City combos where Amtrak makes as much sense as flying

[DesertDude]

Recently my mother made a last minute trip from SLC to Reno, from which she'd be driving back to SLC with my sister. Plane tickets were very expensive, so she called me to see if Amtrak would work for her. It certainly *did* work for her, as the ticket was only $71 and the timing of the overnight ride was perfect.

I looked more into it later, and come to find out flying from SLC to Reno makes almost no sense. A direct one-way flight will cost you over $300 on any day, or you can do a much cheaper indirect flight on a carrier like SWA. The only problem is that when you factor in all the time (including being at the airport) for the indirect flight, you have at least six hours of travel time anyway. Of course doing Reno - SLC on Amtrak is more problematic due to the bad arrival time in SLC, but if you get a ridiculously low Saver fare of $43, that might be worth the hassle for a lot of folks.

Doing the same research for flights from Oakland to Reno yields essentially the same findings; when you factor both time and price, Amtrak becomes competitive with flying.

I know that there are plenty of city combos where Amtrak *obviously* makes sense (especially when it's small towns or places along the NEC), but I was surprised with Reno. What other less-obvious examples are there of city combos where Amtrak is competitive with flying?

 

[niemi24s]

Without even looking, I'd guess any two consecutive stops that are 50 or more miles apart.

But if you mean emotionally competitive, any two cities served by Amtrak - I hate flying nowadays!

 

[XHRTSP]

I did Chicago to Milwaukee on Amtrak, even though I can fly for free. That's kind of an obvious one though.

I've also done Seattle to Portland and Chicago to St Louis, but in those cases riding the train was planned as part of the experience.

 

[neroden]

Amtrak is competitive with *flying* for any city pairs where you'd generally consider driving before you'd consider flying, of course. (In my neck of the woods, going between any of Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Utica, Schenectady, Albany.) The question is whether it's competitive with *driving*.

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

And it depends on where the airports are. Amtrak can usually take you from downtown to downtown, or pretty close, where most airports are several miles out of the city.

 

[jebr]

And it depends on where the airports are. Amtrak can usually take you from downtown to downtown, or pretty close, where most airports are several miles out of the city.

To build on this, it also depends on where in town you need to go. For example, if you're going to downtown St. Paul, the train is much more convenient. If you're going to downtown Minneapolis, the airport is slightly closer. Same if you're visiting a friend in Uptown (Minneapolis.) If you want to visit Mall of America, the airport makes much more sense.

Granted, MSP is fairly unique in its layout, but other cities can be the same way.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

In my experience there is not a single city pair in Texas where Amtrak "makes as much sense" as flying from a scheduling perspective. Same thing with all the cities in all the states that border Texas. By the time two cities are large enough and distant enough to warrant airline service they're too far for Amtrak's LD network to reach in a timely fashion at a reasonable hour. The idea that a single Amtrak train per 24 hours (or less) is legitimately competing with a dozen flights (or more) throughout the day and night is an absurd concept to me.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

My thoughts are if I'm traveling through the night I'll just sleep through it (or most of it) anyway. Is an 8 hour train ride so bad if you can sleep through most of it? So if a train ride is say 11pm to 7am on paper it's a 8 hour ride but in reality it's really not. Even if you can't sleep that well, it's not like you're going to be doing much during those hours anyway.

If I assume 6 hrs. overnight as free hours that don't count in terms of a train ride's duration than a ride where the number of awake hours on a train is close to the number of hours on a plane (plus the extra hour of security) would make the train ride make more sense (assuming you are willing to and not afraid of flying).

 

[neroden]

Oh yeah, you're referring to the sleeper "sweet spot": Chicago to Buffalo, for instance. That actually gets used by businessmen. It's hard to hit the sweet spot, though.

 

[Trailrider1951]

In my experience there is not a single city pair in Texas where Amtrak "makes as much sense" as flying from a scheduling perspective. Same thing with all the cities in all the states that border Texas. By the time two cities are large enough and distant enough to warrant airline service they're too far for Amtrak's LD network to reach in a timely fashion at a reasonable hour. The idea that a single Amtrak train per 24 hours (or less) is legitimately competing with a dozen flights (or more) throughout the day and night is an absurd concept to me.

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

 

[Palmetto]

San Diego-LA

PDX-Eugene [perhaps not for driving]

BOS-NYC

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

Oh yeah, you're referring to the sleeper "sweet spot": Chicago to Buffalo, for instance. That actually gets used by businessmen. It's hard to hit the sweet spot, though.

I would say it's IMO a departure of anywhere between 9pm and midnight and an arrival anywhere between 6am and 9am (although some business people probably need 8am if not earlier).

BUF-CHI arrives at 9:45am. If they moved the departure from the east up a little not only does it make it to CHI by 9am but it also leaves BUF earlier. The return is pretty perfect.

I think PGH-CHI was good in the TR days but the CL leaves PGH close to midnight (11:59pm) and arrives way too early (5:05am?)

