Putting Cars and Trains Up Against the Airlines

The New York Times ^ | July 2, 2002 | JOE SHARKEY

[Willie Green]

For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.

SAN DIEGO -- I've tried driving to avoid this," a businessman from Tucson told my wife as Southwest Airlines customers herded themselves toward Flight 1761, bound for Tucson, 400 miles away. "This" was the milling mob at San Diego International Airport preparing for the dash onto the plane to claim a seat, while loudspeakers barked competing flight announcements into the din.

"But there's no question that flying to Tucson is easier than driving," noted the businessman, who didn't want to give his name but said he owned a company that made medical and other products for diabetics. "Once you get past that first hour out of San Diego, out of the mountains, there's just a bunch of nothing all the way to Tucson," he explained to her.

I can attest to the accuracy of this observation because I was at the same moment pushing east out of San Diego in a rented car on Interstate 8, with the mountains ahead and the desert beyond. The man turned out to be quite right. Once I finally emerged from those mountains, there was literally a bunch of nothing all the way to Tucson.

After the chaotic summer of airline delays in 2000, and the airport problems that developed in the months after Sept. 11, business travelers throughout the country say they have sometimes opted to drive, or take a train if available, on trips of about 150 to 400 miles that they used to make exclusively by airplane.

The advantages of driving or taking the train between various points on the northeastern United States urban corridor are readily apparent. But it's a little more complicated out West, as my wife and I found when we both recently had business trips to Southern California, with a short diversion to Arizona, and then back to San Diego.

She flew to Tucson on Southwest. The one-way fare was $54.50. I asked her to keep a brief diary of the trip, as I set off on the same route by rental car. We both left the hotel in San Diego at about 3:50 p.m.

Her notes read in part: "4:30 p.m., arrive at airport; 6:20 p.m., plane takes off. We have a great view of the harbor, the mountains and the dunes in the desert near Yuma."

At 4:30, I was still pushing east through the rush hour out of San Diego on Interstate 8, with the traffic reporter on the local jazz station, KSDS, moaning helplessly that "traffic is just horrible all over." There was a visual hint of mountains through the soupy haze to the east.

By the time my wife's Southwest plane departed, I had watched the suburbs buffering the Interstate give way to the mountains, and then to the desert and the vast, sun-blasted Imperial Valley. The speed limit was by now 75 miles an hour. Every radio station on the dial seemed to specialize in all mariachi, all the time. Fortified by a sound wall of happy trumpets, I opened the window for some Sonora desert air, which rushed like a belch from a Bessemer furnace.

At about 7 p.m., beyond the expansive Sahara-like Imperial sand dunes that ought to be marked with a sign saying "Last Interesting Thing to Look at Before Tucson," the Arizona state border signs rushed into sight across the tiny Colorado River, which the Interstate bridged without a glance.

At 7:30, over a quick dinner at a Carl's Jr. fast-food joint in somnambulant Yuma, Ariz., where the temperature remained at 100 degrees despite the time of day, I perused The Yuma Sun, whose weather page reported that the next day would be "sunny and warm," with a high of 105. Back on the Interstate, where a road sign announced that Tucson was still 225 miles away, I wondered idly what kind of day it must take to get The Yuma Sun to use the word "hot." The empty desert stretched endlessly ahead in lengthening shadow.

My wife's just-the-facts diary will serve to cut to the chase: "7:20 p.m., land at Tucson airport," she wrote. "8:30 p.m., check in at hotel; 8:55 p.m., beer and snack; 9:20 p.m., relax in room watching TV; 11:20 P.M., husband arrives."

So the airplane wins that one.

A week later, now traveling alone, I tried a more even-money match, this one between train and car on a business trip from San Diego to Los Angeles.

"The train is by far the way to go; have a look," said Denise Jones, a business consultant who was working at her laptop in the dome car of the Pacific Surfliner, the train between San Diego and San Luis Obispo operated by Amtrak in partnership with the State of California.

She gestured toward traffic that was slowing in the morning rush on Interstate 5, the main highway to Los Angeles. The Surfliner lives up to its name only on parts of the trip, where it hugs the Pacific Ocean. Surfers can be seen riding the waves. On the other parts, it runs beside the Interstate.

Even with seven stops between the Santa Fe Depot in San Diego and Union Station in Los Angeles, the train takes 2 hours and 45 minutes. Cars on the congested highway don't keep pace.

