3 ms·

> Trains take you from a place you don't live to a place you're not going to. Airplanes have the exact same problem, but I don't see people saying we should st

> Trains take you from a place you don't live to a place you're not going to. Airplanes have the exact same problem, but I don't see people saying we should stop investing in airports. For long distance travel, I don't think it's a huge problem that you might need multiple modes of transit to get all the way from A to B.

bluGill 4y ago
Trains are too slow for long distance travel. They are useful for short and medium distance travel, but for such trips travel time to the station becomes more important. If this isn't made convenient people will quickly decide their car is better: it goes when they want to go, and goes directly to where they want to be.
waterheater 4y ago
>Airplanes have the exact same problem, but I don't see people saying we should stop investing in airports. Fair point. We should then see if air travel holds a key advantage over rail travel in the USA. As I see it, the answer is in both space and time savings, both of which minimize cost and maximize benefit. The time savings are particularly pronounced, especially over distances greater than, say, a few hundred miles. Happy to elaborate on the savings in more detail, if you desire such. >For long distance travel, I don't think it's a huge problem that you might need multiple modes of transit to get all the way from A to B. That is, of course, your opinion. I'm sure there are tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Americans who will strongly disagree with you because they are, in no particular order: feeble, disabled, terrified of a particular mode of transit, hurried, cost-conscious, traveling with multiple young children, etc.
TylerE 4y ago
Different model. Planes have much greater network effects. Consider a trip between New York and Dallas. A plane can fly a direct route, and will if there is much demand. A train system can’t do that… in my example you’ll end up either going South along the coast and then west through New Orleans to San Antonio, and then back north to Dallas, or the same but reach Mew Orleans via Chicago. Trains work well when there is a large central(ish) city that can act as a hub? Like London, Paris, or Berlin. Not so well in the US where the population is heavily biased towards the outer rim, with a relatively a gaunt desert of nothing in the middle.

bluGill 4y ago

Trains are too slow for long distance travel. They are useful for short and medium distance travel, but for such trips travel time to the station becomes more important. If this isn't made convenient people will quickly decide their car is better: it goes when they want to go, and goes directly to where they want to be.

waterheater 4y ago

>Airplanes have the exact same problem, but I don't see people saying we should stop investing in airports. Fair point. We should then see if air travel holds a key advantage over rail travel in the USA. As I see it, the answer is in both space and time savings, both of which minimize cost and maximize benefit. The time savings are particularly pronounced, especially over distances greater than, say, a few hundred miles. Happy to elaborate on the savings in more detail, if you desire such. >For long distance travel, I don't think it's a huge problem that you might need multiple modes of transit to get all the way from A to B. That is, of course, your opinion. I'm sure there are tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Americans who will strongly disagree with you because they are, in no particular order: feeble, disabled, terrified of a particular mode of transit, hurried, cost-conscious, traveling with multiple young children, etc.

TylerE 4y ago

Different model. Planes have much greater network effects. Consider a trip between New York and Dallas. A plane can fly a direct route, and will if there is much demand. A train system can’t do that… in my example you’ll end up either going South along the coast and then west through New Orleans to San Antonio, and then back north to Dallas, or the same but reach Mew Orleans via Chicago. Trains work well when there is a large central(ish) city that can act as a hub? Like London, Paris, or Berlin. Not so well in the US where the population is heavily biased towards the outer rim, with a relatively a gaunt desert of nothing in the middle.