Will Obama face a backlash from the airlines for his pro high-speed-rail stance?

[Stinky The Clown]

There is no evidence whatever that he will, or even might, but hear me out.

I hate having to use commercial aviation with a white hot passion. I hate the unbearably long times spent milling about in airports. I hate the TSA pat-down goons. I hate getting x-rayed and i hate standing in a booth while someone can see an electronic image of my winkie. I hate taking my shoes off because Richard Reed is a bumbling moron who attempted an airplane takedown with a plan so weak as to be pathetic. I hate signs that say jokes about guns will get you detained.

I hate full flights. I hate the basic notion of paying for a suitcase to be hauled in the I-have-no-doubt-but-they're-emptier-and-emptier plane bellies; how soon until one is top heavy and flips over? I hate everyone putting their greasy crap on my neatly folded coat in the overhead bin. I hate the middle seat between two sweaty people. I hate ground delays and gate holds where they keep you prisoner in the plane. I hate them adding one or two extra rows to the plane and making the seat so tight (as happened to me on a Delta flight to Atlanta just two weeks ago) that it impossible to fully open a 13" tiny little MacBook laptop.

I hate landing where I am a $50 cab ride from the city I'm visiting. I hate being driven by a cab driver who asks me to interpret the words of his GPS (as happened to me in Nashville earlier this week). "Two blocks from the Ryman. Comprendez vous, senor dummkopff?"

I hate the humiliation, hassle, and just wearying nature of flying.

When I can take a train to get where I need to go, I will do it in a heartbeat. For purely selfish reasons.

So ... add up all the selfish oafs like me, add in the environmentally conscious people who will make the same choice. Tally up the romantics, and add a dash of those just too fearful to fly, and i can see the airlines losing a good deal of business.

Will they, like the insurance companies, fight good ideas for selfish reasons, with deep pockets to pay lobbyists and PR firms?

I think they'd do it in a heartbeat.

[glowing]

1. I'd say it will be like Europe. If you have to go a long distance, take a plane.

When you get on the ground, grab a cab, bus, or metro line. If you need to travel less than 2hrs, take the train for commute. The airlines seem well used in Europe still, I can't imagine they will not be used still in the future. Perhaps minor commuter hops and small airlines will die out, but oh well, times are a-changing and you can't stop progress.. ride with the wave or become obsolete. America has always had a stubborn nature when it comes to changing... but it happens anyway.

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. Southwest is already bitching.

:evilgrin:

[Stinky The Clown]

3. Funnily enough, these days Southwest is among the better carriers!

[DemoTex]

8. Negative

SW is among the LUCKY carriers.

[Stinky The Clown]

14. Ha!

Fair enough

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

17. Yup.

A single aircraft type, no international flying, cattle-car seating, making pilots buy their own type ratings -- keeps costs waaaay down. But even so, because their fuel hedges are now expiring they posted a loss for the first quarter.

[SammyWinstonJack]

19. They fly to Hawaii now. They are the 'flying sardine can of the skies'. Too be sure.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

20. Really? I just checked their web site and saw no mention of Hawaii.

That would be pretty unlikely, since all they fly is the B-737, which to the best of my knowledge doesn't have the range to make Hawaii. The 737 is a short to medium range aircraft, and in any event it would have to be ETOPS-certified, which is expensive. Don't think SW would do that, it isn't their market.

[DemoTex]

7. Southwest, AA, and Continental have long blocked the Texas hi-speed rail.

Now that SWA has the Dallas/Houston/Austin market in toto, they will (as Acts 9:5 says) kick against the pricks.

[ben_jenne]

4. If nothing else you make a good argument

for private jets.

[rurallib]

5. When I was still traveling, I would check Amtrak first

for most of the reasons you noted plus the train was always so much more comfortable and relaxing.
I hope America could move to high speed rail. About as much chance as real health care reform.

[XemaSab]

9. Amtrak would be great

if you weren't guaranteed to get there 6 hours late and run out of food. x(

[Stinky The Clown]

15. I've taken (literally) hundreds of train trips between DC and NYC or Boston or in between.

I remember being significantly late only once. Two hours late on the (then) two-hours-and-twenty-seven-minutes run from Baltimore to Penn Station.

[XemaSab]

23. I've gone across the country three times

Being very, very, very late is par for the course.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. If the airlines are smart they'll invest in the rail system.

Way back in the early days, commercial aviation was a supplement to rail service. You could buy a ticket where part of your trip was by rail and part by air. Maybe that could work again -- e.g., high-speed rail to a hub where you could catch a flight to a more distant destination, which would be cool. I work in aviation but I love trains, too.

[DemoTex]

11. Bingo, VO!

I agree 100%, and I'm an ex-airline captain!

[glinda]

12. yeah and they will jack up the prices too and cut out the restaurant

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

21. its been done in Europe by Air France I believe

If airlines want to spend their own money on this, more power to them. I just can't imagine in the present circumstances this is priority for government aid.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

22. It would create a lot of jobs, which I think is one major priority.

There are a heck of a lot of people who would jump at the chance for these jobs, even if it's unskilled labor laying track.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

24. Are they going to build it like the Central Pacific Railroad in 1863?

Large construction projects aren't nearly labor intensive enough these days to really create that many nitty gritty jobs, although I am sure Bechtel will be happy to take the money. At the peak of the project the Boston Big Dig only employed about 5000 people.

I don't want to sound 'bagish but this seems like an absurd waste of money to me, I can think of many projects more deserving of public support than this potential white elephant.

[madeline_con]

10. Not sure, but a lot of FL environmentalists are not happy about it.

More tourists being shuttled between Orlando and Port Canaveral will do nothing but line the pockets of Disney and the cruise lines, while destroying what's left of wild Florida.

[sarcasmo]

13. High speed rail is the shit, about time a President pushes this concept.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

16. It makes me violently ill this is a higher priority than national healthcare

I have taken the train in Europe and at something of a loss as to what is supposed to be so great about them, its much more expensive than flying, their often delayed and atleast on Eurostar security every bit as obnoxious and belligerent as the TSA.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

18. I am not aware that this is a *higher* priority than national healthcare.

It's an idea that merits strong consideration, though.

[Ian David]

25. Airlines need to start co-marketing with Amtrak and working on travel packages with them.

For example, instead of taking a plane from Boston to Chicago to swithch planes for a flight to Miami, how about replacing some of the "spokes" in their "hub-and-spoke" model with high-speed rail.

For example, high-speed rail from Boston to New York with a flight from New York to Miami.