3 ms·
While it's true that if you are connecting a completely disconnected city to a network then you'll need to lay some new track to ensure you can get there to the
by smcl 4y ago
While it's true that if you are connecting a completely disconnected city to a network then you'll need to lay some new track to ensure you can get there to the intended destinations. But if you're connecting it to N cities you won't need to lay N new lines, you might get away with a couple. There may be reasons to add or update infrastucture, but not every pair of connected cities needs its own dedicated track
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> if you're connecting it to N cities you won't need to lay N new lines, you might get away with a couple Trains accelerate slowly. Adding stops non-linearly increases travel time [1]. A few extra stops might thus make total travel time by train meaningfully more than by air. [1] https://blog.bimajority.org/2018/10/20/interlude-physics-of-train-acceleration/ https://blog.bimajority.org/2018/10/20/interlude-physics-of-...
- smcl 4y agoWell yeah it's not the case that one can add a single line to connect a completely new destination to an existing rail network and everything will scale perfectly, but I didn't claim that. And as long as we're talking in abstract we can construct scenarios where one is faster or better. However my read the original comment was that that adding a new connection involves adding new infrastructure, which isn't always true. See the new European overnight routes that opened up post-Covid and which operate on the existing track