4 ms·

While airports do scale their capital costs somewhat differently (better?), airports are actually multi-billion dollar construction projects. Here's Dallas' 5 b

While airports do scale their capital costs somewhat differently (better?), airports are actually multi-billion dollar construction projects. Here's Dallas' 5 billion dollar airport expansion plan (https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/dallas-fort-worth/news/2023/05/16/-4-8b-dfw-airport-expansion-plan-includes-construction-of-6th-terminal- https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/dallas-fort-worth/news/2023...), and here's Houston's 1.3 billion dollar terminal expansion (https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2021/08/17/billion-dollar-budget-for-new-international-terminal-at-bush-intercontinental-airport-rising-again/ https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2021/08/17/billion-...)

cryptonector 3y ago
> While airports do scale their capital costs somewhat differently (better?), Uh, yeah: - 1 airport == unlimited direct routes (limited only by the airport's runways) - 1 airport == unlimited indirect routes vs - 1 rail line == 1 direct route - 1 rail line == small number of ind. routes It's really obvious. > Here's Dallas' 5 billion dollar airport expansion plan $5bn buys a few miles of conventional train tracks. Bullet train tracks cost more. $5bn is nothing for trains. $5bn buys a bunch of gates and/or a runway+ at an airport, which can greatly increase capacity. And these $bns are $bns of other people's money if we're talking about trains because they'll never turn a profit. I don't think trains have been profitable ever in the U.S., at least not since the 1880s. Air travel is often profitable for all involved (or can be).