3 ms·

If it was meaningfully cheaper it definitely would be competitive. Taking a train is a more pleasant experience on multiple levels. As far as the ancillary log

If it was meaningfully cheaper it definitely would be competitive. Taking a train is a more pleasant experience on multiple levels. As far as the ancillary logistics, less secondary infrastructure is needed meaning you don't have to go to a designated chunk of land the size of a midsized town that literally cannot be conveniently located, and you avoid the hassle associated with onboarding (read: the TSA). Luggage also doesn't seem to be nearly as much of a hassle for whatever reason. I'm not sure if this would carry over to true high-volume long distance trains, but at the very least the baggage problem is conceptually simpler than at an airport. There are definitely downsides for the passenger, mostly the added time in transit, but in my experience this only matters is when you require quick turnaround and spontaneity in your travel — in which case you'd just take a plane. For a trip that is planned in advance, even a cross-country train trip can make sense, especially if you work on your computer/phone. The main downside is that long-distance train travel requires a sleeper car and a roomette to be really viable in the general case, and this is hard to scale. This may be an unsolvable problem since it's just so much less space-efficient than row seats, but if it isn't I see no reason why long distance rail couldn't carve out a significant chunk of the cross-country market.

bobthepanda 4y ago
The problem is also that high speed rail has quite high maintenance requirements. Currently most if not all networks perform this maintenance at night, so trains cannot run while maintenance is ongoing.
- humanizersequel 4y ago
  How often does this maintenance need to be performed? To be frank, I find it very unlikely that the Shinkansen, with its reputation for reliability, is having repairs performed on track sections at anything higher than a monthly cadence.
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    Not just repairs, but track and tunnel conditioning monitoring, checking the tension in catenary lines, the maintenance of the trains themselves, etc. Is every track maintained every night? No. But: * it is incredibly dangerous for a high speed train to collide with anything low speed (track maintenance vehicles, supplies, or workers). The rights of way are so constrained that there is no safe way to have them maintain only one track out of two, so they insist on total separation as a policy: https://international-railway-safety-council.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/sasaki-safety-system-for-track-maintenance-vehicle-operation-of-shinkansen.pdf https://international-railway-safety-council.com/wp-content/... * the Shinkansen are a two track network without parallel lines of the same gauge, so any maintenance reroute would require changing to either a normal train or to a bus, making sleepers impossible to operate normally. Even if you could though, trains need regular schedules for both riders and employees, and using different reroutes every night would be a scheduling nightmare

bobthepanda 4y ago

The problem is also that high speed rail has quite high maintenance requirements. Currently most if not all networks perform this maintenance at night, so trains cannot run while maintenance is ongoing.

humanizersequel 4y ago
How often does this maintenance need to be performed? To be frank, I find it very unlikely that the Shinkansen, with its reputation for reliability, is having repairs performed on track sections at anything higher than a monthly cadence.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  Not just repairs, but track and tunnel conditioning monitoring, checking the tension in catenary lines, the maintenance of the trains themselves, etc. Is every track maintained every night? No. But: * it is incredibly dangerous for a high speed train to collide with anything low speed (track maintenance vehicles, supplies, or workers). The rights of way are so constrained that there is no safe way to have them maintain only one track out of two, so they insist on total separation as a policy: https://international-railway-safety-council.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/sasaki-safety-system-for-track-maintenance-vehicle-operation-of-shinkansen.pdf https://international-railway-safety-council.com/wp-content/... * the Shinkansen are a two track network without parallel lines of the same gauge, so any maintenance reroute would require changing to either a normal train or to a bus, making sleepers impossible to operate normally. Even if you could though, trains need regular schedules for both riders and employees, and using different reroutes every night would be a scheduling nightmare