I have not been on an airplane in 10 years.
Any feedback you can give me on your opinions and facts, I would appreciate:
How are rail and air the same?
How are they different?
Thanks Becki
[This message has been edited by yummykaz (edited 01-25-2002).]
I'll try my best:
S I M I L A R I T I E S :
1) Air and rail both get you to your destination.
2) Both receive govt. subsidies (although they are [a lot] less for rail in the US.
3) Both have hubs, and stations/airports.
D I F F E R E N C E S :
1) Comfort wise, trains have more room for people to move around in and stretch out in.
2) Planes travel faster (although some foreign countries have trains which average 150MPH or so.)
3) Rails are mostly laid on land, with some over and underwater passages. Planes can travel between countries/continents.
Other people can probably get more in depth, but I hope this helps!
Eric
Sorry for confusion...I just can't even type "air travel" because I hate it so much!
Thanks ! Becki
Given the time factors post Sept 11, I would say total travel time is faster by air above the 800 mile linear distance. Becki, you'll have to play with that number a tad to see where the breakpoint is ... considering we have to be at the airport 2 hours before wheels-up these days.
Good hunting on the paper, John
quote:
Originally posted by Eric:
I think you meant "Air vs. Rail"...I'll try my best:
S I M I L A R I T I E S :
1) Air and rail both get you to your destination.
2) Both receive govt. subsidies (although they are [a lot] less for rail in the US.
3) Both have hubs, and stations/airports.
D I F F E R E N C E S :
1) Comfort wise, trains have more room for people to move around in and stretch out in.
2) Planes travel faster (although some foreign countries have trains which average 150MPH or so.)
3) Rails are mostly laid on land, with some over and underwater passages. Planes can travel between countries/continents.Other people can probably get more in depth, but I hope this helps!
Eric
------------------
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations
Some more differences:
Trains with diners have kitchens on board for actual cooking. Airliners use pre-packeged meals which are heated up.
Trains offer opportunities to mingle with all passengers, not just the person next to you.
Trains take you through some of the most beautiful parts of the country, and some of the ugliest parts of the cities. Trains allow you to see things you can't from either a plane or a freeway. There's more "real life" along a rail line.
Planes give you a unique perspective on large geological formations (such as mountain ranges), the overall layout of cities, and the like.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Not really that much of a subsidy. The government granted the railroads alternate sections along the proposed rail routes, keeping the remaning sections. The land was isolated -- and therefore worth very little -- without the railroad, and since the government kept half the land along the railroads, they reaped the benefits of their construction.
Differences:
Airports generally look 'safer' than train stations. Airports tend to be newer, and hence are better designed for getting around. Train stations, on the other hand, are often located in 'old downtowns'. Some of the locations are just flat-out unsafe! Some train station locations advise you to "wait in your car" for arriving train passengers, rather than outside on the platform, because of personal safety issues (i.e. thugs in the neighborhood). You never hear that advice about an airport!
Grafitti: This 'social problem' has continued to worsen in the last 20 years. Though airplanes suffer minor etching and scrawls in the bathrooms, it is no comparison to the giant-sized multi-color spray painting you will see on rail facilities and freight equipment.
Sense of adventure: Trains win this hands down. In spite of the troubles listed above, a (non-delayed) train ride is truly more enjoyable than an air journey. There's just more to see!
The lack of PA announcements has been a complaint of mine for a long time in both planes and trains. One time, while landing in fog, our plane suddenly took off again and made a loop around the airport, then landed. We figured that the pilot was not lined up correctly and at the last minute went around for another try, but we were never told. Even after we landed, I tried to ask crew members about it, and nobody would say a thing. I think passengers have a right to know why things like that happen.
What is more likely is that there was an obstruction on the runway or another plane in the landing pattern and the landing had to be aborted when the pilot discovered it. In that case I can understand why they wouldn't explain it, because that would be a severe, potentially catastrophic failure of air and ground control coordination.
If there were severe winds or thunderstorms in the vicinity there may have been a wind shear problem, but you would have felt a sudden drop. Plus fog is usually accompanied by relatively calm air. I live near an airport and in windy conditions I have often seen planes make multiple attempts. One time I hard a pilot on the radio give up after his third attempt and he went to an inland airport.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
A plane aborting a landing because of something on the runway is NOT necessarily dangerous. Busy airports can have several planes a few miles apart coming in to land. Each plane obviously has to get out the way of the next coming in to land, and if it isn't quite quick enough, the next plane may have to abort and go around again, either the pilot deciding to do so, or on command of the air traffic controllers. It happens regularly. Of course, there could be many other explanations, but this is just one possible explanation.
Geoff M.