Is America’s quest for high-speed trains finally picking up steam?::New projects in California, Texas, and Florida are a sign that the United States is finally getting serious about modernizing its commuter railway system.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    The majority of Europe can fit into just the central area of the US. Aircraft scale better with distance and is the core reason aircraft have succeeded so well in the US despite the push for more trains for decades. It’s also why you do see some trains being built in CA, FL, and the NE, as the cities there are closer together, making the idea viable.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      10 months ago

      You do know that the Nordic countries are part of Europe, right? They stretch way up north past the edge of the image. They also happen to have some of the most advanced rail systems in the world.

      • Ricaz@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        most advanced rail systems in the world

        As a Scandinavian: LOL

        • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure, it may not be perfect, but it tells you a lot about the state of rail in the rest of the world. It’s really only places like Japan and maybe China that leads the way.

          • Ricaz@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Most of Europe and large parts of Asia has good railways compared to USA. It’s not that the developed world has good railway systems, it’s just that USA has a completely broken public transport system. But planes and trucks go brrr

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            France and Switzerland. First has trains as fast as airplanes, seconds has good network.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        Sure, and they are about the same size as just CA, a place I specifically mentioned is viable for rail in the US.

        Sweden:

      • Buelldozer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Did you seriously just compare the landmass of the United States with the entire fucking CONTINENT of Europe?

        Yes…yes you did.

        If that’s the comparison you want then the Area of North America is 24,474,000 sq km.

        The better comparison would be the US and the European Union. The EU is 4,422,773 km2.

        Now sit down short stack. You aren’t tall enough for this ride.

          • Buelldozer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You are highly regarded.

            Unlikely. The upside of being socially inept though is that I have more time and headspace for important things…like knowing the difference between a Country and a Continent.

        • thomcat@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          You did see that n2burns was replying to a comment that was a size comparison of the United States with the “entire fucking CONTINENT of Europe”, right?

    • Throwaway@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think Europeans understand what space is. They are all crammed in together like tuna.

      • Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Most of Europe is comparable to California in terms of density and terrain. A few sprawling megacities, a lot of smaller towns on the way to and from them, and a couple of mountain towns that are a bitch and a half to get to.

        And California and The East Coast actually have solid public transportation. More buses than trains but… yeah.

        But what Europe largely lacks are “the flyover states”. Like, I love to reference https://www.amtrak.com/plan-your-trip.html because it really highlights this. The East coast is pretty dense and you can more or less get anywhere within a day or two of train+buses. Which is very reminiscent of (the) Europe(an Union). That is true to a lesser degree in California.

        But… fuck Wyoming. Also, there are almost no major routes going in because the vast majority of that state is nothingness and empty land. Which is when you use an airplane and then a rental car. Same as if you are going to a remote part of Norway or Sweden


        Just adding on a rant here. People who are obsessed with public transportation to eliminate all need for cars are, at best, ignorant. They watched a youtube channel about some rich guy living in Amsterdam and think that is the entire world. That ignores anyone who lives in a small town where bus service is the only option and there just isn’t enough traffic to justify any form of a commute so that they can make a living.

        It is still privileged as fuck, but I strongly encourage anyone with the ability to do so to ACTUALLY go on a trip to the UK or Europe or Japan and then navigate via public transportation. Staying in a city and life will be amazing (which is true of most US cities as well). Going to a few touristy hot spots around the city may be a hassle, but is doable. But look in to doing a day trip or even going cross country. It is still a LOT more doable than in the US, but you start to have much tighter connections and start to get worried about a delay.

        And then you realize that “cross country” is a lot closer to “one state over”.

        I would LOVE to have more public transportation options and very much enjoy not renting a car on a holiday (or only getting it for one or two days on an extended one). But even if we had full on Civ3 endgame levels of rail coverage, simple demand would still mean people need cars. Because having a train track go right to your front door doesn’t mean that you have a train waiting for you to take you anywhere you want to go the moment you want to (… that is a car, by the way). You are still at the mercy of there being a sufficient number of people who want to make the same trip that it justifies running a car on that route at a frequent enough rate that you don’t have to sleep in a bus station after sharing a bowl of soup with your grade school crush,

        • scv@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Nice rant. I was born and raised in a “third world country” with better transportation than the US despite much lower density. In fact it would rank just under Oregon, so 39 stated are more dense than my country.

          California does not have good public transportation, neither does a lot of the East Coast, for that matter. I have lived on both coasts and the Midwest, and visited over 35 states. Public transportation is mostly crap with a few exceptions in the core of a few Metro areas, and the NE.

          Public transportation advocates want more than to add buses and trains, you are misrepresenting what we ask for.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I have, on numerous occasions, had to throw water on European’s plans to visit all of the big sites in the US in one visit. Wanting to see the Grand Canyon, the Everglades and DC in the same visit is not terribly practical. My advice has been to pick a region and see everything there. Pick a different region of the US on your next visit.

        What was throwing them off was a day-trip can drive across several European countries, but will only get you through a few states in the US.

        • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          On the other hand, I have, on numerous occasions, had to throw water on American’s plans to visit big sites in Europe in one visit. “Let’s do Amsterdam and Copenhagen and then Paris, Rome, and Barcelona.” In one week. Yeah, not gonna happen.