![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
walkitouthttps://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/america_on_the_go/long_distance_transportation_patterns/entire
Basically, this paper from 2011 confirms what we all know. Everyone gets _to_ the airport (or train station or whatever) in a private vehicle (their own or someone who is dropping them off or whatever) (not everyone, I know, but big majority). But on arrival, how you get from the airport varies. It’s still a lot of private vehicle (because they include rental car in that), but a mix of other things. _At no point do they look at what options are available_. I will note that people who leave a train station in a cab to go to the airport to rent a car will not show as left the train station in a private vehicle but may show up as left the airport in a private vehicle.
They asked the wrong questions. *sigh* Surprise.
R. tells a story of going to France (decades ago now), flying into Paris, renting a car, driving to the Loire Valley and then doing a bunch of day trips over the course of a week-ish with his dad, and finally returning to Paris (with very expensive tolls clearly trying to discourage driving into Paris). They did this, rather than take the train to the Loire Valley, because they could rent a car a the airport, and they couldn’t at the train station. So, you know, that’s four hours of driving each way that could have been avoided by having rental car at the train station.
It’s easy to second guess this and say, oh, but you could have. I don’t really know what the alternate rental car options were in the Loire Valley or points along the way or what the train schedule and plane schedule and so forth might have been. What I _can_ say is that there are absolutely people taking the train into Boston and NYC and other major cities, _renting a car there because you can_ and then driving right back out of the city. These are avoidable trips, if you could get off the train in a more compatible to your journey location, get your car there, and proceed. All these forum posts indicate this is a super common issue, and a lot of the policy papers are so hyper-focused on getting people _out of_ their private vehicles, that it doesn’t occur to them that making it nearly impossible to navigate from a train station to where you want to go and do the things you want to do without backtracking to the airport is actually the snarl preventing our future, less congested and less climate impacted world.
I ran into this kind of crazy-making calculation when looking at health care provision years ago. When you have preventative care paid for by one entity, primary care by others, and more complex care by others, it’s pretty easy for someone to “save” money while shunting massively increase cost onto other parts of the system. Operations like Medicare, VA and KaiserPermanente by being end-to-end operations can sometimes give us a glimpse into how that is happening. Similarly, if you try to make train systems some perfect mechanism where everyone arrives at the train station by walking, biking, or taking other public transportation, you may well succeed in that. But if you succeeded by having people take public transportation to the airport where they rented a car, rather than renting a car at the train station, how much of a win was that really? If you succeeded by people planning a train trip, realizing they’d be stuck at a train station with only bad choices, bailed on that in favor of a cheaper flight, you may never know that happened and your statistics will be beautiful but it is not a great outcome.
OK, I’ve been poking around at US, Washington State and Oregon policy papers on passenger rail. Rental cars are consistently categorized as “private vehicles”, and are strongly deprecated every step of the way, which, I _get_ and also, does not currently work in a way that routinely shunts people who want to make rail work back to air travel. I decided to look at a different level of advocacy instead.
https://www.fodors.com/news/photos/20-reasons-why-you-should-ditch-the-plane-and-ride-the-train
The _first_ argument here in favor of the train is: Avoid the Airport. Which, as we have seen, you can’t really do if you need to rent a car at your destination. But also this:
“The unpredictability and endless shenanigans encountered at the airport can be avoided altogether by taking the train. Train travel is far more predictable than flying, with fewer steps required from inception to completion, fewer encounters with people and protocols, and the freedom to bring along that life-giving bottle of water.”
You can avoid going through security when you go to the airport to rent a car, it is true. And yet, these two sentences feel exceptionally cruel.
The second argument is superior service:
“ On the train, the mood tends to be lighter and more laidback. The illusion of safety is not at the forefront, the dining car serves drinks, and the restroom is always open for business.”
No dining cars in a lot of trains. The point about the restroom is fair — no seatbelt sign on the train. I’m not sure what to say about the mood, other than to observe that a lot of that comes down to whether or not everyone showed up to work the car and shift you are riding on. Because if they didn’t the people who are there will be stressed, exactly as you would expect.
Third argument: “First class is attainable.” Well, it is on short-haul domestic flights too, and first class in a train means nothing on an overnight if you don’t get sleeping accommodations and those are more expensive than first class on the much shorter duration flight equivalent. Third argument is just a lie.
Better views, fewer fees, more leg room: all true. Less pre-travel time: true, but misleading.
“Less post travel time.” Again, cruel!
“Airports tend to be located far outside of a city, therefore additional transport is required to complete your journey. One huge perk of the train is that it stops right in the city center, cutting down, or eliminating the need for subsequent time and money to reach your final destination.”
I agree, if your goal is to go to a city and not drive around at all while on your trip, then a train to your city is better in terms of post-travel time. That’s a lot of ifs.
#11 is an absolute lie: “stay on schedule”. Weird paragraph backing it up, too.
A bunch of stuff about the restrooms being bigger, being able to walk around, less turbulence or at least you are still on the ground and similar. The stuff about train stations being better than airports, really? That’s a short list of train stations that can be said about.
