Me-go: Around-the-World

Around the World in 42 Days

   

Written by:

On travel message boards I often find people asking how they can travel RTW only by land, in a certain number of days or following some other scheme. I stumbled upon this link on Strange Maps today (via onpaperwings) detailing how one could possibly go “around the world” in less than 80 days without flying.

In this case the writer has managed to put together a route that takes 42 days using trains, subways, buses and boats. The accuracy of the details is disputed in the comments but it’s still an interesting idea. I admit I have thought about how this could be done but once I looked into freight or steamer passage from or to the U.S. I quickly decided the novelty wouldn’t be worth the expense. Even if you’re traveling cheaply you have to realize that traveling cheaply for 42 days is still more expensive than traveling expensively for five. And in this case you’re not crossing the most interesting places, at least to me. Although I have yet to visit Russia, the rest of the trip doesn’t look too exciting too my jaded, well-traveled self.

Comments on the post also dismiss the comparison between the proposed route and the “80 Days” route because it stays North of the Equator, saving considerable distance. The “Around the World in 80 Days” route goes through India, adding considerable distance traveling South and North in addition to the increased circumference of the Earth at the equator. Of course, all of this is theoretical, because anyone who has traveled knows that trains don’t always leave on time and connections are easy to miss on the road, even when you’re traveling slow.

2 responses to “Around the World in 42 Days”

  1. lucas Avatar
    lucas

    that looks like cheating to me. i think any legitimate claim to an around the world in 80 days route would need to visit continents, and have a length at least equal to that of the circumference around the equator.

  2. Megan Avatar
    Megan

    I agree. Technically it works but it’s not really the same.