5 ms·
(ime) Trains only get you to your destination faster if your destination is a train station
by MiracleUser 7y ago
(ime) Trains only get you to your destination faster if your destination is a train station
- Polylactic_acid 7y agoIn a high density area like a city its basically always faster. Also faster if you are going long distances and can benefit from the 200km/h+ speeds. Probably doesn't work in some urban sprawl American suburb but for more sensible layouts its the best option. Also the best for the environment.
- MiracleUser 7y ago>Probably doesn't work in some urban sprawl American suburb yep, hi. It's also the same kind of area where road maintenance is the highest problem. Lot's of road wear and tear, and not enough funding to maintain properly
- einpoklum 7y agoI take it you live in the US? :-(
- asdff 7y agoDepends on the average traffic speed. Subways go over 60mph and are generally the fastest vehicles in a large city besides helicopters and airplanes, and lane splitting motorcycles.
- beatgammit 7y agoLight rail has a lot more destinations, and most rail systems are designed to complement bus systems. I live in Utah, and our "urban" area (SLC) is similar to many "suburban" areas in terms of population density. We have a commuter line that intersects with light rail, which intersects with the bus system. Rail hits most of the important business areas, and buses hit most of the residential areas, and each runs every 15-20 minutes. If you know the system, you can get around fairly well without a car. It was expensive to build, but it is used quite a bit so it is absolutely worth it.