to/fro, and allows them to bring along luggage with ease.