Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[corco]

Presented without comment

http://www.i-5slog.com/

[xonhulu]

That's pretty good.  However, I've flown the shuttle before, and I'd rather drive...

[corco]

It doesn't make sense to me- if Seatac or PDX were right downtown in their respective cities it would work, but otherwise you're hassling with mass-transit to/from the airport which negates any time savings or you're driving to Seatac, parking, flying, and then taking mass transit once you get there or renting a car, which also negates any time savings. Plus it costs twice as much to do all that!

The I-5 corridor isn't too bad anyway- the only annoying parts during peak hours are the bridge into downtown Portland and the stretch from Centralia to Tumwater where there's a ton of traffic and it's only four lanes wide

That said, that website is incredibly well done

[Bickendan]

Incredibly well done, but yeah... SeaTac's location defeats the purpose. PDX isn't bad and better connected by mass transit, but still.

[Scott5114]

There's no way you could spend $79 driving from Seattle to Portland, unless you drive a Hummer or something.

[xonhulu]

The I-5 corridor isn't too bad anyway- the only annoying parts during peak hours are the bridge into downtown Portland and the stretch from Centralia to Tumwater where there's a ton of traffic and it's only four lanes wide

Isn't WSDOT in the process of widening that stretch?

[mightyace]

How do Amtrak's Cascades trains compare to driving or to the shuttle between Seattle and Portland?

[Chris]

There's no way you could spend $79 driving from Seattle to Portland, unless you drive a Hummer or something.

With my diesel car and American diesel prices, It would cost me about $ 11 one way.

[TheStranger]

How do Amtrak's Cascades trains compare to driving or to the shuttle between Seattle and Portland?

Looking at Amtrak's website...$29 for a 3.5 hour trip.  (According to Google Maps, the drive would take about 2 hours and 45 minutes if traffic's flowing well.)

[Chris]

station to station is quite different than from driving door-to-door. Additional transport is the main disadvantage of public transport, but politicians usually only look at fabulous station-to-station travel times.

[mightyace]

^^^

Yes, plus with "security" and delays plus time to and from the airports, I'd never consider a trip as short as Seattle-Portland by scheduled airline.

[Chris]

Me neither. In Europe, they say you have to be at the airport 2 hours in advance.

So the trip really needs to be longer than 400 miles for an airplane to be faster. But I would drive anyway, having mobility on location is useful as well. No need to rent a car for an additional $ 50 or so per day.

[J N Winkler]

Me neither. In Europe, they say you have to be at the airport 2 hours in advance.

This is standard advice in the US these days for both domestic and international flights.  (It used to be two hours for international flights and one hour for domestic flights, but I don't think that has been the case since 9/11.)

So the trip really needs to be longer than 400 miles for an airplane to be faster.

Actually, the break-even point is a little shorter than that--about 210 miles (allowing 2 hours for check-in and an hour total for transition between cruising altitude and jetbridge at both ends).  As an example, a lot of people would consider driving all the way from Wichita to Kansas City (190 miles), Oklahoma City (160 miles), or Tulsa (190 miles) to save money on airfare, but almost no-one would consider driving from Wichita to, say, Omaha (320 miles), Dallas (360 miles), or St. Louis (440 miles) for that purpose.

[mightyace]

This is standard advice in the US these days for both domestic and international flights.  (It used to be two hours for international flights and one hour for domestic flights, but I don't think that has been the case since 9/11.)

Of course, that depends on the airport.  Before 9/11, I was able to make it arriving 30-45 minutes before flight time, but it wasn't recommended.  Currently, I've had no problem with getting to the airport terminal in Nashville 90 minutes before flight time plus time to park and get a shuttle.

Actually, the break-even point is a little shorter than that--about 210 miles (allowing 2 hours for check-in and an hour total for transition between cruising altitude and jetbridge at both ends).  As an example, a lot of people would consider driving all the way from Wichita to Kansas City (190 miles), Oklahoma City (160 miles), or Tulsa (190 miles) to save money on airfare, but almost no-one would consider driving from Wichita to, say, Omaha (320 miles), Dallas (360 miles), or St. Louis (440 miles) for that purpose.

