Comment on Anon likes trains
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 2 days agoExactly this. People too often compare price and time of “train ride” vs. “flight”, which the flight often wins. You need to compare the full travel, and train travel has a lot less overhead, which means a train travelling 100-200 km/h usually wins on stretches below 500 km.
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
But 500 km is at the upper end of the distance I’d drive.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 day ago
With what I’ve heard about the train infrastructure in the US, that doesn’t surprise me. Personally, I only ever use a car if I’m travelling into the mountains or transporting a lot of luggage. I never drive if I’m travelling between cities with little luggage, if only because it’s much less of a hassle to just hop on a train and get where I’m going.
porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
So in most Western European countries I think that limit is actually more like 1000km, or if it includes crossing France even more than that, or if you’re not close to the airport too. Beyond about 7 hours of train, flying starts to be faster and more convenient, most people around here find, but you can get quite far with a train in that time. I appreciate the current situation in the US isn’t the same and it would cost money to upgrade the network, but I think the rest of the world does show that it’s actually worthwhile.