3 ms·
Absolutely not. 300 kph HSR rail exists in developed countries. (2680 miles) / (300 kilometers per hour) = 14.3768064 hours That's coast to coast in ~ 1/2 day
by Ericson2314 5y ago
Absolutely not. 300 kph HSR rail exists in developed countries.
(2680 miles) / (300 kilometers per hour) =
14.3768064 hours
That's coast to coast in ~ 1/2 day.
Ships and blimps represent a much larger decrease in travel time over airplanes than rail. They perhaps pose a to be solved, but rail doesn't.
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoAnd you can go ecen faster >"TGV called V150 holds the record for the highest speed on any national rail system - it hit a whopping 357.2 mph "
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y agoProbably not during normal operations. IIRC they put more mechanical tension on the overhead catenary, also more voltage on it, and used slightly larger wheels. That was more of testing the absolute limits of what you can do with that sort of system, materials- and mechanics-wise.
- cortesoft 5y agoYeah, but that is only from one part of the coast to one part. You would have to have so many lines to connect all the cities.
- Ericson2314 5y agoYes, but even if we double the time estimate, I don't think that's prohibitively slow. Only with the many day duration to traverse oceans eihtou planes do I get worried.
- sologoub 5y agoYou do need favorable terrain for that speed. Much of western US is not exactly flat, so the costs to build this will definitely not be cheap. More likely something slower and a multi-day trip. I’d still consider a say 48h trip from SoCal to NYC provided I could work over wifi, but otherwise it’s really a nonstarter.
- coredog64 5y agoDon’t look at a geographic district map, look at a topographical map. Or does the solution include a tunnel connecting Eastern Colorado with San Francisco?