6 ms·

Wow, this is depressing. For comparison, here's Germany's: http://www.apps-bahn.de/bin/livemap/query-livemap.exe/dn?L=vs_livefahrplan&livemap=yes http://www.a

Wow, this is depressing. For comparison, here's Germany's: http://www.apps-bahn.de/bin/livemap/query-livemap.exe/dn?L=vs_livefahrplan&livemap=yes http://www.apps-bahn.de/bin/livemap/query-livemap.exe/dn?L=v... (might need to zoom in to see more trains)

SilasX 8y ago
I don't know, the /query-livemap.exe/ bit is also a little depressing...
- crooked-v 8y ago
  At least it's not a JS script being used as a CGI executable.
rayiner 8y ago
Not really. In terms of density, the only part of the U.S. comparable to Germany (600 people per square mile) is the northeast megalopolis (900 people per square mile). Also, your map includes regional trains, while the Amtrak map is just inter-city. This is a more appropriate point of comparison: https://4194e6d9-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/northeastrailmap/Northeast_Rail_Map_2014-12-29.png?attachauth=ANoY7cqyBCSOnE9TzEzq6kJ4XdUvKVREN65Htw55NvMFavebEqmPl9KmEjUG9dCN69_xhWDMSOCODqRQfzshYvnO02A0wYtd1IwoPa0vSvBapIojSvefH_n_ceGS6LIeHc91nhDdSIwLglIlk3lNMmamt3eJuN6lW0iYDGCx3jbo-mcgKpowYEYXYvRkanYFSiDoqoeJmbfaRkrdN6fSFhLbxqaxaBMeTt1GBhAHmX2TBg-fiOyCVMHh7rFb_jz7Y5cEjDFxQuMU&attredirects=0 https://4194e6d9-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/no.... (Note that the middle of Pennsylvania, or upstate New York, or almost all of Virginia are not part of the northeast megalopolis: http://statchatva.org/files/2015/11/Northeast-Corridor2-991x1024.jpg http://statchatva.org/files/2015/11/Northeast-Corridor2-991x...).
- ucaetano 8y ago
  > the only part of the U.S. comparable to Germany (600 people per square mile) is the northeast megalopolis (900 people per square mile) Which has >50M people, 2/3 of the population of Germany. In that comparison, that region should have then 2/3 of the rail network of Germany. It has 1 medium-speed rail line. > while the Amtrak map is just inter-city The Capitol Corridor, for example, is comparable to a Regio train in Germany (but slower, shittier, etc.).
  - rayiner 8y ago
    > Which has >50M people, 2/3 of the population of Germany. In that comparison, that region should have then 2/3 of the rail network of Germany. It has 1 medium-speed rail line. What the U.S. also has is 275 million other people who (1) won't benefit from such a rail network; and (2) won't vote to fund it; (3) will condition any support of Amtrak on useless long-distance routes through low-density regions that sap money away from the only corridor in the U.S. where rail makes sense. And it's a completely rational decision for those people.
    - ucaetano 8y ago
      Oh, sure, I'm very familiar with the problems. That's why it is depressing. And it isn't even a rational decision for those people, the economic gains would largely outweigh the costs, being a net-positive for the rest of the country.
      - rayiner 8y ago
        Even if that's true (which I'm not sure about), would economic gains from high-speed rail between New York and DC accrue to a taxpayer in Kansas? Or would a taxpayer in Kansas be bankrolling increased prosperity in a far-off part of the country that's already well off?
        ucaetano 8y ago
        > would economic gains from high-speed rail between New York and DC accrue to a taxpayer in Kansas? Yes, because that economic gain would translate into more taxes, which would be applied across the rest of the country, funding, for example, infrastructure in Kansas. Of course, that's assuming a reasonable government...
        nashashmi 8y ago
        There is a website somewhere that says how much benefit each state gets from the federal government versus how much their people put in. Half the states lose money. And half gain. And all those gaining states have low density. While all the losing states are in the North East.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jorblumesea 8y ago
Germany is a small, dense country, which makes it easier and cheaper to invest in mass transit infrastructure. The US doesn't really need it, outside of California and Eastern Corridor. For most of the US it's an apples/oranges comparison. I'm a huge fan of the US building more mass transit and infrastructure in general, but we have different problems and needs compared to smaller European nations.
- at-fates-hands 8y ago
  I remember my German professor saying the same thing. His evidence was pretty simple: "You can drive from Northern Germany to Southern Germany in 8-9 hours. It takes about the same amount of time to drive from Northern Minnesota to Southern Minnesota. Let that sink in a bit." The other major issue with mass transit is the longer you wait to build the infrastructure, the cost per foot of track continues to go up. Seattle has a long history with light rail cost overruns.
mkempe 8y ago
For our American friends who constantly claim that the USA is unique because of its size, or because of lower population density (whether the subject is Internet connectivity or railroads) -- Europe is 33% larger than the USA (contiguous 48); Finland has 16 people/km2, Sweden 23/km2, USA 33/km2, California 97/km2; Sweden is slightly larger than California, Finland is slightly smaller. No excuses.
- peterwwillis 8y ago
  Have you ever tried to go from New York to San Francisco? It's the same distance as driving from Porto, Portugal to Abisko, Sweden. You go through 8 countries. Or Porto to Mariupol, Ukraine, in only 7 countries. It's faster in the US, through 10 states as big as European countries. We have more people stretched out over more land with more varying regions with more varying needs and costs with more conservative social, political and economic values. Nearly all of our trade involves trucking and cargo ships, with freight making up the raw material shipping that isn't time sensitive. It makes no financial sense whatsoever to fund railroads. We have extensive interstate highways and most of our people have cars. Why pay for a railroad the size of Europe when you don't have to go all over Europe, and all your needs are met via the existing shipping mechanisms? What would be the point? If you took our cars away, maybe it would make sense, maybe. But before we pay for railroads we might need to pay for our health care or education.
  - mkempe 8y ago
    Indeed, I've travelled from NY to SF in both directions by road, rail, and air. The only experience that was much worse than my travels in Europe and Japan was by rail (namely Amtrak). There are more people in Europe, there is more land in Europe, etc. Stop with the fake excuses. Europeans enjoy all of it: cars, trains, and airplanes. The simple fact is that North America is lame and deficient in passenger rail transportation compared to Europe and East Asia, and the comparison keeps getting worse.
    - hueving 8y ago
      >There are more people in Europe Well duh. The key to making trains useful is having people focused in heavily populated areas. If the US were like Europe, some heavily built rail in the Midwest would cover the vast majority of the population. Look at this map to put in perspective how much more rail would be required to connect together the major population centers of the US. https://becovegan.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/europe-us-overlay-map.jpg https://becovegan.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/europe-us-over...
minikomi 8y ago
Here's Japan's: http://www.demap.info/tetsudonow/ http://www.demap.info/tetsudonow/
influx 8y ago
Just got back from Germany, and adored the trains. Everyone, including the passengers worked together to make the schedule on time by getting up, smartly grabbing their bags and getting off at the stop without loitering. That said, the website for buying tickets was atrociously bad. We had a group of six and the website was full of bugs and broken for tickets with more than five people. You essentially have to do one ticket with 5 and one with 1. We even went to the gate agent for help and they had similar problems.