The Surfliner, which rail planners hope will one day be upgraded to accommodate high-speed service, makes 11 daily round trips between San Diego and Los Angeles and carries more than a million passengers a year, making it Amtrak's second most popular rail line after the Northeast Corridor. The regular round-trip fare is $54. An extra $22 buys a round-trip upgrade to business class.

Ms. Jones said that she was headed to Burbank, which can be as much as a 90-minute drive from downtown. There is a car-rental counter at Union Station, but she said she was sticking to the rails.

"You'd be crazy to drive," she said, uttering a sentence that not very long ago would have itself sounded crazy in Southern California. "At Union Station, I hop on the Metro Red Line, a subway that goes out all the way through the hills to the Valley. And I'm in Burbank in half an hour after I get off the train."

[Willie Green]

What is High Speed Ground Transportation?

High-speed ground transportation (HSGT)-- a family of technologies ranging from upgraded existing railroads to magnetically levitated vehicles-- is a passenger transportation option that can best link cities lying about 100-500 miles apart. Common in Europe ( http://mercurio.iet.unipi.it/home.htm) and Japan (http://www.japanrail.com),HSGT in the United States already exists in the Northeast Corridor (http://www.amtrak.com/news/pr/atk9936.html) between New York and Washington, D.C. and will soon serve travelers between New York and Boston. 

HSGT is self-guided intercity passenger ground transportation that is time competitive with air and/or auto on a door-to-door basis for trips in the approximate range of 100 to 500 miles. This is market-based, not a speed based definition. It recognizes that the opportunities and requirements for HSGT differ markedly among different pairs of cities. High-speed ground transportation (HSGT) is a family of technologies ranging from upgraded steel-wheel-on-rail railroads to magnetically levitated vehicles.

The Federal Railroad Administration has designated a variety of high density transportation corridors within our nation for development of HSGT:

.

For more information, please visit the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA’s) High Speed Ground Transportation Website

[speedy]

Didn't see any breakdown on the costs, which would greatly favor the car. I would much rather drive across the desert, blasting the radio or tapes or just going in silence, than sit cramped on a plane. You adjust your schedule accordingly and allow for the extra time. The open road rules.

[OBAFGKM]

I don't doubt that riding the Surfliner is great fun.

That being said, the Surfliner's 2001 fare revenues were $21.5M (The state kicked in another $31M, but is it really a good idea to count charity in your business plan?). The Surfliner's 2001 expenses were $78.6M. It cost over three times as much to run the danged thing as it honestly earned! Taxpayers made up the difference.

As a taxpayer, I have some reservations about people having great fun on my nickle.

[Bonaparte]

For me, flying has two advantages: Speed and, usually, economy -- especially for long trips.

Other than that, it's a lousy way to travel. Cramped conditions, uncomfortable seats, long bathroom waits, horrid food, rude and indifferent "attendants," hassles with carry-ons, parking/jitney delays, departure delays, and more recently, the assortment of convicted felons and sub-moronic third-worlders who insult, harass and rob you before you even get to the gate.

I've travelled all over Europe by train with very few problems. It's a lot of fun. People break out the wine, music and family album. Friendships are formed, business cards exchanged. The time goes by quickly. The "bullet" express are smooth and luxurious, but the old "rickety" trains have a charm all their own, too.

To make these trips by car requires preparation, which Sharkey failed to do. That's one reason why he didn't like the experience. Nothing good on the radio? Who listens to radios in cars anymore? Hey, Sharkey, there this thing called an MP3 player. Ever heard of it? Guess not. And it sounds like his car wasn't equipped with A/C or fresh air circulation. Probably didn't have comfortable seats, either. There are websites that detail the times and routes where congestion and delays can be a problem. RVers and truckers use this info to plan their trips. I guess Sharkey didn't know about those, either. Traveling by car just doesn't have to be the strain he describes.

[Willie Green]

Didn't see any breakdown on the costs, which would greatly favor the car.

Factor in fuel efficiency, highway construction, parking, insurance, personal vehicle depreciation, etc. -- I wouldn't be too certain of that statement.

[Bonaparte]

"The open road rules."

Amen. I had a friend who took lots of these road trips. When rush hour congestion was a factor, he took the train just to get outside of it. Then picked up his rental at the train stop. Worked liked a charm.

[Reeses]

Amtrak: the regular round-trip fare is $54.

