News @lemmy.world MicroWave @lemmy.world 1w ago

Amtrak's new Chicago to Miami train begins next month. Here's how long it takes, and how much it costs

www.nbcchicago.com Is Amtrak launching a new train between Chicago and Miami? What to know – NBC Chicago

Summary

Starting Nov. 10, Amtrak will launch the "Floridian" line, a new daily service from Chicago to Miami.

The route merges Amtrak’s Capitol Limited and Silver Star lines due to ongoing repairs on the East River tunnel damaged by Superstorm Sandy.

The journey spans nearly 48 hours, with stops in Cleveland, Washington D.C., Orlando, and Tampa.

Coach tickets start at just over $100, while private rooms with added amenities like dining car meals, turndown service, and showers begin at $700. Café snacks and a dining car with various meal options are available.

41 comments

It will never happen now, but I always had a romantic idea of going across America by train, New York to Los Angeles.

Oh well, I guess maybe one day I can do London to Athens...
- I'm actually doing that across Canada next summer! Bringing the whole family.*
  
  *If I win the lottery.
  
  Oh I couldn't really afford it in the U.S. either. But I did think maybe one day...
- You can do new York to San Francisco, LA is overrated anyway.
  
  I lived there for a decade and quite enjoyed it, but I won't be doing any of it because I'm getting the fuck out of this country before it's too late.
- New York to Los Angeles would be a lot easier logistically than London to Athens.
  
  The American trip would only require one changeover in Chicago. The European trip would require a changeover in every country.
  
  Really? I would have thought the EU would have made that unnecessary.
The trip on the Floridian will take nearly 48 hours to complete, according to Amtrak.

Coach seats start at just over $100 for the trip, with private rooms available starting at $700.

Who is their target market?
- The market is people wanting a vacation experience of being on a train.
- The Amish.
  
  In case people think you are joking, I want to clarify that you are not joking. Amish, and similar groups like some Mennonites, absolutely vacation by train
- I guess... I am the target market... I take Amtrak from Savannah, GA to Washington DC (about 12 hours) to visit family at least once a year. This new route is basically the same service, but instead of terminating in NYC, it now goes to Chicago (two other trains still follow the route up to NYC). It's much more comfortable than the bus and way cheaper than flying; it's usually about $100-120 for a coach seat round trip. Now that I can get a one seat ride all the way to Chicago, because I've never been, right now I'm planning a trip there next spring once I get my tax return.
  
  Serious question: How do you go about sitting for 2 days straight without going mad? Obviously you can get up and walk around, but it doesn't seem like the most comfortable way to travel. (Although still, probably more comfortable than an airplane for that duration.)
- Hercule Poirot?
- My family's considered something similar, mostly because of one of my children's allergies that make plane travel more risky. Helps that I have lots of PTO/work remote and we homeschool the kids though. It's only like 26-30 hours for us.
- Nobody except the few dedicated train fans. The government requires and subsidizes just enough that it exists, but hardly anyone actually uses it. If you can fly you do, if not you take a bus.
  
  You aren't wrong, but you are being a little unfair to Amtrak. You always see people saying the same thing about amtrak and other forms of public transit as well as services like the post office. Yes, amtrak receives subsidies, but prior to covid, they had a 99% farebox recovery ratio, i.e., 99% of the cost of a ride is covered by the fare, and the remaining 1% by subsidy. Covid dropped travel numbers across the board, but they are still forecasting 86% for this year
  
  Compared to the interstate highway system, which is covered 0% by fares, Amtrak is performing incredibly efficiently. By mentioning that amtrak is subsidized, you are insinuating that driving is not.
  
  It's quite useful in the one part of the country where the service is good: the Northeast Corridor. It makes traveling by plane downright stupid in a lot of cases. If only more of country's rail were even that good, which isn't even a high bar to clear.
It should take seven hours.

Fucking hell America.

You wouldn't need all the fancy amenities if it actually ran at an acceptable speed.
- if it actually ran at an acceptable speed.
  
  So, a train service between Chicago and Miami via Washington DC (as Amtrak's Floridian will take) is just about 1700 miles (about 2700 km). It would take a train traveling at about 235 mph (378 kph) to meet that seven hour target with zero stops along the way. There's maybe five train services in the world that even get close to that operational speed and they all travel between cities that are like 250 miles (about 400 km) apart.
  
  Do we need high speed rail in the USA? Yes, absolutely. Is a high speed rail route between Miami and Chicago viable? No, not really. (Edit: my phone keeps auto correcting "it" and "is" to "it's")
  
  Also, not for nothing, long distance sleeper trains are actually making a comeback in Europe and Asia... so maybe we're actually ahead of the curve on this one.
  
  Ah, I was using a distance measure from Chicago to Miami by road and figuring it'd be approximately correct. I forgot to account for the detour to DC. If that's the distance than a bit over nine hours would be more accurate.
  
  I'm using 300 kmph as a speed average just to give a bit of error for weird slow downs - in France the average top traveling speed for trains is 320 kmph
- I was looking into visiting a friend in Cleveland from Philadelphia. Basically, it's a straight shot West with hardly anything between. 6 hour drive, but I prefer the train when possible. 16 hours of travel time by train. Our system is so screwed.
  
  I know that the lines are owned by freight companies, so they have the right of way. It's just so frustrating to know that the infrastructure was there 100 years ago, but today, it is crippled by private interests and greed.
  
  It's not just right-of-way but also that they stop in every little town along the way so it takes forever. I've done it from Oregon to ND and it took a couple of days of this.
  
  Amtrak actually legally has right of way over freight, it's just that the freight companies break the law, and no one does anything about it. https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/corporate/HostRailroadReports/mythbusters-enforcing-amtraks-legal-right-to-preference.pdf
- Right. Two days there and two days back, so four days of your vacation lost to travel. I imagine the market they're trying to target with these cheap fairs can't exactly take an extra week off of work to waste on travel time. Meanwhile you can hop on a plane and be there the same day usually for not too much more if you keep an eye out for good deals.
- Seven hours is still way worse than flying though.
  
  Honestly? Not really.
  
  A thirty minute flight takes about two and a half hours. Kayak says that's a three hour twenty minute flight so you end up shaving off an hour twenty flying vs. high speed rail... and that's ignoring costs like the annoyance of having your person scanned and tracked in an airport and having arbitrary limits and costs associated with your luggage. Also, losing luggage sucks balls - and you're never going to lose luggage on a train unless you're robbed. Add on that in a train the seats are designed for comfort along with (thank the fucking lord) the bathrooms.
  
  I'll take high speed rail over a US flight any day of the week.
  
  It's funny because in Europe the math is actually more in favor of flights because security theater is minimal and budget airlines are extremely competitive... still airlines cannot compete on comfort.

41 comments