SilasX 8y ago

I don't know, the /query-livemap.exe/ bit is also a little depressing...

crooked-v 8y ago
At least it's not a JS script being used as a CGI executable.

rayiner 8y ago

Not really. In terms of density, the only part of the U.S. comparable to Germany (600 people per square mile) is the northeast megalopolis (900 people per square mile). Also, your map includes regional trains, while the Amtrak map is just inter-city. This is a more appropriate point of comparison: https://4194e6d9-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/northeastrailmap/Northeast_Rail_Map_2014-12-29.png?attachauth=ANoY7cqyBCSOnE9TzEzq6kJ4XdUvKVREN65Htw55NvMFavebEqmPl9KmEjUG9dCN69_xhWDMSOCODqRQfzshYvnO02A0wYtd1IwoPa0vSvBapIojSvefH_n_ceGS6LIeHc91nhDdSIwLglIlk3lNMmamt3eJuN6lW0iYDGCx3jbo-mcgKpowYEYXYvRkanYFSiDoqoeJmbfaRkrdN6fSFhLbxqaxaBMeTt1GBhAHmX2TBg-fiOyCVMHh7rFb_jz7Y5cEjDFxQuMU&attredirects=0 https://4194e6d9-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/no.... (Note that the middle of Pennsylvania, or upstate New York, or almost all of Virginia are not part of the northeast megalopolis: http://statchatva.org/files/2015/11/Northeast-Corridor2-991x1024.jpg http://statchatva.org/files/2015/11/Northeast-Corridor2-991x...).

