723
A leisurely trip (media.piefed.world)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
275 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wish they'd upgrade their long haul routes to go faster. There's one from SLC to SF I'm interested in, but it takes 18 hours, vs 11 by car or 2 by plane. If it was faster than driving, I'd consider it to avoid the airport.

I don't blame them for focusing on the easier trips though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Same, but with the limited funding I get why. Shorter trips like that make money, long hauls don't - and since they don't own the tracks they can't even upgrade them or begin to do anything. I will say 18 is a lot (especially in a coach seat), but there is a positive of not having to drive. I usually take my steam deck and just zone out. Overnights though are tough in coach, for that you really have to want to be there.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, if I want to go anywhere interesting, it would be an overnight trip, with kids. A sleeping room is way too expensive, so it's a nonstarter. If it was 3x the speed, it would probably be fine, especially if they left in the morning instead of the evening.

    So yeah, the only train I take is the commuter, and only to go to the airport because there's no connection from the train to my work (there's a way to get there, but the trip would take 2 hours each way). The commuter can't go very fast because it has to stop every 5-10 miles, but it's fine since it goes about as fast as a car.

    So yeah, here's hoping Amtrak can make enough on the east coast to be able to upgrade the west coast.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent