3 ms·
The problem is that high speed rail is only cost effective when it is going between two dense cities. If it goes to low density suburbs not enough people will r
by TheCoelacanth 9y ago
The problem is that high speed rail is only cost effective when it is going between two dense cities. If it goes to low density suburbs not enough people will ride it for it to be financially viable.
- closeparen 9y agoWe certainly don’t hold roads to a standard like “financially viable,” and systems like Metro, LIRR, and BART may have their problems but they exist.
- TheCoelacanth 9y agoThat's an awfully loose definition of "high speed". Metro North averages about 37 mph and LIRR about 31 mph[1]. The only high speed rail in the US is Acela and even that is pretty slow for high speed rail. [1] https://pedestrianobservations.com/2015/07/26/why-labor-efficiency-is-important/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2015/07/26/why-labor-effi...
- closeparen 9y agoYeah ok, high speed rail (competing with air travel) and commuter rail (competing with driving) are pretty much mutually exclusive. I think parent meant the later. Tokyo’s commuter network isn’t proper HSR either.
- namlem 9y agoExactly. Self-driving minibuses are a much better solution for suburban-urban transit.