ucaetano 8y ago
> the only part of the U.S. comparable to Germany (600 people per square mile) is the northeast megalopolis (900 people per square mile) Which has >50M people, 2/3 of the population of Germany. In that comparison, that region should have then 2/3 of the rail network of Germany. It has 1 medium-speed rail line. > while the Amtrak map is just inter-city The Capitol Corridor, for example, is comparable to a Regio train in Germany (but slower, shittier, etc.).
- rayiner 8y ago
  > Which has >50M people, 2/3 of the population of Germany. In that comparison, that region should have then 2/3 of the rail network of Germany. It has 1 medium-speed rail line. What the U.S. also has is 275 million other people who (1) won't benefit from such a rail network; and (2) won't vote to fund it; (3) will condition any support of Amtrak on useless long-distance routes through low-density regions that sap money away from the only corridor in the U.S. where rail makes sense. And it's a completely rational decision for those people.
  - ucaetano 8y ago
    Oh, sure, I'm very familiar with the problems. That's why it is depressing. And it isn't even a rational decision for those people, the economic gains would largely outweigh the costs, being a net-positive for the rest of the country.
    - rayiner 8y ago
      Even if that's true (which I'm not sure about), would economic gains from high-speed rail between New York and DC accrue to a taxpayer in Kansas? Or would a taxpayer in Kansas be bankrolling increased prosperity in a far-off part of the country that's already well off?
      - ucaetano 8y ago
        > would economic gains from high-speed rail between New York and DC accrue to a taxpayer in Kansas? Yes, because that economic gain would translate into more taxes, which would be applied across the rest of the country, funding, for example, infrastructure in Kansas. Of course, that's assuming a reasonable government...
      - nashashmi 8y ago
        There is a website somewhere that says how much benefit each state gets from the federal government versus how much their people put in. Half the states lose money. And half gain. And all those gaining states have low density. While all the losing states are in the North East.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

jorblumesea 8y ago

Germany is a small, dense country, which makes it easier and cheaper to invest in mass transit infrastructure. The US doesn't really need it, outside of California and Eastern Corridor. For most of the US it's an apples/oranges comparison. I'm a huge fan of the US building more mass transit and infrastructure in general, but we have different problems and needs compared to smaller European nations.

at-fates-hands 8y ago
I remember my German professor saying the same thing. His evidence was pretty simple: "You can drive from Northern Germany to Southern Germany in 8-9 hours. It takes about the same amount of time to drive from Northern Minnesota to Southern Minnesota. Let that sink in a bit." The other major issue with mass transit is the longer you wait to build the infrastructure, the cost per foot of track continues to go up. Seattle has a long history with light rail cost overruns.

mkempe 8y ago

For our American friends who constantly claim that the USA is unique because of its size, or because of lower population density (whether the subject is Internet connectivity or railroads) -- Europe is 33% larger than the USA (contiguous 48); Finland has 16 people/km2, Sweden 23/km2, USA 33/km2, California 97/km2; Sweden is slightly larger than California, Finland is slightly smaller. No excuses.

peterwwillis 8y ago
Have you ever tried to go from New York to San Francisco? It's the same distance as driving from Porto, Portugal to Abisko, Sweden. You go through 8 countries. Or Porto to Mariupol, Ukraine, in only 7 countries. It's faster in the US, through 10 states as big as European countries. We have more people stretched out over more land with more varying regions with more varying needs and costs with more conservative social, political and economic values. Nearly all of our trade involves trucking and cargo ships, with freight making up the raw material shipping that isn't time sensitive. It makes no financial sense whatsoever to fund railroads. We have extensive interstate highways and most of our people have cars. Why pay for a railroad the size of Europe when you don't have to go all over Europe, and all your needs are met via the existing shipping mechanisms? What would be the point? If you took our cars away, maybe it would make sense, maybe. But before we pay for railroads we might need to pay for our health care or education.
- mkempe 8y ago
  Indeed, I've travelled from NY to SF in both directions by road, rail, and air. The only experience that was much worse than my travels in Europe and Japan was by rail (namely Amtrak). There are more people in Europe, there is more land in Europe, etc. Stop with the fake excuses. Europeans enjoy all of it: cars, trains, and airplanes. The simple fact is that North America is lame and deficient in passenger rail transportation compared to Europe and East Asia, and the comparison keeps getting worse.
  - hueving 8y ago
    >There are more people in Europe Well duh. The key to making trains useful is having people focused in heavily populated areas. If the US were like Europe, some heavily built rail in the Midwest would cover the vast majority of the population. Look at this map to put in perspective how much more rail would be required to connect together the major population centers of the US. https://becovegan.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/europe-us-overlay-map.jpg https://becovegan.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/europe-us-over...

minikomi 8y ago

Here's Japan's: http://www.demap.info/tetsudonow/ http://www.demap.info/tetsudonow/

influx 8y ago

Just got back from Germany, and adored the trains. Everyone, including the passengers worked together to make the schedule on time by getting up, smartly grabbing their bags and getting off at the stop without loitering. That said, the website for buying tickets was atrociously bad. We had a group of six and the website was full of bugs and broken for tickets with more than five people. You essentially have to do one ticket with 5 and one with 1. We even went to the gate agent for help and they had similar problems.