City combos where Amtrak makes as much sense as flying

[Alexandria Nick]

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.

But it also presupposes that that time actually works for that pair. There were two trains to pick from, but eight flights out of BWI that went to Raleigh today. If you include DCA, there's 15 flights. But still just two trains.

 

[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.

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.

Sure. However, I would have thought it would have made more sense to go out to another hub like perhaps Denver. SMF already has direct service to most major airports on the West Coast. It might make the most sense if someone is flying international.

United used to have direct SFO-OAK service. That used to be the shortest scheduled jet airliner service in the world - typically with 727s. It was 11 miles and the plane typically wouldn't get higher than 4000 ft. It then went on to Denver. I've heard of some people booking that flight just to get the minimum miles or to get a segment to make a tier.

 

[neroden]

Back in The Old Days (and heck, it was only the 1980s), I knew people who commuted from Ithaca, NY to Elmira, NY and back by airplane. The old USAir route was Pittsburgh-Ithaca-Elmira and Pittsburgh-Elmira-Ithaca, *alternating* during the day, which made this possible.

This is, of course, lunacy, if you look at the distance between the two cities. But that was the mid-century fantasy of airplane travel, and a few people lived it.

Anyway, I honestly think Amtrak's competition is mostly driving, not flying.

 

[west point]

Yes get the people out of cars first. However look at the NEC and see how many travel that as opposed to airlines. BAL / WASH to Raleigh might completely change once the HrSR is completed WASH - RGH.

 

[JayPea]

There used to, until a few years ago, two round trip flights a day, operated by Alaska Airlines subsidiary Horizon Airlines between Pullman/Moscow (WA/ID) and Lewiston (ID). Flight time was 19 minutes and driving distance between Pullman and Lewiston is just over 30 miles. I didn't see the point then and I don't now. I guess it would be a good way to get Alaska Airlines frequent flyer points, though

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

Back in The Old Days (and heck, it was only the 1980s), I knew people who commuted from Ithaca, NY to Elmira, NY and back by airplane. The old USAir route was Pittsburgh-Ithaca-Elmira and Pittsburgh-Elmira-Ithaca, *alternating* during the day, which made this possible.

This is, of course, lunacy, if you look at the distance between the two cities. But that was the mid-century fantasy of airplane travel, and a few people lived it.

Anyway, I honestly think Amtrak's competition is mostly driving, not flying.

That's why the future is HSR. If the train is significantly faster (or even close to) driving, it becomes much more popular.

 

[DesertDude]

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*.

I agree that Amtrak being competitive with driving is what really counts; I just think examples like SLC - Reno are interesting (I wonder how many people who didn't want to drive that route ended up taking a flight, when they were unaware of the overnight train option). It's also interesting because Denver is close to being the same drive time away from SLC, but flying is clearly more convenient than Amtrak with multiple inexpensive direct flights to DIA each day.

 

[jis]

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.

Those are feeder flights feeding into United's massive SFO hub to connect with longer hop domestic and international flights.

United actually does both bus and train feeder "flights" into Newark hub in addition to United Express feeders. A large proportion of passenger on the feeder flights are connecting passengers, and not O to D.

 

[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.

Sure. However, I would have thought it would have made more sense to go out to another hub like perhaps Denver. SMF already has direct service to most major airports on the West Coast. It might make the most sense if someone is flying international.

Yes, it allows SMF passengers to tap into the vast selection of transoceanic flights available out of SFO. Another advantage to connecting in SFO (versus DEN) is that you can connect to east-bound red-eyes. For instance, if you want to get to NYC by connecting through DEN, you'd have to leave SMF by approx 3 p.m. But if you connect through SFO on the red-eye, you can stay in SMF until 7 or 8 p.m.

There used to, until a few years ago, two round trip flights a day, operated by Alaska Airlines subsidiary Horizon Airlines between Pullman/Moscow (WA/ID) and Lewiston (ID). Flight time was 19 minutes and driving distance between Pullman and Lewiston is just over 30 miles. I didn't see the point then and I don't now. I guess it would be a good way to get Alaska Airlines frequent flyer points, though

The point was that Horizon didn't think there was enough traffic to sustain a SEA-Pullman or a SEA-Lewiston flight on its own. So they patched the two together. It wasn't about serving people going from Pullman to Lewiston. It seems like they've changed their mind since then.

