4 ms·
Boston - New York - Philadelphia - Washington San Diego - Los Angeles - Silicon Valley - San Francisco
by aquadrop 9y ago
Boston - New York - Philadelphia - Washington
San Diego - Los Angeles - Silicon Valley - San Francisco
- jandrese 9y agoThe Boston<->Washington line you mentioned there is one of the only reliably profitable lines for AmTrak.
- ng12 9y agoAnd yet somehow it's more expensive and slower than flying (incl. getting to the airport and going through security).
- jandrese 9y agoThe Acela is more expensive than a plane ticket, but the NE Regional is usually cheaper and just about as fast as the Acela. The Acela got dicked over by some NIMBY types pretty hard and doesn't really deserve the HSR appellation.
- ng12 9y agoI guess it depends on which leg you're traveling but I've found flying from New York to Boston is almost always cheaper. You can get a flight from LGA to BOS two weeks ahead of time for under $60.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- seanmcdirmid 9y agoCalifornia is not nearly as dense as the area along the Tokaido line. More to the point, those cities aren’t as integrated as the eastern Boston-DC megapolis.
- aquadrop 9y agoIt doesn't need to be just as dense, it has enough people. SF area and LA have massive growing population and economy, don't you think high speed train connecting those in under 2 hours would have enough ridership?
- deaddodo 9y agoThere's no way you're connecting San Diego to San Francisco directly via 323mi of track, let alone via LA and SJ/MV. That's a 520-550mi ride, buddy.
- aquadrop 9y agoYou can drop San Diego, even that would be enough, pal.
- deaddodo 9y agoStill over the limit by about 70mi, friend. And you cut out the second largest city in the state, to do so.
- aquadrop 9y agoDepends on how you define 'connecting' cities, and we aren't talking about rigid boundaries on the railroad, just "comparable". And LA->SF route has enough people to be profitable, mate.