<story><title>Spain will introduce free train travel</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-15/spain-will-introduce-free-train-travel-to-help-ease-the-cost-of-living</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mschuster91</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;no way&lt;/i&gt; to make a coast-to-coast trip in the US as fast as a plane ever. It&amp;#x27;s like, what, 4500km? Even with the fastest regular passenger train in the world which runs at 350 km&amp;#x2F;h, this will be a 12 hour trip and that&amp;#x27;s not including the time the train will spend below that speed e.g. for stops. Compared to that, your average Airbus A380 hits 900 km&amp;#x2F;h as regular cruise speed, rendering that into a much better 5 hour trip.&lt;p&gt;Not to say high-speed rail doesn&amp;#x27;t have its uses - by far not, the chief one being replacing flights &amp;lt; 2 hours - but anything above the 2 hour flight time is better kept served by plane.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;edition.cnn.com&amp;#x2F;travel&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;worlds-fastest-trains-cmd&amp;#x2F;index.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;edition.cnn.com&amp;#x2F;travel&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;worlds-fastest-trains...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>alar44</author><text>I&amp;#x27;d say the biggest issue is that trains are slow as fuck. If I take a plane I can get to either coast in a few hours from the Midwest. A train will take 1-2 days.</text></item><item><author>itronitron</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve ridden Amtrak a few times on different routes, TX to CA as a child, midwest to DC as a student, and northeast to southeast (NE corridor +) with a pregnant wife.&lt;p&gt;The main issue with train travel in the US is that many passengers are going to need a car when they reach their destination.&lt;p&gt;If I could pick one major rail investment for the US it would be to follow I-95 from Florida to New England. There is a lot of commute and vacation traffic along that interstate (I-95) that can be stressful and people would probably happily move over to Amtrak if the service guarantees are good.</text></item><item><author>stormbrew</author><text>&amp;gt; If Amtrak went that direction and made its transportation close to free, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;d see more people try it out&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that in north America the big problem with passenger rail is less cost and more the fact that there&amp;#x27;s a bias towards freight in track right of ways. Even if you&amp;#x27;re willing and happy to pay a lot to travel by train, scheduling is still likely to be screwed up somewhere by a big ass freight train in the way and there&amp;#x27;s nothing you can do about it.&lt;p&gt;Edit to add after a double check: I guess in the US it&amp;#x27;s technically the law that passengers be given priority but it&amp;#x27;s poorly (or just not) enforced[1].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.amtrak.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;dam&amp;#x2F;projects&amp;#x2F;dotcom&amp;#x2F;english&amp;#x2F;public&amp;#x2F;documents&amp;#x2F;corporate&amp;#x2F;HostRailroadReports&amp;#x2F;mythbusters-enforcing-amtraks-legal-right-to-preference.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.amtrak.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;dam&amp;#x2F;projects&amp;#x2F;dotcom&amp;#x2F;english&amp;#x2F;p...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>hardwaregeek</author><text>Free or extremely cheap transportation is a fascinating development. I always found it odd that the rhetoric around transportation was that it should make money. We don&amp;#x27;t expect other parts of the government to turn a profit. Why transportation?&lt;p&gt;If Amtrak went that direction and made its transportation close to free, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;d see more people try it out. Maybe it&amp;#x27;d gain some popularity and we could finally see a shift away from cars. Public transportation is a difficult process because until the money is spent and the line is there, people are not sold. Whereas with cars, even if a highway is not built, people still have a car by default. Therefore the government needs to float money, either in infrastructure or in subsidized fares. At least subsidized fares is a little less binary than infrastructure.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>herewulf</author><text>You make good points but you forgot to factor in the 2 hours early that you need to show up at the airport. Getting on and off a train can take only minutes.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve only ridden Amtrak once but I guess there are also security requirements that do take some time also (as opposed to most European countries).&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve also experienced lots of unexpected delays on flights whereas trains seem to be exceptionally on time (especially in a country like Germany). You&amp;#x27;re also assuming a direct flight also (though this is probably more related to cost which is another issue).&lt;p&gt;All in all, a coast to coast journey that takes 12 hours vs. 7 doesn&amp;#x27;t seem so bad if:&lt;p&gt;- I can spend maybe 8 of it sleeping in a bed
