3 ms·
As a public transit advocate, I have to say the sheer expansive distance between cities on the West Coast makes it ill suited for rail.
by sghiassy 4y ago
As a public transit advocate, I have to say the sheer expansive distance between cities on the West Coast makes it ill suited for rail.
- melling 4y ago“Sheer expansive distance between cities…” Perhaps we should elaborate? If a train leaves city A traveling at 220 mph towards city B… How far are we talking before we are too far away to travel by HSR in say, 4 hours?
- labrador 4y agoYes and that's why America flies instead of building high speed rail. Why go 220 mph when you can go 500+?
- melling 4y agoThis argument has been debunked repeatedly
- labrador 4y agoPeople says it's debunked but never tell me why. People are so into their "Asia has high speed rail but America sucks because it doesn't" argument that they don't stop to think we already have a solution.
- melling 4y agoI’m sure it has been answered hundreds of times but every time you simply start over. Sort of like climate deniers saying “the climate is always changing “ How about making an effort and telling us what has already been explained to you? Here are two routes: Los Angeles to San Diego and Los Angeles to Las Vegas. Explain how going to an airport is a better solution.
- labrador 4y agoI'm not opposed to HSR, I'm opposed to the expense. We already have a solution with fast jets so I'm content to let people who travel between major cities pay for the inconvenience of an airport themselves. I'm sure they would prefer the coolness of HSR, but it costs too much. The 100 billion dollars projected is needed to build desalinization plants.