rail vs air or get it together

[Anonymous]

Transportation - i.e., getting from one place to another in the USA is not an easy task! Especially if you want to combine rail and air and maybe even a bus! I found it most gratifying to see that AMTRAK is building a rail station at the Milwaukee Airport - DAAA - how long does it take to figure out if services are combined and time is a precious commodity - "service" is the key word. Several years ago Greyhound co-located stations with AMTRAK stations or within near walking distance. Rail service could be co-located with airports. I am certain this will prove a successful venture for AMTRAK and the airlines and will serve the traveling public, especially to rail cities where airlines don't go! Maybe even have to put on a few more trains, stops and routes?

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, there are efforts now to minimize train stations at airports under the homeland security banner. Hopefully, they'll find a way to secure the system as a whole. I believe Tri-Rail now has a station at Miami's airport...

LC

[Anonymous]

Yes, I can see where that may be a concern - however there is far more security at single crowd sites than "out on the road" where it is extremely difficult to make secure. I have long - privately argued and put forth the thought of combining services. Technology and alertness will have to prevail in this era - however long it takes. Thanks for your observation!

[Anonymous]

Trains just need to get faster in america were using 100 year old technology whereas the railroads accross the world are modern.

[dehusman]

There is SEPTA service to Phillie's airport, and it connects to Amtrak at 30th St Station.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

There is no real reason for a passenger train to travel higher then 90mph. When the distances are relatively short like Milwaukee - Chicago and routes like Flporidas Tri-rail. Effort can be made to maintain 90mph through junctions, crossovers and curves to keep the average speed up. If you build passenger cars with open vestibules and open windows, you'll realy be able to feel that 90 is fast enough, so relax and enjoy the ride.

Slow orders waste more time then higher top speeds save time.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE:
Slow orders waste more time then higher top speeds save time.

Well said.

I know the only reason I never travel by train or light rail is because it is not in my area.

I was looking to head up to Kamloops on my vacation and I didn't want to drive, I could have gone by train or bus.

If I went by train I would have had to get a ride into Vancouver (about 40KM from where I live) catch the train at about 7:00pm or so and get into Kamloops at about 2:00am or so, needless to say that didn't interest me.

I just ended up not going.

[88gta350]

Harrisburg PA's new airport will combine a bus terminal with an Amtrack station, and of course the airport. Too bad the population isn't dense enough to really take advantage of the opportunity. It's a nice hub, but won't get used like it should.

[jchnhtfd]

Newark International (now called 'Liberty') and Amtrak are connected, and it is possible to get more or less 'through' tickets from many European cities (e.g. London, Edinburgh, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Paris) to anywhere on the Northeast Corridor through Newark.

Bradley International, in Connecticut, could do the same thing -- but don't get me started on Connecticut transportation policy, please!

[StillGrande]

BWI (Baltimore) has a station on the Amtrack and MARC lines between DC and Baltimore. Ronald Reagan National Airport is on the Metro line in DC (3 stops from 2 Amtrack stations). And they are once again talking (always talking) about extending the Metro trains to Dulles (Northern Virginia).

I agree that passenger transportation should be better integrated. Buses should connect to trains to planes. Each has its strengths. The problems always arise when one tries to do the job of the others.