• 𝕾𝖕𝖎𝖈𝖞 𝕿𝖚𝖓𝖆@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    If it takes more than 4-6 hours to drive there, high speed rail is the clear choice. I’m someone who has been on several 10+ hour road trips, and driving for more than a few hours at a time sucks. You waste up to an entire day just driving. Even if it does take the same amount of time, it’d be nice to nap or read a book in that time instead of focusing on just driving. It’s mentally and physically exhausting.

    Especially I-70 in western Kansas and eastern Colorado.

    • tlou3please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      The furthest I’ve driven in one day was about 9 hours to Edinburgh. Our trains over here are stupid expensive so it worked out much cheaper. But damn I regretted it big time around hour 4 when I realised I wasn’t even half way.

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Except in most of the (non-New England) US. San Antonio to Dallas by car is 4-5 hours. By train it’s 10-11 because it has to constantly pull over for the freight trains that own the tracks. The US only has about 100 miles of HSR for the whole country.

      • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think they meant it more in a “high speed rail would work better in these situations if we had it” rather than “we totally have that infrastructure in place let’s use it”. That was my read anyway. Plus, my understanding is that what we consider HSR here barely even qualifies as such in other parts of the world.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      The problem with trains is that they are expensive to maintain and slower (at least the traditional trains are)