While a good portion of the DE route is through typical New England forest, there are a couple of places where it goes near the water, particularly the marshy area in Scarborough just South of Portland. There are also a number of quaint New England towns it goes through such as the stops in New Hampshire, something you don't see from I-95. Personally I like the approach to Boston, the suburbs becoming more urban, then the run alongside the newly building Green Line extension. But that's just me
Well, overrated is in the eye of the rater, I suppose. The Frazier River Canyon is a spectacle. When the weather cooperates, the Canadian Rockies are sublime. As for the mid-sections of both the US and Canada, the endless flat prairies are a wash, I think. The ice-blue lakes of Canada through much of the Canadian shield area are soothingly pretty. What I think pushes the Canadian over the top for me is the quality of the on-board experience--the staff seem uniformly customer-oriented, and while this is definitely true for some Amtrak employees, there are a non-negligible number of indifferent or even outright surly ones working for Amtrak. And, the food and wine are better on the Canadian than even the best traditional dining on Amtrak, to my taste. So, I will just have to agree to disagree on the Canadian being overrated.
I think he was strictly speaking about scenery, not service
It's not an Amtrak route. (see the title of the thread). It doesn't even run in the same country as Amtrak (except for the new one in Colorado/Utah). It is designed to run only on scenic portions of a route. It's a TOURIST train, not a train transporting passengers for the purpose of getting them from city to city and town to town.
Hey, the definition of "scenic" is strictly a matter of taste. It's possible that some people really, really like looking at slums, abandoned factories and polluted waterways, so for them, the Northeast Regional between Washington and New York would be the most scenic ride on the Amtrak system.
What happened with the Park cars that sleeper passengers are all but locked out of?
I have to say the scenery West of Calgary was spectacular especially the spiral tunnels from the Park dome. Of course this was the old route via Calgary and Banff, I haven't been on the current Canadian.
Since some of scenic America is beginning to look like the backyards of the Northeast, I see no difference. Nothing more natural than watching someone on an old chair in their backyard while they are guzzling a Shlitz.
My reply, I was referring to the most senic routes in North America, Second It’s not your place to tell me when and where I can post a replyI Third I doubt very seriously if those routes you are referring to can come close to Vancouver-Banff Route, And by the way,Amtrak does run in Canada along with VIA Rail and Rocky Mountaineer
senerery!
By that definition, the view from the top of the Empire State Building isn't scenic.
I think it's kind of impressive. You can see more than just the rooftops of a bunch of buildings. If the weather is clear you can see a number of miles.
Oh, I agree. It's just that what you see is not "natural" scenery, as stated in the definition that I replied to. Also, the definition used the terms "impressive" and "beautiful," which are totally subjective. Our hypothetical fan of urban slums and abandoned factories could easily consider them "impressive," if not always in a positive way. And, as they say, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder," and not everybody thinks the mountainous areas of the Rockies are the be-all-end-all in "beauty." Personally, I have a thing for greener scenery than what's found in most of the West, where even the forested areas seem brown and dusty, except maybe in the springtime.
... AMTRAK was made for youI think whenever we see things from great distances we get a different sense of perspective. I think this inspires us.
