4 ms·

slower than flying on a commuter airline Less security, bigger seats, room to move around. The time loss going from New York to Chicago or Seattle to Los Ange

slower than flying on a commuter airline Less security, bigger seats, room to move around. The time loss going from New York to Chicago or Seattle to Los Angeles would be minimal if you count the total time spent in transit, and the trip would be much less stressful. you still have to figure out how to travel tens of miles to where you really want to go. Same with air travel, except it's easier for trains to end up in city centers instead of airports outside of the city. as opposed to a continuous stream of people on a freeway Which is much more environmentally damaging, and requires drivers. When autonomous, electric vehicles are the rule instead of the exception this might not be the case, but for now I'd much rather take a train than drive.

ivan_gammel 9y ago
>>you still have to figure out how to travel tens of miles to where you really want to go. >Same with air travel, except it's easier for trains to end up in city centers instead of airports outside of the city. With developed network of local and regional lines it's usually more convenient to travel by train, because you just switch to metro or local train on the same station. E.g. in Germany there are long distance speed trains (ICE), regionals (RE), local trains (S-Bahn), metro (U-Bahn) and very good public transit. I haven't find a place yet, where you will really need a car to get there. One comment on the website mentions airport-like security checks, saying that they'll slow down the boarding by the same amount of time. Actually, it's not true - just look at "Sapsan" trains between Moscow and St.Petersburg in Russia. There's, in fact, airport-like security check right before the train and it does not make boarding significantly slower.