5 ms·
Tokyo-Osaka is definitely a prime example where it makes a lot of sense. In an close-to-ideal system (like Japan) you could reach major cities 1200km apart (by
by m_mueller 6y ago
Tokyo-Osaka is definitely a prime example where it makes a lot of sense. In an close-to-ideal system (like Japan) you could reach major cities 1200km apart (by rail) in 4h, 300kph average. For longer distances than that, the plane becomes indeed more reasonable. That means in US terms, you could do NYC - Chicago in roughly half a day by train, arriving relaxed and being able to work all the way through. If you've never taken a Shinkansen - please try it when you go to Japan. I've never experienced a smoother, more relaxing and more comfortable train than this.
- presentation 6y agoThe Chinese ones also feel similar, like they carbon copied the experience, and are (probably artificially) super cheap, so if you visit China sometime I’d recommend their high speed rail too! (The Shanghai airport maglev is impressive as well, though it doesn’t go to a particularly convenient location unfortunately as of when I last was there lol) I’ve taken pretty long high speed rides there, like Shenzhen to Shanghai and Xi’an to Beijing. Smooth experience and makes you wonder why the US is still not doing it...
- lazylizard 6y agobecause the us doesnt have a whole bunch of 5m+ pop cities within 2hours of each other...
- m_mueller 6y agothere are a bunch within 4 hours however, counting by metro population. Boston - NYC - Philadelpha - DC is the most obvious candidate for a dedicated 300-350kph HSR, that investment should be a no-brainer. Further candidates: Chicago - Cleveland - Pittsburgh - Philadelphia, SF - San Jose - Bakersfield (for connectivity) - LA - San Diego, Dallas - Houston.
- SECProto 6y agoAnd if you look internationally, the Detroit-Windsor-Toronto-Montreal-Quebec City corridor is in a line with a number of intermediate cities
- deepnotderp 6y agoBecause nearly every hsr route in the world loses money (eg CRC is 770 billion in debt) and the U.S. lacks enough high density city pairs. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_passenger_air_routes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_passenger_air_...)
- presentation 6y agoPoint of public transit isn’t to make money by fares, it’s to generate value at the destinations. I find it silly how people complain that American rail in general loses money, without addressing the fact that American rail systems make horrible use of the real estate of their stations - in most of Asia there’s huge mixed apartment, office, retail complexes on every station owned by the rail companies - and guess what it’s good for business when you build a human funnel into real estate you control, see how profitable JR/HK MTR are.
- deepnotderp 6y agoEven the Shinkansen lines had a lot of their debt forgiven when they transitioned from public to private assets
- SECProto 6y agoLots of highways and airports and bus lines lose money/exist only because of government support. Being profitable as a sole concern doesn't account for any of the benefits from transportation options existing.
- presentation 6y agoActually EDIT: the experience on the trains is similar, though the experience at the stations aren’t as good - they made them more like airports in China so there’s security checks, and boarding time at gates, so it’s somewhat less convenient; also the stations in Japan are part of the actual city while the stations in China are their own huge plazas disconnected from the actual city so the seamless transition from being in the city to getting on the train in Shinkansen is lost on Chinese rail. Nonetheless, an enjoyable system