4 ms·

> Especially out West, for vast areas of the US, there really are no good alternatives to driving ... > And most of the cities are too far apart to reasonably

> Especially out West, for vast areas of the US, there really are no good alternatives to driving ... > And most of the cities are too far apart to reasonably take trains between them. Heh, that's a very USian response ;). That's largely because the US doesn't have proper long-distance trains. In a lot of other countries you'll be about as fast or faster with a train rather than a car, and can comfortably work for most of that time. Even if a 6h car-trip becomes a 7h train-trip, I'd almost always take the train. Compare driving Cologne-Frankfurt Airport by car (2h, if the traffic gods smile), and train (45min). That's a faster track, so not quite representative, but even Berlin-Freiburg on mostly slower tracks - I've done that over a hundred times - is ~6.40h train vs. ~8h by car. I don't see the US getting comparatively nice long-distance trains anytime soon. > For example, there's very limited ability to visit most National Parks without a car. Yea, that's true. I've so far done that with rental cars, works well enough unless you're going in winter... Hm, I should plan a trip soon.

lacampbell 9y ago
You need a certain population density for high speed rail, or even decently fast rail, to be economically viable, don't you? I've had brief experiences with high speed rail and I loved it. Much more comfortable than the whole taxi/airport/plane scenario. Though I do understand HSR doesn't scale for very long distances.
maxerickson 9y ago
The US has a comparable train to your Berlin-Freiburg route. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express Unsurprisingly, it goes through a high population density region. Even a route like this one wouldn't service all that many people and isn't even halfway across the country: http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&route=39.952%2C-75.164%3B40.800%2C-96.668#map=5/40.847/-85.913 http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&rout... (It does a decent job of passing metro areas; Pittsburg, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Des Moines)
- anarazel 9y ago
  > The US has a comparable train to your Berlin-Freiburg route. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express Well, it lags by over 100km/h of allowed speed (and more in practice I tihnk), but then the fast trains in Germany can't use their top-speed in a lot of regions either. The network isn't even remotely as varied. But, as you say: > Unsurprisingly, it goes through a high population density region. Everything in Germany is extremely dense compared to large swathes of the US. It'd not be feasible to have every medium sized city on a high-speed train network in the US. But the situation on the US west coast, where I now live, is really kinda bad. There not being reasonable "public"/rail transport between Seattle<->Portland<->SF/Bay Area<->LA is hard to understand from a European/German perspective, although I see the political perspective of it being hard to do. You really get used to that tho. I recently went to a conference in Stockholm, and reflexively wanted to hail a cab from the airport to the hotel/venue. Just to remember to check public transport: 15min less than by car.

lacampbell 9y ago

You need a certain population density for high speed rail, or even decently fast rail, to be economically viable, don't you? I've had brief experiences with high speed rail and I loved it. Much more comfortable than the whole taxi/airport/plane scenario. Though I do understand HSR doesn't scale for very long distances.

maxerickson 9y ago

The US has a comparable train to your Berlin-Freiburg route. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express Unsurprisingly, it goes through a high population density region. Even a route like this one wouldn't service all that many people and isn't even halfway across the country: http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&route=39.952%2C-75.164%3B40.800%2C-96.668#map=5/40.847/-85.913 http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&rout... (It does a decent job of passing metro areas; Pittsburg, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Des Moines)

anarazel 9y ago
> The US has a comparable train to your Berlin-Freiburg route. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express Well, it lags by over 100km/h of allowed speed (and more in practice I tihnk), but then the fast trains in Germany can't use their top-speed in a lot of regions either. The network isn't even remotely as varied. But, as you say: > Unsurprisingly, it goes through a high population density region. Everything in Germany is extremely dense compared to large swathes of the US. It'd not be feasible to have every medium sized city on a high-speed train network in the US. But the situation on the US west coast, where I now live, is really kinda bad. There not being reasonable "public"/rail transport between Seattle<->Portland<->SF/Bay Area<->LA is hard to understand from a European/German perspective, although I see the political perspective of it being hard to do. You really get used to that tho. I recently went to a conference in Stockholm, and reflexively wanted to hail a cab from the airport to the hotel/venue. Just to remember to check public transport: 15min less than by car.