Cheapest way

Fly vs. Drive vs. bus vs. tram? Quickest, cheapest, safest

Verify return fare even if you are travelling in only one direction. Round trip are often less expensive, for a curious sake. When you travel to more than one town, use the machine's dedicated multi-city locator. Some of my other pages may please you if you liked my low cost guide: What is the quickest, cheapest and most environmentally friendly?

Work out. Fly does not spare you much travel experience if the journey is brief. The only way to fly quicker is to make a proper journey. Keep in mind that your drive is " waste your free hours " - there is nothing you can do while underway. However, if you take a flight, rail or coach, you can enjoy reading, studying, working or sleeping.

This is especially the case for a trainset where you can get an upgraded "roomette" cab with sleep. Night rides are often more comfortable than air travel. That' because the amount of your precious turn on the bandwagon isn't a waste of it. An airplane can take 3 hrs while a platoon needs 11 hrs, but if you sleep 8 hrs in a beautiful bunk on the platoon, then the platoon is a better one.

Kilometres are given as the distance covered, since airline miles are usually smaller than vehicle driving distances. Whilst the fares are relatively low, you have to buy well in advance to get the best fares. Some years ago, when I repeated the check on the fares for a particular trip and increased the turnaround for every trip, the fares became up to 30 day lower - at that point I quit the check.

However, the point is while the fares can be low, you have to buy long in advance to get the best fares. Penalties for last-minute purchases in a rail or coach are generally much lower compared to this. It'?s much more safe to fly than to drive. When 140 persons want to make a 3000 mile cross-country journey, they only need one airplane, but they need 70 automobiles (with two persons per car).

This journey would amount to only 3000 airmiles in an aircraft, but it would be a good 210,000 automiles to drive, because 70 vehicles drive 3000 each. Thus the exposition when travelling by road is 70 times higher per capita. Although automobiles cause fewer fatalities per kilometer, there are more fatalities overall because there are so many more kilometers.

However, although it is the case that travelling by plane is much more safe than travelling by horse, travelling by rail is still the surest way. That' s exactly what you would have expected, because there is no way it will fall from the skies, and if it goes into a wagon, the platoon will have it. In comparison to air travel, the platoon provides ample leg room, no limitations on the use of electronics, ample free luggage allowance (and you can even take a bike with you), a restaurant wagon with newly cooked food, and most of all the opportunity to convert a small twin room into a bedroom.

Of course, the airplane is the last to die. As a rule, flight is less effective than riding. Airplanes get a respectable 43 air mile per gal (pMPG), but they cause 1. It'?s already 10 p.m. above the airplane. What if two humans are travelling? There' still 22 on the airplane. Per capita, 6 per MPG, as we already take into account the fact that the aircraft transports several persons.

However, put two guys in a 23 millipg auto and all of a sudden we get 46 millipgs. More about the environment impacts of aviation and a CO2 Ecological footprint calculation to help you understand the impacts of travel and use. So why use your frequent-flyer mileage as a comparison of risks? A few folks (like De Clarke) say that it is incorrect to use air passenger distance to calculate the risks, because if the ship is halved, the number of accidents seems to have doubled.

Assuming the number of accidents remains the same, but half as many drivers per kilometre, half as many fatalities occur, so the mortality per kilometre is still the same. And if you are sceptical, simply create a table to calculate the mortality per air traveler milage based on any value.

Then, modify the mean "fullness" of the car (e.g. 25%, 50%, 75%) and you will see that the mortality per kilometre of passengers remains the same. Let's say we are living in a really hazardous environment and airplanes are killing an estimated 22 persons per 1000 flying kilometers and an estimated 1 per 1000 traveling kilometers.

The 22:1 relationship is indeed the true relationship in reality, as airplanes are killing many more humans per driven kilometer than automobiles. But in our fake worlds, every 1000 leagues a car kills a single individual, so one of you is likely to get killed, and there's a 50% shot that it's more likely to be you than your mate.

What if you take the airplane? Aeroplane is killing 22 humans every 1000 mile, so on a 1000 mile journey we are expecting 22 humans to be killed. However, on balance there are 140 passengers on the airplane, so it is unlikely that you will be among the 11 killed. This means that the flight is 50% ÷ 15.

7 percent = 3. 2 x more safe than riding. Well, you could say that if the airplane crashed, then generally everyone died, not just 15. That' s right, but the example is still good, because the numbers are the same when it comes to tens of millions of flights a billion mile.

This means that the vast majority of flight types have no problems at all, while on a few rarely used flight types all will be killed, and once the average is calculated, flight is still 3. 2x safe than flight. Some years from now there have been zero fatalities on US airliners, while every year about 40,000 Americans are dying on America's roads, quite rigorously.

Briefly, flight is much more safe than riding. Amtrak rail tariffs and timetables. Google Maps allows you to travel distances between towns. Security: 1949 aircraft accidents and 6 billion flight mileage from 1988-2006 (NTSB, "Aviation Accident Statistics", Table 6, U.S. Airlines running under 14 CFR 121).

That is 103 fatalities per year or 90 fatalities per year if we rule out 9/11 flighters. 21,491 average fatalities among occupants of cars and an average of 1,439,628 million air passenger kilometres between 1988 and 2006, from the Traffic Safety Facts 2005 (PDF), NHTSA. Averages of 718 accidents in buses from 1988-2006 ("avg."), from road safety data 2005 (PDF) and 2006 (PDF), NHTSA.

There were 83 fatalities on the railways in 1994-07 and 168,783 million air passengers in 1994-2006 (5. 9 fatalities and 12,983 million average miles) (BTS, Table 2-38: Safety figures for passengers travelling by rail). Including 1990-1993 figures, the mortality rates are much higher (8.6 deaths/year) because of a large Amtrak fall in 1993 that left 42 out.

Environment: US aircrafts consumed 19,704 galons of gasoline and travelled 848 billion air mile in June 2007 to May 2008, equivalent to 43 MPMG. Some of my other pages may please you if you liked my low cost guide: