Thread #2068851
File: 2023-07-21-Merced_Overpass-3-scaled.jpg (340.1 KB)
340.1 KB JPG
Why are trainfags obsessed with HSR when 99% of mechanized passenger travel is local.
37 RepliesView Thread
>>
>>
>>2068851
Your average HSR fan is also probably an even bigger commuter rail fan, but HSR is often more politically feasible than new commuter rail. Also flying sucks, I'd pay a 2x price premium to not step on a plane.
>>
>>2068863
>HSR is often more politically feasible than new commuter rail
There are new commuter rail projects being built, even in the last 6-7 years, things like expansions to DART or Brightline's Orlando extension or the South Shore Line in Indiana. Meanwhile, the only true HSR project is California, which has pissed away over $15B and never laid a single piece of track.
>>
>>2068851
they're mostly americans who are mostly "Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires" who think they have frequent enough need for interregional travel that it needs to be subsidized, but are also too out of the loop to realize that that meeting could have been on zoom and even that zoom meeting could have been an email
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>2068905
>Yes, because securing property rights is a fucking bitch, especially with how inflated land value is in California.
Maybe they should've thought about that and correctly priced the estimate before pitching the idea to voters as a $30 billion project.
>>
>>
File: 785675765.jpg (873.8 KB)
873.8 KB JPG
flying is a humilation ritual
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>2068867
>meeting could have been on zoom and even that zoom meeting could have been an email
this
we should cease any and all /n/ activities, internet completely obsoletes meat transportation
close the board, scrap all the passenger rail and planes, dig up the roads, lock all the doors permanently
>>
File: 1201728_carmine3_corona-chan.jpg (2.3 MB)
2.3 MB JPG
>>2069537
how quickly normies forget
>>
is that true though? i know some trainfags and they rarely talk about HSR.
>>2068936
trains would get there too if they had routes that got popular you better believe they'd be cramming people into cars and would make it as gay as airtravel.
>>
>>2069612
>trains would get there too if they had routes that got popular you better believe they'd be cramming people into cars and would make it as gay as airtravel.
no HSR in the world has the security theatre that plane travel does
>>
>>
>>2069612
From what I have seen there are basically two distinct breeds of train autist, the freight and heritage train autist, and the urbanist autist that only likes modern passenger infrastructure, and they rarely interact with each other.
>>
>>
>>2068904
>between LA and Las Vegas
>actually between Rancho Cucamonga and South of the Strip
>living in the basin, I have to drive a minimum hour-and-a-half in Friday LA traffic to get to the "LA" station
>have to take a $45 Uber from the Vegas station just to get to my hotel on the Strip
>supposed to be high-speed rail, but they aren't building the necessary tunnels to keep the grades through mountain passes flat enough, so the high speed part goes away on grades
>train ends up doing 60 mph up the Cajon Pass and along much of the route between Barstow and Primm
>cost me $200 in train tickets and uber fares and took 4-plus hours door-to-door to get there
>why didn't I just fly?
I would say it's gonna fail, but I know folks working on it, and they say it'll never get built in the first place because Brightline isn't going to sink any money into building it until California and Nevada float bonds
>>
>>
File: tether plane.jpg (32 KB)
32 KB JPG
High-speed rail cons:
- requires expensive overbuilt tracks to handle the loads
- the same goes for train itself - which means it's heavy
Airliner cons:
- uses tons of fuel to fly
- requires highly skilled (expensive) personel to operate
- airports take a lot of space
What if you merged the two into one system?
On the ground you would only need a single cheap to build rail, it wouldn't have to be perfect - bumps would be absorbed by the (slightly) elastic tether. Maybe short strips of two rails for landing.
No fuel required - plane would be pulled by a small electrically powered "engine" on the ground.
Depending on how long the tether can be you would also maybe get some advantages from lower air density (lower drag) at altitude like normal planes do.
>>
>>
>>2068936
>>2068863
War in Iran has shown that if the Middle East ever gets glassed or destabilized oil prices will cause flying to be way too expensive. A lot of people are just driving long distance for vacation now rather than flying.
Trains are better than flying cause they don’t guzzle expensive jet fuel. They can also be electrified. Mostly I like trains cause train stations have less TSA and boarding bullshit, and they put you closer to city center.
>>
>>
>>2070191
What you're thinking of is Eminent domain, and the government hasn't practiced it in decades, to explain why requires opening a whole-ass can of worms about the perceived targeting of minority communities and such
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: Smallthorne.jpg (190.4 KB)
190.4 KB JPG
>>2070420
Pic is on a driving test route near me, it is on the brow of a hill so you only get to see a bit of it at a time.
I have never heard of someone nailing it through a red light there.