View Single Post
Old 02-17-2010, 08:31 PM   #20
CiccoineFed

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
536
Senior Member
Default
Even at 200 MPH, a NON STOP trip from NY to Cali would still take 18 hours to get across, compared to 3 hours on a plane.
3 hours? What are you taking?

It's a big country. Why use a cross-country trip as the standard? For trips under 1000 miles, rail is competitive with air travel, since the travel time to and security time spent at the airport is a significant percentage of the time you're actually in the air.

Oddly enough, the one thing Trains can market as being more advantageous was as I said before, bringing your own vehicle with you. Strictly a niche market; would not generate enough ridership to spur passenger rail development. I could not see the extra expense of having my car hauled along with me for a week or two vacation. Maybe if I was going on a job assignment of a couple of months or more, but that's atypical.

The biggest problem is rail capacity. I've mentioned it on some other thread - a higher percentage of the US rail network is used for freight, the opposite of most European countries, where there is more passenger ridership and a smaller percentage of freight.
CiccoineFed is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity