2008 Woodie Awards
The United States should make the transition from airplanes to trains
Counterpoint
Aaron Fetterman
Issue date: 4/21/08 Section: Opinion
Our planes keep us connected. They keep us flexible. Overall, if we transitioned to more trains, we would lose these things and the cost of a simple flight would rise to unobtainable levels.
The simple fact is that it would be unrealistic to connect every place that is currently connected via planes through trains. In some spots, there just wouldn't be enough travelers to justify it. My uncle lives near the four corners - where Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona meet. To get to the airport closest to his house, we take a tiny, twelve passenger plane that flies once or twice a day.
Fewer places would be well-connected, and it would take longer to get everywhere. Instead of flying through the air at hundreds of miles an hour, trains operate on the ground and their paths have to take things like mountains and rivers into account. Remember this: planes don't only take people, they take our mail across the country, and keep the packages that we receive relevant, instead of weeks old.
There are also extra delays because there would be stops along the way to pick up more people - it's unlikely that there would ever be a non-stop transcontinental trip, and much more likely that there would be two or three hours in delays due to stops to take on new passengers. Instead of taking one day to fly anywhere in the U.S., it might take two days, just in travel time.
There is also no reason to expect that security in a train station would be less than that in an airport. Who knows what you would bring on that train? True, you might be able to bring your own water without the TSA clamping down on your terrorist ways, but if trains were a common mode of transportation, then I wouldn't be surprised to hear of a variety of new bans on what you can and cannot take on them.
Trains have more to maintain. Airlines have planes and airports. Trains have engines, passenger cars, rails, and train stations spread across the country to deal with. It would be hard to keep all these safe, much less modern.
The simple fact is that it would be unrealistic to connect every place that is currently connected via planes through trains. In some spots, there just wouldn't be enough travelers to justify it. My uncle lives near the four corners - where Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona meet. To get to the airport closest to his house, we take a tiny, twelve passenger plane that flies once or twice a day.
Fewer places would be well-connected, and it would take longer to get everywhere. Instead of flying through the air at hundreds of miles an hour, trains operate on the ground and their paths have to take things like mountains and rivers into account. Remember this: planes don't only take people, they take our mail across the country, and keep the packages that we receive relevant, instead of weeks old.
There are also extra delays because there would be stops along the way to pick up more people - it's unlikely that there would ever be a non-stop transcontinental trip, and much more likely that there would be two or three hours in delays due to stops to take on new passengers. Instead of taking one day to fly anywhere in the U.S., it might take two days, just in travel time.
There is also no reason to expect that security in a train station would be less than that in an airport. Who knows what you would bring on that train? True, you might be able to bring your own water without the TSA clamping down on your terrorist ways, but if trains were a common mode of transportation, then I wouldn't be surprised to hear of a variety of new bans on what you can and cannot take on them.
Trains have more to maintain. Airlines have planes and airports. Trains have engines, passenger cars, rails, and train stations spread across the country to deal with. It would be hard to keep all these safe, much less modern.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Chad Bernier
posted 4/26/08 @ 2:22 PM EST
Don't forget about speed. You didn't place enough emphasis on it and related it to emergencies. What if you found out something happened to your family in Boston at 3PM, and you were in Atlanta. (Continued…)
Post a Comment