Hacker News Reader

Comment by GenerWork | Hacker News Reader

I'm going to be honest, they have an uphill battle. Why would I want to sleep on a train when I could just fly between cities during the day? I'm sure some people will cite not dealing with the TSA or airport security as a reason, but when it takes hours instead of actual days to get from Point A to Point B, people are going to choose the plane.

View on HN

If I have the choice between traveling somewhere during daytime for a few hours or going overnight, I‘d choose overnight every time. Traveling during daytime always feels like wasted time to me, and it’s always a little bit exhausting. During the night I can sleep and arrive at my destination rested and ready to go.

I've taken intercity sleeper trains a few times before, and I'd take one over air travel in a heartbeat if it wasn't so much more expensive.

Beyond airport security, you can arrive at the station minutes, not hours, before departure, and train stations are usually right in the city center, saving even more time, to say nothing of comfort (I personally value an hour spent reaching a flight at five less hours of vacation time).

On top of that, it usually saves at least one night in a hotel!

All that is for European distances though, i.e. a single night spent on the train, not a night and the better part of a day and more.

Yeah it's just too slow AND too expensive to be an option. I've compared between the two before and train was like 4 days and $500 while the flight was 3 hours and $200.

I would much rather take my kids (aged <5) on a train to visit family than on a plane.

I thought that too until I looked at the complex connection I'd have to make (long layovers...) high prices and how long it takes. I end up making the 20 hour drive as the time lost is still my best value and I beat the train.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com