Amtrak's next-gen Acela train: “Wi-Fi, craft beers and reliable schedules” | Hacker News Reader

Amtrak's next-gen Acela train: “Wi-Fi, craft beers and reliable schedules”

cbsnews.com

25 pointsShelnutt219 comments

The improved performance and amenities from better Acela will translate into more profits for Amtrak to improve the other lines that run. For Amtrak, I can arrive 5 minutes before it leaves, have plenty of space in my seat, food that's a lot better then airlines, and walk around when I want to which is so much better then the airplane experience. I can't wait for the new trains to come.

I've never taken Amtrak, but from what I understand, it's not that great outside the northeast megalopolis. Every time I've looked at their site, it's always been only barely cheaper than flying and often has no trains to a destination I search. Especially if that destination is not a huge city

"Cheaper" isn't a huge component of Amtrak's value proposition. It's usually slightly cheaper than flying, but not much.

The reason to take the train (for me) is that it tends to be much more comfortable and lower-stress than flying or driving. Sometimes it's faster than flying (over short distances).

There are many factors that can spoil this value prop - delays, crowded cars, lack of connectors requiring bus transfers, all of which happen with regularity. Even so, I'll always prefer taking a train over flying and driving as long as it's convenient to do so.

> Former Delta Airlines CEO, Richard Anderson, now runs Amtrak. He said the new Acela is "incredibly important" to the future of the company.

> "It really lays out a clear vision for what short haul, inter-city passenger rail transportation can do for this country. And this country is going to need it in more and more corridors because millennials don't want to drive and you cannot add enough lane miles for 100 million more people," Anderson said.

I was in a bind the other day and needed to travel ~30 miles between two midwest cities (on the Texas Eagle train). Grandmother drove to hospital, I drove her and her car home, and then grabbed an Amtrak ticket (on Amtrak.com, excellent purchase UX) back to the hospital to get my car; total cost was $8.50 and I didn't even need to present my ticket to the conductor at boarding, just my last name. National treasure.

Do trains have an uphill battle in car and air travel centric America? Most definitely. But the value is there, and this article explains why that value should be nurtured and grown.

>Do trains have an uphill battle in car and air travel centric America? Most definitely

Figuratively and literally (because trains have a much harder time going uphill than cars)

The one advantage I've heard about taking the train is that prices are usually flat. If you need to book a trip the next day you will pay through the nose for most airfare. Train trips on the other hand will mostly be the same price no matter when you book. Aside from that small exception, air travel is MUCH faster/cheaper/convenient.

I have taken probably 15 Acela rounds trips in the last 3 years between Boston and NYC for work and I personally find it more convenient than flight travel.

In my case, it's easier for me to get to South Station in Boston than to get to Logan Airport. The seats and accommodations are much better on a train, much less stressful and easier boarding process (and I have precheck). I have never had an issue finding overheard space. Once in NYC, it's also easier to get to the part of Manhattan that I need to than any NYC airport. Flying is still a little faster, but my employer encourages we travel during work hours, so I don't mind the extra time for the better experience.

Obviously if I was going all the way to DC from Boston, it would't make as much sense, but since NYC is close enough, speed is basically a wash.

Next-day train tickets do increase in price, particularly on these Acela lines. However you do escape the aggressively hyperoptimized pricing for airlines, and fares become flat once you're booking about a week ahead.

Outside the Northeast Corridor, you're absolutely right, it's not great.

Acela runs inside the Northeast Corridor, however, and for that market even the current version is pretty compelling. I take it periodically to travel between DC and NYC; it costs approximately the same as flying, but offers wide seats with built-in power sockets, lets you get up and stretch your legs if you want to, and doesn't require you to run the ridiculous security gauntlet that's mandatory at airports. Plus it drops you right in midtown Manhattan, so if you're there on business getting to where you probably want to go is easier and cheaper than it would be from an airport.

The main downsides are that it's a little slower than flying (though if you include time spent dealing with airport security the difference narrows), the trains are starting to show their age a little, and in NYC they drop you at Penn Station, which is a structure straight out of Dante's Inferno. New, faster trains would help ameliorate two of these three problems. (I'm not sure anything could be done to improve Penn Station, except maybe burning it to the ground and salting the earth it stood on.)

I took the NE Regional last weekend and I was honestly really impressed. The WiFi was fast enough, seat was comfortable and it was remarkably on time.

I'm planning a trip to NYC in a few weeks and I realized that LGA to midtown Manhattan costs about $50 via UberX each way the Acela ends up being as expensive or cheaper while still being faster!

Yeah, the Northeast Regional is a little slower than Acela, and the train cabins are a little dowdier, but other than that it's not bad either. And it can be significantly cheaper than Acela, so if you're not tightly scheduled it can be very attractive.

Yeah, flying in and out of NYC is a total PITA because there's no decent public transit to the airports, unlike in better-laid-out cities.

The Cascades line in the PNW is top notch. Taking the train from Vancouver to Seattle/Portland is a far better experience than flying or driving. Wifi, big seats with lots of legroom, easy customs, dining car, train leaves and arrives downtown - I highly recommend it.

Amtrak between LA and San Diego (and even Santa Barbara) is very convenient if your destination is within walking/biking/bus/trolley range of downtown.

It isn't for everyone. If you are traveling with a bicycle or other heavy luggage it makes sense. For the same price as a plane ticket + bicycle charges you could get a room on Amtrak. This makes even more sense if you are a bicycling couple.

You can sit in your private compartment and drink your own bottle. When you arrive you are already downtown with your own bicycle.

As someone who commutes on the shared train lines used for the NYC to DC route I for-see more delays for my commute to make the reliability numbers go up. Screw over the many for the benefit of a few... Many being the normal more commuters out of New York Penn Station.

Amtrak is already proceeding on a new tunnel project under the Hudson[0] independent of the Gateway project, (edit: and has funding independent of the federal government). The real question is if elected officials can get on the same page with the interstate Gateway project.

[0]: https://nec.amtrak.com/project/the-hudson-tunnel-project/

It is still owned by Amtrak, which means that normal commuters will still get the short end of the stick over Amtrak customers like normal. Any one that takes NJTransit during rush hour knows just how little Amtrak cares about commuters. For those who don't. They on a regular basis posted track numbers for two rush hour trains leaving within 5 mins on the same track pair. This leaves more than 300 people rushing down the same 3 stairwells.

When I took the Acela a few times this year, I was surprised to see only Dunkin Donuts coffee served. I would expect Starbucks or better on a train marketed towards an upscale crowd.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com