🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <21840@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.011127.553@sooner> dewey@sooner.ctci.com (Dewey Coffman) writes:
>>	On a flight back from Oklahoma City via Dallas(I'll tell you
>>	what, I may not know how to get to Heaven or Hell, but I can 
>>	guarantee you, there is a layover in Dallas). I was handed a
>>	"Travel Survey" by a Market research company, clearly trying
>>	to ascertain the Public's tolerance for High Speed rail fares.
>
>There is a way to figure this one out, and it's done by figuring out
>the times that each choice implies.  But after reading the choices I
>must admit that some of them are unreasonable.  They'd simply require
>too many trains going in too many different directions.
>
>For the questions below, assume that Dallas to Austin is 40 minutes,
>which is just about right.  The average times then are -
>
>>	+--------------------------+          +-------------------------+
>>	AIR					HIGH SPEED RAIL
>>
>>	Terminal to Terminal Time		Station to station time
>>	 15 minutes more than your		 30 minutes more than
>>	 present trip.				 your present trip.
>>
>>	FREQUENCY		    [  ]	FREQUENCY		[  ]
>>	 departs every hour.			 departs every hour.
>>	+--------------------------+          +-------------------------+
>
>Air #1 = 30 minute wait + 55 minute trip = 85 minutes
>Rail #1 = 30 minute wait + 70 minute trip = 100 minutes
>
Ummmm, you missed the main trick. WHERE are the (for example) Dallas or
Houston airports? Where are *most* airports? WAY the hell out of town
(nobody wants to be on the flight path.). Where are most train stations?
Right in the middle of town. So, let's add 30 min to 2 hr *travel time to
get to the damn *gate*, or to your *actual* destination. NOW what's the
travel time? Less for rail. 

I've seen this kind of crap from the airlines before. Haven't you?

	mark