Before Covid, I took at least four 12- to 14-hour train rides a year. This year, I took some 2 hour flights. Still prefering the train. (no security checks, no waiting at and running through the airport, less baggage limits, free wifi, no hurting ears, faster (un-)boarding, way cheaper,...)
I've travelled from Berlin to Barcelona for conferences on several occasions. 17 hours, but a beautiful train ride. I love working on trains and it's nice to see the surroundings change. much better than flying 👌
Americans especially also need to understand how cheap it can be to fly round trip from Paris to Berlin if you are ok with a low cost carrier like easyJet. Even with a checked bag it's not much more than the 120€ round trip HSR ticket. I did really enjoy my 4.5hrs TGV ride though. 8hrs, who knows.
Ease of boarding/departing, little security mess, less restrictions on bags, centrally located stations, just less headache/worry in general are pretty valuable to me. Really depends on opportunity of cost of time on the train.
I've taken 4-5 hr train rides both here and in Europe.That was my limit.
Know several folks who have taken the Chicago-Seattle trip and liked it.
Interesting fact: A friend who did that trip had more cell coverage then when he drove 4 hrs from Martinsburg WV-> Elkins WV.
Interesting fact 2: your friend was primarily traveling through the US National Radio Quiet Zone which places severe restrictions on cellular and radio strength
It’s in it. Elkins is east of Buckhannon, which is on the west edge of the map in my skeet. I grew up in the Quiet Zone before cellular. the radio reception was garbage.
Now & then, in winter, the Empire Builder becomes The Trip From Hell, a Mr. Hyde result of blizzards, deep cold, and/or equipment failure in a remote spot. After hours spent stationary without heat, a bus schleps you to a motel in Devil’s Lake or Cut Bank, or to points ➡️ or ⬅️. #SnowyGilligan’sIsland
If the alternative is two hours of flight plus dealing with airport shenanigans, I would prefer the train unless the train ticket was significantly pricier.
Total time equivalence, an 8 hour train is probably the same as a three hour flight unless the airport is particularly well positioned or the train station particularly poorly located, but the train is far more pleasant imo
Have taken 8+ many times and 20+ a few times as well.
I wouldn’t at all mind doing it again. 8 is great if one wants to get loads of uninterrupted work done (2h flight much more wasteful).
20+ is for vacation where the train journey is part of it.
If it was very beautiful, but I think I would have problems being inactive for that long so would rather get off and do something.
The 20h rides I’ve taken have been overnight—afternoon to noon—and then it makes for a lazy evening and morning. Continuing for a full day more would feel long.
My longest was 48hrs from Hanoi to Saigon. Was a little rough. Next longest was an overnight train from Harare to Mutare, Zimbabwe. Scheduled for 9hrs, the train broke down on the tracks for 3hrs, but was a sheer delight. Thanks Rhodesian railroad.
Ive taken an 8-hour train ride on Amtrak. The sad part is that it was supposed to be 2 hour. By the time I got off the train the only thing left to do was to wait at the station for the train going the other direction to take me home.
Thought experiment: what iconic cinematic train-centered scene or conceit could be improved if set on plane/in car? It's certainly not hard to think of some that would definitely be worse off.
I had many long slow train rides as a child in China (e.g. overnight) and still idealize train travel. Train rides can be memorable in a way that air travel just isn't. There's flexibility to let the mind wander or converse with a cabinmate or anticipate what's in the dining car or even hop on/off.
Due to time constraints, not because the train is a worse mode of transport along other dimensions. I would be hesitant to do 8h flights for a 2d conf. as well. I understand the need for those who travel between Paris-Berlin weekly to take the plane but of course that sub. would be most meaningful.
In my experience, 8h on a good train = a full day of work in a relaxed environment. Usually city center to city center, no check in, standing in line, etc.
I'm sure it varies between people, but after a train ride, I usually arrive rested, while flights typically leave me exhausted.
I would have to extend my 2 day conference and add a vacation on to justify an 8 hour plane ride. Too much discomfort, jet lag and cost for just 2 days of conference.
The UK overnight London-Cornwall and London-Glasgow were both 8 hours (they stopped for around 1.5 hours to let passengers sleep). Beds v comfortable, seats ok.
Seeing as I was one of the people nitpicking on your earlier comparison — I have, both in the US and in Europe! European ones are amazing by comparison
I’ll also throw in that while I get your point that flights are still maybe better for business travel, there is a burgeoning movement of people traveling for pleasure through Europe by train. And I’m talking distances like Sweden to Italy or Spain.
It depends entirely on where I'd be going at the end of that train ride. Am I in Vancouver BC? Heck yeah. We drove it last time and it was a nightmare.
Given the choice between an 8 hr train ride and a 2 hr flight, I'll fly. Given the choice between the same train ride and 10hrs of driving, gimme the train.
Probably true, but I’d guess that most of them have experienced (a) an 8-hour drive, (b) a 2-hour train ride, and (c) a 2-hour drive, and prefer b to c and very much dislike a.
Have taken an 8 hour train. Actually many train rides and while the train journey that I did in the late 80/90s was at a time the difference in $$ was huge, I would always fly now (syd-bris) I would love to train to Dunedin over flying - that would prob be 5 hours over a 45min flight (doesn’t exist)
Taken multiple 8-hour+ train trips (gone between Reno, NV and Galesburg, IL a few times). I would take more 8-hour+ train rides.