 

[PerRock]

I haven't checked airfare in a while, but in the past I've found that ARB-CHI (well probably most places that are west of Detroit Metro & served) would find Amtrak better for getting the Chicago. From ARB in particular it car vs train time, wise tends to be about the same (bar rush hour), but in air I find that Amtrak is much better, if only in hassle.

peter

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

The mention of riding the Hound back in the day got me to looking at some of the great Greyhound commercials and Travelogues posted on YouTube. Sure makes bus travel look civilized, especially if you were on a Scenicruiser

 

[MARC Rider]

Years ago, I was riding the Crescent from Baltimore to Atlanta, and the lady in the room next to mine was going to Greenville, SC. She was doing this instead of flying because she had to make the trip on short notice (a funeral, I believe), and she found Amtrak after recovering from the sticker shock of the airfare from BWI to the Greenville-Spartanburg airport. I have since traveled to Greenville for business, and I use the Crescent, despite the awful 5 AM arrival and the 11:30 PM departure because the airfares are nuts. I mean, when a roomette is price-competitive with coach airfare, something is out of kilter. Also, the last time I went (which admittedly was a couple of years ago.), there were no direct flights.

A similar city pair is Baltimore/Washington - Savannah (GA). The airfares to Savannah are extremely high, and no direct flights. (at least there weren't the last time I did this trip, which was 2 years ago.) The Meteor is a nice overnight with dinner and you're there right before breakfast. (You might actually get breakfast going north.) Sure, there's direct (Southwest) air service to Charleston which is much more reasonable; my boss tried it the last trip, and it involved a circuitous drive, as there is no direct interstate highway connection between the two cities. I showed up on time; he was 3 hours late.

 

[MARC Rider]

Back in the early days of the Acela Express, circa 2000-2001 I believe the Washington Post did a stunt where they ran a train vs. plane race to compare the new train service. It involved travel from the Washington Post's old HQ on L St.NW in DC to their New York Bureau (if my memory is correct) somewhere in midtown Manhattan. I'm not sure whether they cabbed it to/from the train station/airport or used the Metro/subway. I believe they flew between National and LaGuardia (which means they must have cabbed it into Manhattan from LaGuardia.) I don't remember what time of day they did this. I don't remember whether they rode the nonstop WAS-NYP Acela Express that briefly ran at that time, or whether they took a regular Acela.

The bottom line was that flying beat the Acela by about 30 minutes. Given the hassle factor of dealing with the airports, even in the pre 9/11 era, the writer of the article considered the Acela Express a viable alternative to flying. In other words, time might be money, but 30 minutes is pocket change.

 

[tp49]

Yes, it allows SMF passengers to tap into the vast selection of transoceanic flights available out of SFO. Another advantage to connecting in SFO (versus DEN) is that you can connect to east-bound red-eyes. For instance, if you want to get to NYC by connecting through DEN, you'd have to leave SMF by approx 3 p.m. But if you connect through SFO on the red-eye, you can stay in SMF until 7 or 8 p.m.

I understand the purpose of those flights but I say this as someone who lives in SMF and flies out of SFO internationally a couple times a year for me it's actually more convenient (and usually cheaper) to just drive down to SFO and park there then it is to park at SMF take the puddle jumper to SFO and make a connection. For my travels back east I'll use any of SMF, OAK or SFO depending upon which one is the cheapest and by how much. I can say that I've never made an SMF-SFO-XXX connection and don't see myself ever doing so especially when it's an hour and half drive down to SFO from downtown Sacramento.

 

[tomfuller]

If you live in Sacramento and want to fly out of SMF, just ride the Yolo bus out to the airport. I have done this after arriving on the CS to rent a car at the airport before the downtown locations are open.

 

[jis]

Yes, it allows SMF passengers to tap into the vast selection of transoceanic flights available out of SFO. Another advantage to connecting in SFO (versus DEN) is that you can connect to east-bound red-eyes. For instance, if you want to get to NYC by connecting through DEN, you'd have to leave SMF by approx 3 p.m. But if you connect through SFO on the red-eye, you can stay in SMF until 7 or 8 p.m.

I understand the purpose of those flights but I say this as someone who lives in SMF and flies out of SFO internationally a couple times a year for me it's actually more convenient (and usually cheaper) to just drive down to SFO and park there then it is to park at SMF take the puddle jumper to SFO and make a connection. For my travels back east I'll use any of SMF, OAK or SFO depending upon which one is the cheapest and by how much. I can say that I've never made an SMF-SFO-XXX connection and don't see myself ever doing so especially when it's an hour and half drive down to SFO from downtown Sacramento.

Indeed, I have found that very often what I prefer to do is not what many others prefer to do. I know several colleagues who live in Roseville, Sacramento and even Davis who prefer to use SMF rather than battle traffic to OAK or SFO. Each to his or her own taste I suppose.

 

[rrdude]

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.

BAL-SAV works for overnight. Depart 6:15AM-ish arrive, 6:30AM-ish

 

[rrdude]

I haven't checked airfare in a while, but in the past I've found that ARB-CHI (well probably most places that are west of Detroit Metro & served) would find Amtrak better for getting the Chicago. From ARB in particular it car vs train time, wise tends to be about the same (bar rush hour), but in air I find that Amtrak is much better, if only in hassle.

peter

Meh, being an ARB native, if you need to GET to CHI fast, still faster to go to Metro, and catch a 90 minute flight to ORD, or better yet, Midway.

