5 ms·

Passenger rail in the United States probably doesn’t have the same economics as the other places you’re thinking of. I recently drove across part of the country

Passenger rail in the United States probably doesn’t have the same economics as the other places you’re thinking of. I recently drove across part of the country, and it is shocking how much space there is with absolutely nothing there. There is a 100 mile stretch of I-80 without cell service or signs of habitation. If you live in a city, it’s easy to forget that the United States is much, much, bigger than Europe or Japan.

tigershark 9y ago
What? Europe is actually bigger than US. US is less than 10M Km^2, Europe is more than 10M Km^2
- 1812Overture 9y ago
  More important difference is that a lot of the empty space in Europe is at its northern and eastern extremes and America's empty space is mostly in the middle (and Alaska).
titzer 9y ago
> There is a 100 mile stretch of I-80... Logistically speaking, empty places are really, really easy to build rail through. (Politically they may not be). These rail networks already exist, but they are often not dual line, aren't engineered to support fast trains, and there aren't passenger rail options that utilize them. All of these factors are due to consistent under investment because of chick-and-egg and political problems. It's a real failure of national investment. You can Google around but the cost per mile of new railroad track is comparable, if not a bit less, than interstate highway. And there are _tons_ of miles of interstate highways. The US has just chosen poorly.
- ekianjo 9y ago
  You can have way more passagers on a highway than on railroads though. Capacity wise cars are the better choice because its a continuous flow. Plus, they get you where you need to be, not just where the track stops.
  - mark-r 9y ago
    Once you can easily hail a self-driving car at both ends of the trip, where the track stops ceases to be a problem. You can do that with cabs today, but the cost and convenience aren't where they need to be.
  - mercutio2 9y ago
    This is the opposite of everything I’ve ever read about transportation capacity. Trains have exceptional capacity. You can make them longer, you can increase frequency. Cars routinely max out capacity in roadways where equivalent area train systems would have vastly more capacity without breaking a sweat. Last-mile is better for cars, though.
  - Johnny555 9y ago
    No, you can't. A rail line can carry many more passengers/hour than cars, even self driving cars. From https://letsgola.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/capacity-101/ https://letsgola.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/capacity-101/ A typical freeway lane today can carry around 3600 passengers per hour. Reduce the headway between cars to 1 second and put 4 passengers in every car and that goes up to 14,400 pax/hr However, run a heavy rail line and run trains every 3 minutes, and it can carry 54,000 pax/h, or 90,300 pax/hr crush load
    - dagw 9y ago
      The number of areas in the world where you have two points where it's worth running a heavy line train every 3 minutes is minuscule.
      - Johnny555 9y ago
        But, not coincidentally, those areas are the same areas where freeways are at capacity and would benefit from running 4 passenger self-driving cars at 1 second headways. Self driving cars work well with railroads -- the cars can get passengers from their lower density neighborhoods to the rail stations, and rail can take the passengers to the urban centers where their jobs are. It makes little sense for a self-driving car to take a worker from his suburban home all the way to the crowded urban center where his car either needs to find someplace to park, or join thousands of other cars looking for someone else to ride until it's time to go home.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> If you live in a city, it’s easy to forget that the United States is much, much, bigger than Europe or Japan. I assume you mean “less densely populated” (bigger, per capita) rather than actually bigger; it's actually smaller, not bigger, than Europe.
- yohui 9y ago
  True, the continent of Europe (10.2 million km^2) is larger than the United States (9.8 million km^2), but the context suggests wskinner meant a comparable geopolitical entity such as the EU. The US covers roughly twice as much area as the EU (4.5 million km^2), which includes most of the countries we're talking about. If we want to add the rest of continental Europe (mainly western Russia), we might also add the rest of continental North America (mainly Canada).
paddy_m 9y ago
That stretch is I-70 between Moab, UT and I-15 about 150 miles south of Salt Lake City. It's an absolutely breathtaking segment of road. I truly recommend visiting it.
- wskinner 9y ago
  The one I was thinking of is actually I-80 north of Utah to outside of Sparks, Nevada. But yes, the section of I-70 you’re thinking of is quite nice.
com2kid 9y ago
> Passenger rail in the United States probably doesn’t have the same economics as the other places you’re thinking of. I recently drove across part of the country, and it is shocking how much space there is with absolutely nothing there. There is a 100 mile stretch of I-80 without cell service or signs of habitation. If you live in a city, it’s easy to forget that the United States is much, much, bigger than Europe or Japan. Visit China sometime. Lots of space, lots of high speed rail. The high speed rail is incredibly nice to use, puts airplanes to shame. What we need is more large metro areas to take trains between. Over here on the west coast, our largest cities are not even what China would consider a tier 2 city. (To be fair, by Chinese standards, NYC is the only reasonably sized city America has!)