Again, personal preference and distance from the airport.  For example, Atlanta is about 225 miles from my house, so let's say four hours by car.  Now by plane, it's an hour to the airport, two hours at the airport, 30 minutes flight time, 30 minutes to get my luggage and 30 minutes to get a rental car.  That's 4:30 assuming everything goes well and there are no delays.  So, it's a half hour longer for me to fly and I'm limited to what I can carry and somebody looks at all my stuff.  And, unless you fly Southwest, the idiots charge you for checked luggage!

Personally, I won't fly anything under 500 miles.

Also, I used to regularly take beach trips to Gulf Shores AL which is about 500 miles and almost nobody flew.  Because of changing planes and limited flight times, the folks that flew would take longer to get there.

[J N Winkler]

Again, personal preference and distance from the airport.  For example, Atlanta is about 225 miles from my house, so let's say four hours by car.  Now by plane, it's an hour to the airport, two hours at the airport, 30 minutes flight time, 30 minutes to get my luggage and 30 minutes to get a rental car.  That's 4:30 assuming everything goes well and there are no delays.  So, it's a half hour longer for me to fly and I'm limited to what I can carry and somebody looks at all my stuff.  And, unless you fly Southwest, the idiots charge you for checked luggage!

The purpose of the trip will have an effect on how highly you value your time over the particular journey.  For instance, it might well be more attractive to fly to Atlanta if it were a business trip, you had to be there and back the same day, and you were being given free (to you) transportation on the Atlanta end (i.e., no need to mess with bag check-in and claim or car rental).

I'd certainly agree that the distance to the home airport becomes a salient factor when it is too long to "kiss and fly" easily.  My parents live within 15 minutes of Wichita Mid-Continent Airport, so I don't have to worry about parking or ground transportation at that airport.  In Oxford, however, getting to the airport with luggage means booking a private hire vehicle to pick me up and take me and my luggage to Gloucester Green bus station, and from there it is 90 minutes to Heathrow or two hours to Gatwick.  (If I have a rucksack I usually just walk to Gloucester Green, but the pedestrian pavements are so uneven it is not worth it with wheeled luggage.)  In Wichita I can begin my journey essentially two hours before pushback (the 15-minute travel time to the airport allows me to "squeeze" the two-hour rule), while in Oxford I have to start 4 hours before if I am flying out of Heathrow, or 5 hours before if I am flying out of Gatwick.

Where road delays are concerned I also have to be much more conservative in the UK than in the midwestern US because there is absolutely no slack in the motorway network--it takes just one heavy shower to cause massive delays.  In July 2008 I flew to Berlin out of Gatwick, left 5 hours before pushback, and almost missed the plane (check-in had just closed and I needed to be "squeezed" in) because of a rainstorm.

[mightyace]

Again, personal preference and distance from the airport.  For example, Atlanta is about 225 miles from my house, so let's say four hours by car.  Now by plane, it's an hour to the airport, two hours at the airport, 30 minutes flight time, 30 minutes to get my luggage and 30 minutes to get a rental car.  That's 4:30 assuming everything goes well and there are no delays.  So, it's a half hour longer for me to fly and I'm limited to what I can carry and somebody looks at all my stuff.  And, unless you fly Southwest, the idiots charge you for checked luggage!

The purpose of the trip will have an effect on how highly you value your time over the particular journey.  For instance, it might well be more attractive to fly to Atlanta if it were a business trip, you had to be there and back the same day, and you were being given free (to you) transportation on the Atlanta end (i.e., no need to mess with bag check-in and claim or car rental).

I'd still want to drive to Atlanta, unless they made me!  Especially since Atlanta has one of the busiest airports in the country, if not the world.  I can also speak from personal experience as my company has business in Atlanta on a semi-regular basis and our employees always drive there.  But, they are often carrying computer equipment and it is much less hassle to drive than to try an get it on a plane.