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

Other current sweet spots (or close to sweet spots):

BOS-WAS night owl

Raleigh-Jacksonville

Fairly close:

CHI-Memphis (North is good, South leaves a little early)

LAX-Tucson (East works, West arrives quite a bit early)

Potential sweet spots if Amtrak had enough demand for an additional frequency and sleepers available (or maybe just coach like the Night Owl would still work). These are shifts of current schedules.

NYP-Montreal (South Montreal 10:20pm, ALB 6:15am, NYP 8:50am, North NYP 9:15pm, ALB 11:50pm Montreal 8:11am)

Carolina Overnight (South NYP 8:05pm, PHL 9:35pm, WAS 11:53pm, Raleigh 5:42am, CLT 9:12am, North: CLT 9:00pm, Raleigh 12:25am, WAS 6:29am, PHL 9:00am, NYP 10:35am. You want to keep WAS and Raleigh out of the graveyard shift. NYP would be out of the sweet spot).

NYP/PHL-PGH (West NYP 9:52pm, PHL 11:42pm, PGH 7:05am, East PGH 11:30pm, PHL 6:55am, NYP 8:50am. Ideal if hooked up to a train heading to/from CHI)

NYP-BUF/Niagara Falls (West NYP 10:15pm, ALB midnight, Buffalo Exchange 6:14am, Niagara Falls NY 7:21am, East Niagara Falls NY 10:55pm, Buffalo Exchange 11:30pm, ALB 4:50am, NYP 7:45am)

MEM-NOL (South MEM 10:50pm, NOL 7:32am, North NOL 10:45pm, MEM 7:00am. Also ideal if hooked up to a train heading to/from CHI)

CHI-MSP (North CHI 11:15pm, MSP 7:03am, South MSP Midnight, CHI 7:55am. Milwaukee would have to be in the graveyard shift)

DAL-SAS (South DAL 9:50pm, FTW 12:10am, SAS 7:55am, North SAS 11:00pm, FTW 5:58am, DAL 7:20am. Austin would have to be in the graveyard shift)

NOL-HOS (West NOL 10:00pm, HOS 7:18am, East HOS 10:10pm, NOL 7:40am. Fairly close to my Sunset Limited reschedule proposal)

SJC-LAX (South SJC 9:07pm, LAX 8:00am, North LAX 10:10pm, SJC 8:11am. Would have to leave Oakland/SAC earlier and arrive later)

LAX-Phoenix if they ever would serve Phoenix again

DAL-HOS (Roughly 7 hrs each way from old schedule for TE DAL-HOS through cars. Fairly close to my Sunset Limited reschedule proposal)

CHI-CIN would work well but it would leave IND in the graveyard shift both ways.

To me, the LAX-SJC would be by far the biggest seller. DAL-HOS and LAX-Phoenix would also be big.

Feel free to suggest others.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

In my experience there is not a single city pair in Texas where Amtrak "makes as much sense" as flying from a scheduling perspective. Same thing with all the cities in all the states that border Texas. By the time two cities are large enough and distant enough to warrant airline service they're too far for Amtrak's LD network to reach in a timely fashion at a reasonable hour. The idea that a single Amtrak train per 24 hours (or less) is legitimately competing with a dozen flights (or more) throughout the day and night is an absurd concept to me.

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

I see what you're saying but I think we're comparing apples and oranges here. I'm talking about cities large or important enough to have their own commercial airport while you're including smaller cities and towns without scheduled commercial airline services. That's not to say you're wrong so much as to say I don't see Taylor as being part of the commercial airline market.

 

[Karl1459]

What is "better"?

Parameters matter. Time? Schedule convenience? Comfort? Price? Cost?

Connectivity matters. Access to local rental cars? Access to public transit or taxis? (And does public transit run when you need it to?)

There are really very few city pairs that air-rail can be directly compared, those such as BWI where the airport and station are in very close proximity.

What about parking at the station/airport. Airports have the rape and pillage of parking fees down to a science. While many smaller Amtrak stations have free parking available many do not. And in large cities parking can be a deal breaker.

And then the hidden costs! I booked a rt flight PDX-BWI, ticket "price" was 360.00, with taxes (40.00) and a seat upcharge (10.00, no base seats left on one leg) so the total was 410.00. Traveling LD train coach food costs need to be included, as do the inflated airport meal costs. Now to pitch another *****, the travel costs are federally reimbursable (community disaster preparation training) for air travel, but coach only if traveling by train. The Feds will not reimburse for sleeper accommodations even if the cost is less than comparable air travel. The other deal breakers for the train was of course time, 6 fun days vs 2 long days via air (my time is unpaid volunteer time for travel and the weeks training).

 

[keelhauled]

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

"If the train is on time" is a pretty substantial qualifier.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

"If the train is on time" is a pretty substantial qualifier.

All travel has the potential for delay. As much as we complain about freight train interference, I would imagine it's less than the delays in air space or on the crowded highways.