I’d say if someone can enjoy a roadtrip, they can enjoy a longer train ride. The key with train travel is being able to sacrifice a bit of speed and travel flexibility.
I’ve done 48 hours on an Amtrak and would never overnight again without a sleeping car. With a sleeping car and a shower, I’d go 48h again iff it was through mountains and I hadn’t been through those mountains on a train recently. For flat areas, 4-8h would be my max.
I've taken plenty of 8 hours and longer trains, including multi-day. When I had the chance and had to regularly fo the trip, I'd always catch the 10+hr overnight train Melbourne to Sydney rather than fly.
I'm much more productive on the train than on a plane. I've taken several 1-3 day train trips to attend conferences but will usually fly if it's vacation/family trip since I want to minimize transit time.
Having done a lot of both, I vastly prefer 8h train rides to 8h flights. Even prefer an 8h train ride to a 2h flight plus 2h security and other airport hassles. In particular, when it's European trains.
My job required me to travel to the HQ located in a different city. The options were a 45-mins flight (+ travel to the airport, security, travel from the airport) or a 4.5-hour train journey.
In the end, the total travel time for both options was roughly the same, and I always chose the train.
A lot of people prefer 8 hours driving over a 2 hour flight. They would be way more comfortable on a train. I think the preference of train is not so crazy
Depends on the amount of space/comfort. Overnight Moscow/Leningrad trains with sleeping cabins were awesome (and were deliberately slowed down to give enough time to sleep). But if it's a train with uncomfortable small seats that's not optimized for long distances, then yes, 8 hours is not fun.
As an American who has lived in Europe and taken 8+ hour train rides, I think the key distinction is that I'd rather do an 8-hour train ride than an 8-hour drive if I have something 8 hours away I want to do.
The experience of flying has been made as miserable as possible on all levels, from the airport itself to the actual experience of Being On A Plane. There is absolutely nothing to like about the experience in any fashion unless, I guess, you're a billionaire with a private jet
For a personal trip, I’d probably maximize my time at the destination, so fly. But for a business trip, if arriving a day early for a conference or court hearing, I could probably be more productive working on the train than in an airport/airplane.
I never tried 8 hours, but imho the ~7 hours Copenhagen to Stockholm is better by train if I am alone / I can work / time away from home is not an absolute issue.
The latter condition has nonetheless pushed me to flying the last couple of times not to leave my wife alone with multiple toddlers.
Assuming a similar price, depends on time and scenery. Am I on a longer vacation and going through mountains? Train. Is it a weekend trip and I'm crossing Iowa and Kansas? Flying.
I’ve taken >8 hour train rides, and I still prefer them to schlepping to the airport, dealing with security, being trapped in a small seat, trying to fit everything in a carry on, having to plan ahead/pay for a decent seat, having to get a taxi to get to the city etc when I fly.
I've done a whole bunch and even longer. Did the 14 hours between Seattle and Whitefish and it fit fine into my schedule; have done the 6 hours to Eugene as well. Biggest issue is there isn't a lot for me at all 8 hour distance
Is this about the 8 hour train to Berlin? No fucking way. If it was at night, and the seats were comfy and reclined with a footrest then I'd consider it.
Do you count transfers? Because if so, I went to Rome by train, 14 hours each way with two transfers. The quality of the food at Italian train stations is really meh.
I don't perceive it as cramped, to be honest. The trains were not particularly full, for one, and the seating density is lighter than in international premium economy. I worked while watching the Alps.
Took a 6h train from Rovereto (Lake Garda) to Munich with a bike in the bike compartment last year. Was a really relaxed way to travel back from a long bike touring trip.
Comments
Know several folks who have taken the Chicago-Seattle trip and liked it.
Interesting fact: A friend who did that trip had more cell coverage then when he drove 4 hrs from Martinsburg WV-> Elkins WV.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Radio_Quiet_Zone
At Amtrak levels of comfort, I would prefer an 8 hour train ride to 8 hours of airports & airplanes or an 8 hour bus ride.
Or an 8 hour drive. Done plenty of those, too.
If it were 6 I'd take it every time over flying.
A bit boring, but it had a vibe.
I wouldn’t at all mind doing it again. 8 is great if one wants to get loads of uninterrupted work done (2h flight much more wasteful).
20+ is for vacation where the train journey is part of it.
The 20h rides I’ve taken have been overnight—afternoon to noon—and then it makes for a lazy evening and morning. Continuing for a full day more would feel long.
Unfortunately, trains from the US to China are not very possible and that is my main long distance traveling.
I'm sure it varies between people, but after a train ride, I usually arrive rested, while flights typically leave me exhausted.
https://bsky.app/profile/poll.blue
Love trains though….
I’d say if someone can enjoy a roadtrip, they can enjoy a longer train ride. The key with train travel is being able to sacrifice a bit of speed and travel flexibility.
Since you stated a theory about other people's preferences in your original post, I explained mine, in case you were interested (in lieu of a poll).
Also, there's no such thing as a 2h trip involving a commercial flight :)
Gnight!
In the end, the total travel time for both options was roughly the same, and I always chose the train.
My longest ever flight was 10.
Felt like a week.
The latter condition has nonetheless pushed me to flying the last couple of times not to leave my wife alone with multiple toddlers.
it sounds so confining, so painful