For the same price the airline a) flys at 500mph, b) sometimes makes a profit, and c) pays taxes. The Amtrak fare on the other hand is heavily subsidized. For transporting people, trains can not compete against airliners. It's Luddite to build new passenger trains.

Trains do have capacity and energy efficency over automobiles but not if autos were to link up into virtual trains on the highway. I think that's the direction we should be headed in. First thing we have to do though is kill all the lawyers.

[steve-b]

Hey, Sharkey, there this thing called an MP3 player. Ever heard of it? Guess not.

There are still a few bugs to be worked out -- in my experience, the anti-skip on MP3/CD players isn't quite there yet, and the hard-disk jukebox models are still a bit too expensive.

That said, I've gotten good results cleaning up and converting old casette tapes before they finally disintegrate.

[wjcsux]

If I have to travel any distance on business, I will fly. I figure 700 miles one way is my maximum distance to drive. I will drive myself, or fly myself (I have a commercial pilot's license) if I am traveling for any other purpose than business. I have spent the last of my hard earned money on airline tickets. I refuse to spend my own money for the luxury of being harassed at the airport by a bunch of 3rd World goons who want to grope the females in my presence in the name of "security".

[rollin]

Our company has recently instituted a new rule. Unless you are going more than 800 miles, drive.

In fact, there was a lengthy debate among the top brass that anything in the U.S. should be driven and only trips overseas should be on airlines.

The use of buses and/or trains did not even come up in the discussions.

In fact, after 90 days of implementation, only one complaint or request for an exemption has been directed towards this policy.

The company also suggested that the employee take family members along on each trip if possible and would pay for their expenses as well.

[Bonaparte]

Have you checked out the Sonicblue Rio Volt SP250? Very smooth action, and the price has dropped way down.

[Willie Green]

but not if autos were to link up into virtual trains on the highway. I think that's the direction we should be headed in.

While that may be one of the high-tech dreams of self-anointed futuristic visionaries, I don't believe that will become a reality. It is simply too hazardous to lull drivers into further inattentive lack of control of their own vehicle. It's bad enough that many currently attempt to drive while juggling cell-phones/soft drinks/coffee, etc.

IMHO, driving while the vehicle is on "snooze-control" is a real BAD idea.

[Willie Green]

I figure 700 miles one way is my maximum distance to drive.

12 hours +/- 2 depending on conditions and the number of pit stops you make.
High-speed rail (190 mph max) and Maglev (300 mph max) operate 3-5 times faster.
Get you there and back in the same day.

[r9etb]

Ms. Jones said that she was headed to Burbank, which can be as much as a 90-minute drive from downtown. There is a car-rental counter at Union Station, but she said she was sticking to the rails

That's just dandy, as long as your meeting takes place in a train station.

[Bonaparte]

Here ya go. $146.94 and free shipping at Amazon.

[Willie Green]

Our company has recently instituted a new rule. Unless you are going more than 800 miles, drive.
In fact, there was a lengthy debate among the top brass that anything in the U.S. should be driven and only trips overseas should be on airlines.
The use of buses and/or trains did not even come up in the discussions.

While your company's principals are rightly concerned about rising airfares, they sure don't place much value on employees' time, do they?

I'm not sure that I'd want to own stock in this outfit.
Their policies seem too impulsive rather than analyticlly sensible.

[Willie Green]

That's just dandy, as long as your meeting takes place in a train station.

That is a legitimate concern with the antiquated rail system,
although less-so with the major rail stations in our larger cities.

The new infrastructure proposed to accommodate high-speed rail and maglev addresses that issue by providing stops at major metropolitan airports. This provides phenomenal convenience and flexibility for travelers wishing to change modes of transportation.

[OBAFGKM]

"I'm not sure that I'd want to own stock in this outfit."

So would you want to own stock in Amtrak? Me neither. Passenger trains won't be a reasonable transportation option until they become economically viable. Frankly, the only fiscal impact of high-speed trains will be to lose money faster.

[Bonaparte]

"This provides phenomenal convenience and flexibility for travelers wishing to change modes of transportation."

That's the ticket alright. Lots and lots of these switching nodes.

[Willie Green]

So would you want to own stock in Amtrak? Me neither.

If Amtrak were broken up and "privatized", I'd be looking to invest in enterprises which may aquire portions of Amtrak.
And I don't share your pessimism regarding the future of high-speed ground transportation in America.
A shrewd investor would be looking at taking a position in TransRapid, American Maglev, or some of the other players in this emerging technology that are mentioned in these articles that I post.