 

[keelhauled]

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

"If the train is on time" is a pretty substantial qualifier.

All travel has the potential for delay. As much as we complain about freight train interference, I would imagine it's less than the delays in air space or on the crowded highways.

Per Amtrak's October monthly report, 77.8% of all trains were on time; 54.9% of LD trains. Per USDOT, 85.4% of flights were on time.

In September, 75.8% of all trains were on time; 49.1% of LD trains. 86.7% of flights.

In August, 72% of all trains were on time; 40.3% of LD trains. 83.2% of flights.

Shall I continue?

 

[jis]

It also makes a huge difference when there a single service each day and its late arrival causes you to miss a connection to another single service each day vs. service every two hours connecting to service even every three or four hours.

 

[Trailrider1951]

In my experience there is not a single city pair in Texas where Amtrak "makes as much sense" as flying from a scheduling perspective. Same thing with all the cities in all the states that border Texas. By the time two cities are large enough and distant enough to warrant airline service they're too far for Amtrak's LD network to reach in a timely fashion at a reasonable hour. The idea that a single Amtrak train per 24 hours (or less) is legitimately competing with a dozen flights (or more) throughout the day and night is an absurd concept to me.

Sorry, but I disagree. I live just north of Austin, and catch the train to Dallas to visit my sister occasionally on a weekend. If the train is on time, I can leave TAY on Friday at 10:30 am and arrive in Dallas around 3:30 pm. On Sunday, I can leave Dallas just before noon and arrive back in TAY around 5:30 pm. With a senior discount, the round trip fare is less than $40. If I were to fly, I would have to drive 50 to 60 miles SOUTH to the airport southeast of Austin, board the airplane and fly to DFW, miles from my sister's house. And the cost would be much more than $40. No thanks. And the train is so much better than driving. Have you ever driven that stretch of I-35 between Austin and Dallas on a weekend? Last time I did, it was bumper to bumper traffic and construction everywhere. Amtrak, take me away!

I see what you're saying but I think we're comparing apples and oranges here. I'm talking about cities large or important enough to have their own commercial airport while you're including smaller cities and towns without scheduled commercial airline services. That's not to say you're wrong so much as to say I don't see Taylor as being part of the commercial airline market.

Sorry, but I still disagree. Those of us who live in the Round Rock/Hutto area are still considered to be in the greater Austin area. I can choose to board the Eagle in either downtown Austin or in Taylor, which is much closer to where I live. Taylor is more convenient. However, if I want to fly anywhere, I have no choice but to go to Austin Bergstrom airport. If I lived in Taylor, I would still fly out of A-B airport. It's all the same market to the people who live here.

 

[ainamkartma]

To briefly return to the original topic, my co-workers and I often ride the SWC from ABQ-LAX and return for business.

And yes, I agree that it is intensely frustrating that federal travel rules permit one to sleep on travel as long as you are not moving, so a hotel+air fare are allowed but spending the same time (and money) in a train cabin is forbidden.

Ainam "both feet on the ground, or at least on the second floor of a Superliner" Kartma

 

[BCL]

Strangely enough, United Express has schedule San Francisco-Sacramento service. On top of that, the airport in San Francisco is well out of the city limits, and Sacramento Airport is on the outskirts of town well away from the population centers, by design.

It would require a bus, but it's really convenient.

 

[acelafan]

A guy at work dropped his wife off at BWI to go to Raleigh. Seems like DC to Raleigh could be train competitive for $54 each way. Dp WAS 10:55 AM, Ar RGH 4:45 PM.

Too bad it's not about 1 hour quicker, but I suggested it to him nonetheless.

 

[Anderson]

Until Amtrak shuffled its pricing policies on the Silvers (it used to be reasonably common to find lower-bucket tickets towards the last minute) there was a tendency for last-minute tickets to Florida to make a lot of sense on Amtrak (this is what first led me to Amtrak: A last-minute one-way ticket from either PHF, RIC, or ORF to DAB coming in at about $500 versus a $150 Amtrak ticket...for reference, that $500 would beat out all but a high bucket roomette).

The question is generally one of cost versus time in many cases (though on some shorter corridors with bad air connections, Amtrak can win out on both).

(As a note, as of late Amtrak is doing their damnedest to drive away my business.)

 

[fairviewroad]

Strangely enough, United Express has schedule San Francisco-Sacramento service. On top of that, the airport in San Francisco is well out of the city limits, and Sacramento Airport is on the outskirts of town well away from the population centers, by design.

A flight like that isn't for people traveling from San Francisco to Sacramento, of course.** Neither are the multiple daily flights between Chicago and Milwaukee, where in some cases a taxi would be quicker and cost-competitive with a plane ticket. Same with Detroit-Lansing or DFW-Waco, etc, etc. Flights like that are solely for people connecting through an airline's hub.

** It's entirely possible that some people DO book SFO-SMF as a standalone leg...but those tickets would not in and of itself sustain the route.