Posted on 07/22/2010 6:10:01 AM PDT by Willie Green
WHITEFISH, Mont. — When I was 7, my mother took my three siblings and me on a train ride from my hometown of Brainerd to visit my grandmother, who lived in Staples. It was a 30-mile journey that took about 45 minutes.
The trip was faster and cheaper by car. (Gas was about 32 cents a gallon back then, and the train tickets were $2 or $3 for each of us). But Mom thought it would be a fun and educational experience. The trip was unremarkable, but the experience — complete with a conductor who hollered "all aboard!" just like they did in the movies — stuck with me.
That was the last time I'd ridden a train until a week ago Friday, when I helped chaperone a dozen high school kids from my church to a camp on Flathead Lake in Montana, near Glacier National Park.
This trip was just a tad longer than my first one. We spent 26 hours to Montana on board and 26 hours back to our departure point in Winona. And, unlike my childhood journey, we ate and slept on the train.
Now that many of the nation's rail lines have been ripped out, sold for scrap and replaced by bike trails and farmland, passenger trains are making a comeback. The Empire Builder, the Amtrak train we rode on than runs from Chicago to Vancouver, is regularly filled to near capacity, and Amtrak ridership has been steadily rising over the last decade.
In places all over the country, including Rochester, city and state leaders are lobbying for high-, medium- and regular speed passenger train lines to run through their cities.
It's pretty apparent that we gave up on rail transportation way too early in this country. It's still a safe, eco-friendly and relatively affordable way to travel — if you're lucky enough to have a destination that's along an Amtrak route.
After my journey I'm convinced that passenger rail travel has flying beat in nearly every category, but one — speed.
Some comparisons:
Leg room: There's about three times as much space between rows in coach cars on a train as there is on a plane, and the La-Z-Boy chair-like foot-rests are extremely comfy.
Freedom of movement: You will never hear a crew member aboard an Amtrak train tell you to remain seated until the captain turns off the seat belt sign. That's because there are no seat belts on Amtrak trains. That doesn't mean you won't be bounced around like a crated turkey on a semi. But you're free to move not only from one row to another or from your seat to the restroom, but also to the lounge car and the dining car, or most other passenger car on the train.
Restrooms: They're a little larger on Amtrak trains than they are on most airplanes. (You don't have to be a contortionist to change clothes in them.)
Customer service: The crews working our trains were friendly, courteous and professional.
The food: Yeah, it's overpriced. But there's a lot of variety. You can get anything from a bag of chips, pizza or a hot dog in the cafe to a $22 sirloin steak dinner in the dining car. If you're not in first class, you're lucky if you can score a bag of peanuts on an airplane these days.
Scenery: It's A-plus. The windows are wide, offering us breathtaking views of the mountains. We saw mule deer, bald eagles and a moose on our journey.
During the summer vacation season, Amtrak, in cooperation with the National Park Service, offers interpretive programs in the lounge cars on selected routes. Keith Bear, a Mandan Indian from the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota, spoke and played a hand-made wooden flute during our ride home.
Security: There are no X-ray machines or grumpy TSA agents to get past at Amtrak stations. So, you don't have to worry about having your knitting needles, contact lens solution or toenail clippers confiscated. However, we did have two border patrol agents enter our car in Havre, Mont., and ask us if we were U.S. citizens. (I guess they were looking for nefarious Canadians?)
Yeah, it takes a whole lot longer to get places on Amtrak (the train travels at a maximum speed of about 65 miles per hour and makes brief stops every half hour or so). And Amtrak's overall on-time record is pretty spotty.
But it's a great travel option if time isn't an issue for you, and it allows you to avoid spending time at O'Hare Airport.
“Scenery: It’s A-plus. The windows are wide, offering us breathtaking views of the mountains. We saw mule deer, bald eagles and a moose on our journey.”
This is an amazing statement, last time I was on the Empire Builder, it went through the mountains at night and across North Dakota during the day. Nice planning there.
But yes, it was an otherwise nice 2 1/2 day ride to the west coast.
Beyond that, I don’t see anywhere in the article which suggests, as the headline misleads, that rail travel is “making a comeback”!
