6 ms·

How so? I can drive to NYC from Boston, that's a little slower then the acela, but then I am not bound to the train schedule. It's more convenient to me. I'd l

How so? I can drive to NYC from Boston, that's a little slower then the acela, but then I am not bound to the train schedule. It's more convenient to me. I'd like to see high speed trains, but it's never going to happen in the US without massive investments. Too many special interests.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
chrisseaton 8y ago
But that’s what I said. You prefer the slow driving option. You said Americans prefer the fastest option then contradicted yourself and said you take the slower one. You said it yourself. Why are you asking me ‘how so?’
- paleotrope 8y ago
  It's like 10-20 minutes slower. That's not even including travelling to the station.
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    I get that it’s slower. You said people pick the faster option rather than the slower less convenient option, then you said actually you pick the slower more convenient option. You contradicted yourself.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > You prefer the slow driving option Trains are the slowest option for 99% of routes in America. It’s a diffuse population that built diffuse cities. By the time rail makes sense here, I suspect we’ll have leapfrogged to regional electric air travel.
  - ip26 8y ago
    Sure, but they could be the fastest. In terms of speed, I-80's got nothing on a 200mph TGV. So "trains are slow" doesn't seem to explain antipathy towards new rail projects.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > they could be the fastest. In terms of speed, I-80's got nothing on a 200mph TGV From station to station, sure. From door to door, it's more complicated.
- enjo 8y ago
  Driving in that case is only slower if the train schedule matches more or less perfectly with your trip AND your destination is very close to a train station. That's not the reality of train travel. You often wait for pretty long lengths of time for the train to arrive and then have to deal with transit on the other end. The in-transit time for a train (just like a plane) must be MUCH faster than driving for it to ever really be worth it from an efficiency point of view. That's why we prefer planes to go long distances and trains in cities where driving times are very high (like NYC). There are a lot of issues with cars (traffic, sprawl, environmental concerns, etc..) but Americans don't prefer cars in general because Americans are stupid, cars solve the last mile in a way that trains/planes just can't.
stevep98 8y ago
> but then I am not bound to the train schedule Trains from Tokyo to Osaka leave about every 10 mins. You can generally find a seat on a train if you just show up to the station 30 mins before the departure. And if that train is full, just wait 10 minutes more. It's just so much better. You're also not price-gouged by making last minute travel arrangements as happens with airlines.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

chrisseaton 8y ago

But that’s what I said. You prefer the slow driving option. You said Americans prefer the fastest option then contradicted yourself and said you take the slower one. You said it yourself. Why are you asking me ‘how so?’

paleotrope 8y ago
It's like 10-20 minutes slower. That's not even including travelling to the station.
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  I get that it’s slower. You said people pick the faster option rather than the slower less convenient option, then you said actually you pick the slower more convenient option. You contradicted yourself.
JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> You prefer the slow driving option Trains are the slowest option for 99% of routes in America. It’s a diffuse population that built diffuse cities. By the time rail makes sense here, I suspect we’ll have leapfrogged to regional electric air travel.
- ip26 8y ago
  Sure, but they could be the fastest. In terms of speed, I-80's got nothing on a 200mph TGV. So "trains are slow" doesn't seem to explain antipathy towards new rail projects.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > they could be the fastest. In terms of speed, I-80's got nothing on a 200mph TGV From station to station, sure. From door to door, it's more complicated.
enjo 8y ago
Driving in that case is only slower if the train schedule matches more or less perfectly with your trip AND your destination is very close to a train station. That's not the reality of train travel. You often wait for pretty long lengths of time for the train to arrive and then have to deal with transit on the other end. The in-transit time for a train (just like a plane) must be MUCH faster than driving for it to ever really be worth it from an efficiency point of view. That's why we prefer planes to go long distances and trains in cities where driving times are very high (like NYC). There are a lot of issues with cars (traffic, sprawl, environmental concerns, etc..) but Americans don't prefer cars in general because Americans are stupid, cars solve the last mile in a way that trains/planes just can't.

stevep98 8y ago

> but then I am not bound to the train schedule Trains from Tokyo to Osaka leave about every 10 mins. You can generally find a seat on a train if you just show up to the station 30 mins before the departure. And if that train is full, just wait 10 minutes more. It's just so much better. You're also not price-gouged by making last minute travel arrangements as happens with airlines.