They are slower than driving except in peak traffic. Caltrain san Francisco to san Jose is about 2x driving time, and on neither end does the train get you into real downtown. San Jose is close but still a 15 minute walk before you get to anything interesting. Francisco is in a relatively shady area near a stadium, also 15 mins from market.
If you don’t have to park, getting to the airport by transit involves switching from Caltrain to BART at a random suburb so as an example San Jose to SFO is 30 mins by car, 1:30 by train. Note the tracks for the Caltrain and Bart are parallel here.
If you mean to say “trains with high average speeds have high average speeds” I’ll agree, but even in countries trying to get faster average speeds it’s still relatively new outside of Japan.
There’s also cost to consider. You can get a fast train Paris to Berlin and it’s 4 hours faster than driving, but costs more than 4x to transport 1 passenger vs a car which can bring 5. The main route is slow, matching the speed of a car. (If you had a family, would you pay 60 euros to drive, 520 euros to train at car speeds, or 932 euros to train faster?)
However the “fast” train is still only reaching normal highway speeds (120-130 kmph) on average…it’s just the roads are so bad google is estimating an average car speed of less than 80 kmph which is essentially like…suburb/business area street speed here in this country.
I’m cheating slightly because I’m considering distance in terms of the direct train. The other is faster but goes another few hundred km wayyyy out of the way so I’m considering that to be the average speed for comparison purposes.
The other fatal flaw in the analysis is that while gas (actually I used VW+diesel) is pretty flat rate, trains can be cheaper off-peak. But I was mostly looking to confirm that the general economics aren’t that different.
Where the us is real dumb is we actually have a shitton of space. Like the whole LA-SF train if we built it would be literally just next to i-5 in the middle of a redneck wasteland…plenty of space to get up to speed, and pretty much no reason to stop between sf and la. But we don’t do it because we suck.
What if trains weren’t slow? 🤔
Wdym? In what clown world are trains slow?
THE LAAAAAAAND OF THE FREEEEEEE! 🇺🇸🦅🛻🔫
Me watching the cars crawling on the highway at 120 km/h when I zip by at 330 km/h in my comfortable TGV seat, playing on my Steam Deck.
Playing online on the steam deck even
The future is now
The US
"Oh no! Trust me. Free market capitalism is gonna bring us so much innovation! "
If I wanted to take the train from my city to NYC, I’d end up spending about as much as a flight and I’d be on the trip for about 34 hours.
Freedom! Prestige!
Amtrak has entered the chat
They are slower than driving except in peak traffic. Caltrain san Francisco to san Jose is about 2x driving time, and on neither end does the train get you into real downtown. San Jose is close but still a 15 minute walk before you get to anything interesting. Francisco is in a relatively shady area near a stadium, also 15 mins from market.
If you don’t have to park, getting to the airport by transit involves switching from Caltrain to BART at a random suburb so as an example San Jose to SFO is 30 mins by car, 1:30 by train. Note the tracks for the Caltrain and Bart are parallel here.
Ah, American trains. Outside of the USA and Canada, trains are fast.
If you mean to say “trains with high average speeds have high average speeds” I’ll agree, but even in countries trying to get faster average speeds it’s still relatively new outside of Japan.
There’s also cost to consider. You can get a fast train Paris to Berlin and it’s 4 hours faster than driving, but costs more than 4x to transport 1 passenger vs a car which can bring 5. The main route is slow, matching the speed of a car. (If you had a family, would you pay 60 euros to drive, 520 euros to train at car speeds, or 932 euros to train faster?)
However the “fast” train is still only reaching normal highway speeds (120-130 kmph) on average…it’s just the roads are so bad google is estimating an average car speed of less than 80 kmph which is essentially like…suburb/business area street speed here in this country.
is the paris-berlin route really that slow?
vienna-munich travels at around 200 km/h…
I’m cheating slightly because I’m considering distance in terms of the direct train. The other is faster but goes another few hundred km wayyyy out of the way so I’m considering that to be the average speed for comparison purposes.
The other fatal flaw in the analysis is that while gas (actually I used VW+diesel) is pretty flat rate, trains can be cheaper off-peak. But I was mostly looking to confirm that the general economics aren’t that different.
Where the us is real dumb is we actually have a shitton of space. Like the whole LA-SF train if we built it would be literally just next to i-5 in the middle of a redneck wasteland…plenty of space to get up to speed, and pretty much no reason to stop between sf and la. But we don’t do it because we suck.
Train should take the German highway to go faster
What if they didn’t have to run on tracks either? And then there could be smaller personal sized versions that families could own too!
why the fuck would any family want to own their own trolleybus