Considering what zoos the airports have become - searching Granny and junior, in order to avoid (gasp!) the appearance of Political Incorrectness it would proffer simply to search Moslems - eating a mouthful of tacks would be more pleasant than flying.
On the other hand, occasional train travel CAN be fun, and rather scenic, too.
Agreed. My car has windows, and I can stop whenever I want. Try that on the train.
Amtrak’s capital costs are 100% taxpayer subsidized and its operating costs get 50-60% from the taxpayers even on busy short routes (Chicago-Milwaukee, NE, etc.)
It’s a failed, outmoded and obsolete system with good views.
“The trip was faster and cheaper by car”
And there’s the rub.
Train travel is really nothing more than a novelty in the US anymore.
For the heck of it, I just did a quick cost comparison for a possible upcoming trip: AMTRAK, round trip, was 3 times the cost of flying.
No thanks.
I love train travel. The time spent on the train has to be part of the trip. I have met the most fantastic people from the USA and around the world.
It is relaxing and comfortable.
When I go on vacation, I don’t want to watch the scenery go by. I want to stand and take it in and I want to do it at my leisure.
Train travel appears to be a primarily urban desire that they want the rest of the country to pay for.
As far as training in the USA, no desire.
In 1990, I took the Amtrak from Milwaukee (I live in Racine -just south of Milw) to Williston, ND, to visit friends along the ND-MT border. In early Feb.... and everything you said is pretty true. But since my trip was in winter, and the tracks do go along the highways a good bit, I clearly recall thinking, “God, I’m glad I’m not driving in this weather”. It was very windy and snowy. Now the cost was about equal to that of flying to Bismark, and asking my friends to drive a long way to pick me up. But, I had the time, both ways, and I thoroughly enjoyed the trip .... cuz the cost to me was about the same as a single passenger. Now if we were going as a family, we’d have difinitely driven out there, cuz then the cost of 5 tickets would have far exceeded the cost of driving.
Having said all that.... I did enjoy the train trip both ways.
It’s been my experience on overnight Amtrak trains that the coach car bathrooms, although roomier than an airplane, tend to take on an unpleasant aroma about 24 hours into the trip.
And one trip they overflowed and nothing was done but to shut the door closed.
Unfortunately railroad cars, track, bridges and tunnels are much easier to be come targets than aircraft equipment.
When the Islamic jihadists realize that railroads are far easier to attack they may just wise up and change tactics, thankfully and knock on wood they are in all reality too stupid to think about this.
I would gladly travel by rail, all my life I have had a strong passion for trains, in my early twemties one of my favorite pastimes was indeed rail hopping from Sacramento to Sparks Nv and traveling on a reefer car or boxcar over and through the Sierra Nevada Mnts. Also were the trips down the El Cajon pass in So. Ca, that was almost terrifying!
Where I live in Wasilla, AK we really need a commuter train to Anchorage, my local job is dying and I must commute in the future, my current truck is too much a gas guzzler.If Sarah Palin was still our governor and wasn’t hounded by the liberal press she was going to get the local commuter trains going.
Train travel is really nothing more than a novelty in the US anymore.
You took the quote out of context.
Here, I'll help you out:
The trip was faster and cheaper by car. (Gas was about 32 cents a gallon back then,
There... that should do it....
Now... please explain to us: when do you think we're going to see 32¢ gas again???
And when do you think those piddly little hybrid battery powered Obamamobiles are going to be more powerful than a locomotive???
Of course you will have to buy carbon offsets for the horse flatulence.
I don’t care what they say about Amtrak, I like it. We went from Los Angeles to Flagstaff and it was great! We had one of those mini sleepers.
Now if we were going as a family, we’d have difinitely driven out there, cuz then the cost of 5 tickets would have far exceeded the cost of driving.
Well that's an individual judgment call.
As you thoughtfully pointed out, traveling by train IS much safer in hazardous winter conditions. So for some people the extra cost for the entire family would be worth it. (Don't forget... unlike the airlines, Amtrak offers a 50% discount for children ages 2~15, and infants younger than 2 ride for free!)
For some weird reason, this is the part you see during the daylight hours.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.