tigershark 9y ago

What? Europe is actually bigger than US. US is less than 10M Km^2, Europe is more than 10M Km^2

1812Overture 9y ago
More important difference is that a lot of the empty space in Europe is at its northern and eastern extremes and America's empty space is mostly in the middle (and Alaska).

titzer 9y ago

> There is a 100 mile stretch of I-80... Logistically speaking, empty places are really, really easy to build rail through. (Politically they may not be). These rail networks already exist, but they are often not dual line, aren't engineered to support fast trains, and there aren't passenger rail options that utilize them. All of these factors are due to consistent under investment because of chick-and-egg and political problems. It's a real failure of national investment. You can Google around but the cost per mile of new railroad track is comparable, if not a bit less, than interstate highway. And there are _tons_ of miles of interstate highways. The US has just chosen poorly.

ekianjo 9y ago
You can have way more passagers on a highway than on railroads though. Capacity wise cars are the better choice because its a continuous flow. Plus, they get you where you need to be, not just where the track stops.
- mark-r 9y ago
  Once you can easily hail a self-driving car at both ends of the trip, where the track stops ceases to be a problem. You can do that with cabs today, but the cost and convenience aren't where they need to be.
- mercutio2 9y ago
  This is the opposite of everything I’ve ever read about transportation capacity. Trains have exceptional capacity. You can make them longer, you can increase frequency. Cars routinely max out capacity in roadways where equivalent area train systems would have vastly more capacity without breaking a sweat. Last-mile is better for cars, though.
- Johnny555 9y ago
  No, you can't. A rail line can carry many more passengers/hour than cars, even self driving cars. From https://letsgola.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/capacity-101/ https://letsgola.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/capacity-101/ A typical freeway lane today can carry around 3600 passengers per hour. Reduce the headway between cars to 1 second and put 4 passengers in every car and that goes up to 14,400 pax/hr However, run a heavy rail line and run trains every 3 minutes, and it can carry 54,000 pax/h, or 90,300 pax/hr crush load
  - dagw 9y ago
    The number of areas in the world where you have two points where it's worth running a heavy line train every 3 minutes is minuscule.
    - Johnny555 9y ago
      But, not coincidentally, those areas are the same areas where freeways are at capacity and would benefit from running 4 passenger self-driving cars at 1 second headways. Self driving cars work well with railroads -- the cars can get passengers from their lower density neighborhoods to the rail stations, and rail can take the passengers to the urban centers where their jobs are. It makes little sense for a self-driving car to take a worker from his suburban home all the way to the crowded urban center where his car either needs to find someplace to park, or join thousands of other cars looking for someone else to ride until it's time to go home.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> If you live in a city, it’s easy to forget that the United States is much, much, bigger than Europe or Japan. I assume you mean “less densely populated” (bigger, per capita) rather than actually bigger; it's actually smaller, not bigger, than Europe.

yohui 9y ago
True, the continent of Europe (10.2 million km^2) is larger than the United States (9.8 million km^2), but the context suggests wskinner meant a comparable geopolitical entity such as the EU. The US covers roughly twice as much area as the EU (4.5 million km^2), which includes most of the countries we're talking about. If we want to add the rest of continental Europe (mainly western Russia), we might also add the rest of continental North America (mainly Canada).

paddy_m 9y ago

That stretch is I-70 between Moab, UT and I-15 about 150 miles south of Salt Lake City. It's an absolutely breathtaking segment of road. I truly recommend visiting it.

wskinner 9y ago
The one I was thinking of is actually I-80 north of Utah to outside of Sparks, Nevada. But yes, the section of I-70 you’re thinking of is quite nice.

com2kid 9y ago

> Passenger rail in the United States probably doesn’t have the same economics as the other places you’re thinking of. I recently drove across part of the country, and it is shocking how much space there is with absolutely nothing there. There is a 100 mile stretch of I-80 without cell service or signs of habitation. If you live in a city, it’s easy to forget that the United States is much, much, bigger than Europe or Japan. Visit China sometime. Lots of space, lots of high speed rail. The high speed rail is incredibly nice to use, puts airplanes to shame. What we need is more large metro areas to take trains between. Over here on the west coast, our largest cities are not even what China would consider a tier 2 city. (To be fair, by Chinese standards, NYC is the only reasonably sized city America has!)