Will trains ever replace aircraft for short haul journeys?

Question

i hate to arrive early

Answer 1

In Europe this has already essentially happened. I doubt that in will occur in the U.S. though, despite  pollution problems from aircraft, air traffic control problems,increasingly long check in times at airports and cumbersome journeys from

airports to city centres.

Answer 2

Trains are already excellent for short haul journeys.   They go downtown to downtown, and stop in the suburbs and small towns.  

Air travel isn't worth it for short hauls. As you well know, a "40 minute flight" ... isn't.

Answer 3

Absolutely!!

I dont think trains will completely replace air travel for short trips but it is already happening, particularly where airports are already overcrowded and enlarging them would be horrifically expensive die to property costs etc.

Trains already run right to the heart of almost every major city in the world, much quicker getting on and off, no long lines to be searched, less restrictive baggage limitations, nicer ride, roomier and with the proper infrastructure and funding every bit as reliable.

Passenger rail travel uses so much less fuel than flying that as the world grows increasingly environmentally conscious railroads and commuter rail service will continually play an important part in our evolving energy requirements.

Answer 4

Case en pointe.

Right now, owing to a death in the family, my wife is booking reservations for Amtrak, from Dunsmuir, Ca., to Los Angeles.

Round trip train fare around $240.  Round trip air, from Redding, Ca. (requiring a two hour round trip by auto), to LA, $1400.  Not to mention all the BS at the airport.

The replacement is already under way.

Answer 5

very much, more so since airports move out of the cities.

Travelling to and from an airport outside the city will take you more a lot of time, much more than the actual flight duration. Security restrictions/ checking takes more time in airports. Considering these, and cost, trains are the way to go for short trips.

Faster trains will only fasten the transition.

Answer 6

Speaking of the carbon emissions factor by the above poster, check out the below link from Class I railroad, CSX Transportation.  For those less fluent in railroad operations and the efficiencies rail can provide the calculator is a very enlightening and educational tool.

In any event, to answer your question, actually short haul journeys are where high-speed rail will be able to make inroads in air travel (I think airlines will always have the edge in long haul, unless service continues to deteriorate).  This is already happening along Amtrak's Northeast Corridor where the railroad is using its high-speed Acela train services to compete with air in the Boston-New York market.  

However, for passenger and high-speed rail to truly shine it needs to be properly funded, at least more along the lines of the subsidies airlines receive and the annual funding given to highways (right now Amtrak receives a little under $2 billion annually which is a mere drop in the bucket compared to that of airlines and highways).  

So, if passenger rail would ever receive appropriate funding not only would folks ride the trains but be amazed at just how fast and efficient the service would be.  Until then, however, it looks to be up to the states, Amtrak, and proponents (like the National Association of Railroad Passengers) to push and further develop passenger rail services.

Answer 7

NO! PLANES AND TRAINS  ARE FOR TOTALLY  DIFFERENCE APPLICATIONS. PLANES ARE FOR LIGHT LOADS QUICKLY. TRAINS ARE FOR VERY HEAVY LOADS AT THE LOWEST COST.

Answer 8

oh yes!

Answer 9

If you look at Europe they use trains for the short  haul. The Airport  are in the center of the hub and the trains support then. The US need to look at using the sane type hub system. Trains use less fuel in short hauls and can if you put in high speed rail you can make the runs faster than planes because you have no landing and take off, which is when planes use most of there fuel. Right now on Amtrak High speed rail you can go from downtown New York City to downtown Washington D C on train than by plane and cab.

Answer 10

If you look at the big picture, there are several reasons train will be taking over air:

-There are less carbon emissions per mile in a train than a car, whereas flying in a plane there are more (1)

-You are allowed to use nearly all types of civilian technology

-Getting through security is faster

-The baggage is actually on the train you're riding, and since you're normally on the same train there is no hassle

-The technology exists for high-speed rail and Maglevs, as these technologies are being well-funded by train companies and the government

-The luxuries in a train are similar to that of an aircraft

-There is little overbooking and there are no rescheduling fees

-There is little need to reschedule since there are virtually no weather delays

-There are less parts to repair in a train, therefore there are fewer delays caused by it

-You can sleep on a train

-You get meals on a train regardless of where you are sitting

-Fuel isn't a major cost factor like in aviation and an oil shock wouldn't effect trains as quickly as in airplanes

-Current engines can support alternative fuels in the immediate case of an oil shock

-Trains crash less often than do planes, and if there was a crash (God forbid), the death toll wouldn't be as severe

-You aren't traveling as fast, so you get some time to relax

-There are far more train stations than there are airports

Answer 11

We can only HOPE... and lobby and pressure and FORCE the politicians and corporations to do this !!

Answer 12

Agreed, the transition back to rail from air is solidly under way.  It is very likely that most of the airline infrastructure we have now will be gone in another 20 years.

Rail is the way to go.  Of course we have to educate people and speak strongly against the claims of powerful, dangerous, greedy people to make progress.  But in the long run it is inevitable.

The system of the future is one in which people will lease small electric cars and interchange them at railroad stations.  You will drive your electric buggy around town, but when you need to go somewhere further than, say, 50 miles, you will make your reservations on the internet, drive down to the railroad station, park your electric car, and get on the train.

You can eat in the diner, sleep, watch TV, work on your laptop, or join a conversation group in any of a variety of topics.  On longer trips, you will have a private room and sleep comfortably.  When you get to your destination, you get off the train and check out an identical electric car by sliding your membership card through the slot.  Drive to your meeting or whatever, and, when you are through, return to the station and take the next train home.

There will be many more trains than there are right now, and it will be convenient, very fast, and comfortable.  I probably won't live long enough to see this, but perhaps you will.

To have these benefits, we must all vote intelligently.  Don't forget that!

Answer 13

In America yes defiantly. the short lines are most used and are showing the high growth. President bush has been trying to get rid of our long distance trains and only keep short routs. (mainly north east corridor) but we still have booth. for my self to take train to Milwaukee from Chicago that travel time is just over a hour and cost around $40 "round trip ticket" is much better than at lest standing in line for a hour for security. much better way to travel.

If had Proper funding would even expand the short routes and increase the speed.

Answer 14

Nah, flying is the way to go.  Takes less time and everyone wants everything fast these days.