Now, when the ENTIRE line is 110MPH, and the "Chicago South Lake Situation" is handled, it might be flight competitive. (It should be, look what happened when LAX to SAN went to hourly..............)

 

[PerRock]

I haven't checked airfare in a while, but in the past I've found that ARB-CHI (well probably most places that are west of Detroit Metro & served) would find Amtrak better for getting the Chicago. From ARB in particular it car vs train time, wise tends to be about the same (bar rush hour), but in air I find that Amtrak is much better, if only in hassle.

peter

Meh, being an ARB native, if you need to GET to CHI fast, still faster to go to Metro, and catch a 90 minute flight to ORD, or better yet, Midway.
Now, when the ENTIRE line is 110MPH, and the "Chicago South Lake Situation" is handled, it might be flight competitive. (It should be, look what happened when LAX to SAN went to hourly..............)

Once you calculate in travel time to and from the airports they're all about the same time wise; especially if you rent a car at ORD or MDW. I just did a quick check and ya, air fare is way more expensive then Amtrak (about $200 more, for a flight today) between DTW & CHI.

 

[rrdude]

I haven't checked airfare in a while, but in the past I've found that ARB-CHI (well probably most places that are west of Detroit Metro & served) would find Amtrak better for getting the Chicago. From ARB in particular it car vs train time, wise tends to be about the same (bar rush hour), but in air I find that Amtrak is much better, if only in hassle.

peter

Meh, being an ARB native, if you need to GET to CHI fast, still faster to go to Metro, and catch a 90 minute flight to ORD, or better yet, Midway.
Now, when the ENTIRE line is 110MPH, and the "Chicago South Lake Situation" is handled, it might be flight competitive. (It should be, look what happened when LAX to SAN went to hourly..............)

Once you calculate in travel time to and from the airports they're all about the same time wise; especially if you rent a car at ORD or MDW. I just did a quick check and ya, air fare is way more expensive then Amtrak (about $200 more, for a flight today) between DTW & CHI.

I disagree, 30-45 mins to DTW, get there 45 mins ahead of time, 90 mins gate-to-gate: That's 3 hours, figure 45 mins from Midway downtown, that's now 3:45., versus 4:30+ for the train, add 15 minutes travel time to train, now at 4:45 Hmmmmmmm so, I guess YOU ARE CORRECT!, It's withing a hour+ of flying, and a lot less hassle. Just wait 'til 110MPH the entire route!

 

[BCL]

Yes, it allows SMF passengers to tap into the vast selection of transoceanic flights available out of SFO. Another advantage to connecting in SFO (versus DEN) is that you can connect to east-bound red-eyes. For instance, if you want to get to NYC by connecting through DEN, you'd have to leave SMF by approx 3 p.m. But if you connect through SFO on the red-eye, you can stay in SMF until 7 or 8 p.m.

I understand the purpose of those flights but I say this as someone who lives in SMF and flies out of SFO internationally a couple times a year for me it's actually more convenient (and usually cheaper) to just drive down to SFO and park there then it is to park at SMF take the puddle jumper to SFO and make a connection. For my travels back east I'll use any of SMF, OAK or SFO depending upon which one is the cheapest and by how much. I can say that I've never made an SMF-SFO-XXX connection and don't see myself ever doing so especially when it's an hour and half drive down to SFO from downtown Sacramento.

Indeed, I have found that very often what I prefer to do is not what many others prefer to do. I know several colleagues who live in Roseville, Sacramento and even Davis who prefer to use SMF rather than battle traffic to OAK or SFO. Each to his or her own taste I suppose.

I found lower prices, even with a connection. For one random day in March, the lowest fare SMF-PVG was more than $200 less than SFO-PVG. I guess it's something to do with yield management.

 

[DesertDude]

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)

A more compelling example than LAX-Tucson is Inland Empire to Tucson. The only LA area airport with non-stop flights to Tucson is LAX. If you live in San Bernardino, you're easily looking at 1.5-2 hours just to get to LAX. If you do decide to fly out of LAX, you'll have a grand total travel time of at least 5 hours (1.5hr flight + 1.5 hrs to the airport + 2 hrs at the airport). However, the overnight train ride from Ontario to Tucson is only 8.5 hours.

The flight options from Ontario to Tucson aren't very good. For a comparison, I'm looking two months from now on Wednesday, May 4th. The only flight that wins in terms of both price and flight time is an indirect SWA flight for $84 and 3.5 hours of flight time. With time spent at the airport, you're still looking at least 5 hours. The coach fare for Amtrak? $46. The Saver fare? $37.