Next!
Basically, this paper from 2011 confirms what we all know. Everyone gets _to_ the airport (or train station or whatever) in a private vehicle (their own or someone who is dropping them off or whatever) (not everyone, I know, but big majority). But on arrival, how you get from the airport varies. It’s still a lot of private vehicle (because they include rental car in that), but a mix of other things. _At no point do they look at what options are available_. I will note that people who leave a train station in a cab to go to the airport to rent a car will not show as left the train station in a private vehicle but may show up as left the airport in a private vehicle.
They asked the wrong questions. *sigh* Surprise.
R. tells a story of going to France (decades ago now), flying into Paris, renting a car, driving to the Loire Valley and then doing a bunch of day trips over the course of a week-ish with his dad, and finally returning to Paris (with very expensive tolls clearly trying to discourage driving into Paris). They did this, rather than take the train to the Loire Valley, because they could rent a car a the airport, and they couldn’t at the train station. So, you know, that’s four hours of driving each way that could have been avoided by having rental car at the train station.
It’s easy to second guess this and say, oh, but you could have. I don’t really know what the alternate rental car options were in the Loire Valley or points along the way or what the train schedule and plane schedule and so forth might have been. What I _can_ say is that there are absolutely people taking the train into Boston and NYC and other major cities, _renting a car there because you can_ and then driving right back out of the city. These are avoidable trips, if you could get off the train in a more compatible to your journey location, get your car there, and proceed. All these forum posts indicate this is a super common issue, and a lot of the policy papers are so hyper-focused on getting people _out of_ their private vehicles, that it doesn’t occur to them that making it nearly impossible to navigate from a train station to where you want to go and do the things you want to do without backtracking to the airport is actually the snarl preventing our future, less congested and less climate impacted world.
I ran into this kind of crazy-making calculation when looking at health care provision years ago. When you have preventative care paid for by one entity, primary care by others, and more complex care by others, it’s pretty easy for someone to “save” money while shunting massively increase cost onto other parts of the system. Operations like Medicare, VA and KaiserPermanente by being end-to-end operations can sometimes give us a glimpse into how that is happening. Similarly, if you try to make train systems some perfect mechanism where everyone arrives at the train station by walking, biking, or taking other public transportation, you may well succeed in that. But if you succeeded by having people take public transportation to the airport where they rented a car, rather than renting a car at the train station, how much of a win was that really? If you succeeded by people planning a train trip, realizing they’d be stuck at a train station with only bad choices, bailed on that in favor of a cheaper flight, you may never know that happened and your statistics will be beautiful but it is not a great outcome.
OK, I’ve been poking around at US, Washington State and Oregon policy papers on passenger rail. Rental cars are consistently categorized as “private vehicles”, and are strongly deprecated every step of the way, which, I _get_ and also, does not currently work in a way that routinely shunts people who want to make rail work back to air travel. I decided to look at a different level of advocacy instead.
https://www.fodors.com/news/photos/20-reasons-why-you-should-ditch-the-plane-and-ride-the-train
The _first_ argument here in favor of the train is: Avoid the Airport. Which, as we have seen, you can’t really do if you need to rent a car at your destination. But also this:
“The unpredictability and endless shenanigans encountered at the airport can be avoided altogether by taking the train. Train travel is far more predictable than flying, with fewer steps required from inception to completion, fewer encounters with people and protocols, and the freedom to bring along that life-giving bottle of water.”
You can avoid going through security when you go to the airport to rent a car, it is true. And yet, these two sentences feel exceptionally cruel.
The second argument is superior service:
“ On the train, the mood tends to be lighter and more laidback. The illusion of safety is not at the forefront, the dining car serves drinks, and the restroom is always open for business.”
No dining cars in a lot of trains. The point about the restroom is fair — no seatbelt sign on the train. I’m not sure what to say about the mood, other than to observe that a lot of that comes down to whether or not everyone showed up to work the car and shift you are riding on. Because if they didn’t the people who are there will be stressed, exactly as you would expect.
Third argument: “First class is attainable.” Well, it is on short-haul domestic flights too, and first class in a train means nothing on an overnight if you don’t get sleeping accommodations and those are more expensive than first class on the much shorter duration flight equivalent. Third argument is just a lie.
Better views, fewer fees, more leg room: all true. Less pre-travel time: true, but misleading.
“Less post travel time.” Again, cruel!
“Airports tend to be located far outside of a city, therefore additional transport is required to complete your journey. One huge perk of the train is that it stops right in the city center, cutting down, or eliminating the need for subsequent time and money to reach your final destination.”
I agree, if your goal is to go to a city and not drive around at all while on your trip, then a train to your city is better in terms of post-travel time. That’s a lot of ifs.
#11 is an absolute lie: “stay on schedule”. Weird paragraph backing it up, too.
A bunch of stuff about the restrooms being bigger, being able to walk around, less turbulence or at least you are still on the ground and similar. The stuff about train stations being better than airports, really? That’s a short list of train stations that can be said about.
Next!