Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel?

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by Erlich_Bachman on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @03:56AM (#20864476)

How does one "work comfortably on the train"? Assuming you are using a computer, or even do anything else intellectual including reading, the constant vibrations and movement of the train places a very definitive strain on the eyes (because they have to constanly work to even be able to focus on what you're looking at) and makes it harder to concentrate. Many people experience the rocking effect where they get very sleepy. The internet connection will just inevitably end up being worse and less reliable, completely off in some areas. You don't have access to a great desk, to a great chair, you are constantly distracted by noises. Dependent on what your seating arrangement is, you can be distracted by your neighbors, even if they don't talk to you. There is very little space, you can forget getting up and stretching well or taking short walks to gather your thoughts. How does any of this amount to "comfortable work"? Have you tried working on a train? It is an illusion that one could comfortably work on one. Even reading a book comfortably might be a stretch on some of them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by NeedMoreTea on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @04:11AM (#20864550)

s/train/{car|plane|coach|tram|bus|bicycle}/

No transport is free of movement or vibration, cars most especially. Far more get car and air sick than train sick. So unless you're advocating never travelling at all, I'm not sure what point you're making.

From my experience of all, train is probably the most comfortable of the lot, with the best seating, most desk space - you get a proper table and even a mains point. You don't get forced to breathe dry low oxygen air, and avoid the nasty taste of road fumes.

Biggest negative is the relative cost of train compared to all the other forms of transport, which speaks more of relative subsidy than inherent costs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by Erlich_Bachman on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @04:42AM (#20864698)

The point I am making, which is clear if you read previous comments I was answering to, is that travelling for a whole day in a train is not in any way an equivalent, productivity-wise, to travelling 3 hours by plane and then working the rest of the day in an office or a home.

There might be other reasons to take trains over airplanes, but "so I can comfortably work on it" is a very questionable one.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by maskros on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @06:13AM (#20865142)

3 hours by plane also includes 2 hours traveling to and from the airport, an hour of security queueing, and another hour of navigating the airport, boarding, and picking up your luggage. All those extra stressful hours are not available for working. Now you've spent the better part of a day traveling, just how much are you going to get done "the rest of the day"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by sokoloff on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:28AM (#20866265)

Get TSA Precheck, carry your luggage on (easy for work trips IME), learn the typical transit time and latencies for security. I can leave my house at 4:30-4:45 for a 6 AM flight (boarding closes at 5:45), reliably make it, have breakfast on the flight, and walk off the plane directly to ground transport and be in fine shape to work a full day somewhere.

You can add hours of buffer time if you want (if you're flying to do an organ transplant, maybe that's a good idea); most people can take a 0.5% chance of missing their flight. (I've literally never missed one, though I've been a few minutes away from doing so a couple times, usually because of my own error, once because of unexpectedly long security lines, even for TSA Pre.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by NeedMoreTea on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @10:40AM (#20866905)

Ideally there'd be a sleeper service so I could maybe do a little work in the evening, travel overnight, have a relaxed breakfast arriving ready for a full day. To me that's miles ahead of getting up 5 hours early with all the mucking about of getting there, checkin, baggage and what not involved in air travel, and almost as ridiculous on arrival.

Personally I've never had issue working on trains, and the many friends who use trains regularly seem to do work well enough too.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by danenania on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @12:34PM (#20868295)

I guess it's subjective, but I've always worked well on trains with a laptop--certainly better than on any other form of transportation. You usually get a full sized table in front of you, and while granted it's not an Aeron chair, I find them comfortable enough.

I haven't experienced any issues with vibration or overwhelming sleepiness and haven't ever heard anyone complain about these things.

The other passengers and background noise are no less distracting than an open plan office, and it could even be much quieter if you have a cabin with just a few other passengers.

A good reliable internet connection is crucial, I agree. I think it should be manageable with proper planning.

Lots of people walk up and down the cars on long trips. You have to walk to get to the dining car, bathroom etc. It's certainly easier and more pleasant to walk and stretch on a train than a plane or a bus.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by GeraniumFusion on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @04:25AM (#20864627)

I have tried on multiple occasions, on anything from local trains to high-speed long-distance trains. Works very well for me. The landscape passing by is very calming and helps me focus.

[ Parent | on HN ]