- The difference is 5 hours
- I can eat some real meals in a dining car
- I can walk around reasonably</text></comment>
<story><title>Spain will introduce free train travel</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-15/spain-will-introduce-free-train-travel-to-help-ease-the-cost-of-living</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mschuster91</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;no way&lt;/i&gt; to make a coast-to-coast trip in the US as fast as a plane ever. It&amp;#x27;s like, what, 4500km? Even with the fastest regular passenger train in the world which runs at 350 km&amp;#x2F;h, this will be a 12 hour trip and that&amp;#x27;s not including the time the train will spend below that speed e.g. for stops. Compared to that, your average Airbus A380 hits 900 km&amp;#x2F;h as regular cruise speed, rendering that into a much better 5 hour trip.&lt;p&gt;Not to say high-speed rail doesn&amp;#x27;t have its uses - by far not, the chief one being replacing flights &amp;lt; 2 hours - but anything above the 2 hour flight time is better kept served by plane.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;edition.cnn.com&amp;#x2F;travel&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;worlds-fastest-trains-cmd&amp;#x2F;index.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;edition.cnn.com&amp;#x2F;travel&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;worlds-fastest-trains...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>alar44</author><text>I&amp;#x27;d say the biggest issue is that trains are slow as fuck. If I take a plane I can get to either coast in a few hours from the Midwest. A train will take 1-2 days.</text></item><item><author>itronitron</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve ridden Amtrak a few times on different routes, TX to CA as a child, midwest to DC as a student, and northeast to southeast (NE corridor +) with a pregnant wife.&lt;p&gt;The main issue with train travel in the US is that many passengers are going to need a car when they reach their destination.&lt;p&gt;If I could pick one major rail investment for the US it would be to follow I-95 from Florida to New England. There is a lot of commute and vacation traffic along that interstate (I-95) that can be stressful and people would probably happily move over to Amtrak if the service guarantees are good.</text></item><item><author>stormbrew</author><text>&amp;gt; If Amtrak went that direction and made its transportation close to free, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;d see more people try it out&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that in north America the big problem with passenger rail is less cost and more the fact that there&amp;#x27;s a bias towards freight in track right of ways. Even if you&amp;#x27;re willing and happy to pay a lot to travel by train, scheduling is still likely to be screwed up somewhere by a big ass freight train in the way and there&amp;#x27;s nothing you can do about it.&lt;p&gt;Edit to add after a double check: I guess in the US it&amp;#x27;s technically the law that passengers be given priority but it&amp;#x27;s poorly (or just not) enforced[1].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.amtrak.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;dam&amp;#x2F;projects&amp;#x2F;dotcom&amp;#x2F;english&amp;#x2F;public&amp;#x2F;documents&amp;#x2F;corporate&amp;#x2F;HostRailroadReports&amp;#x2F;mythbusters-enforcing-amtraks-legal-right-to-preference.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.amtrak.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;dam&amp;#x2F;projects&amp;#x2F;dotcom&amp;#x2F;english&amp;#x2F;p...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>hardwaregeek</author><text>Free or extremely cheap transportation is a fascinating development. I always found it odd that the rhetoric around transportation was that it should make money. We don&amp;#x27;t expect other parts of the government to turn a profit. Why transportation?&lt;p&gt;If Amtrak went that direction and made its transportation close to free, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;d see more people try it out. Maybe it&amp;#x27;d gain some popularity and we could finally see a shift away from cars. Public transportation is a difficult process because until the money is spent and the line is there, people are not sold. Whereas with cars, even if a highway is not built, people still have a car by default. Therefore the government needs to float money, either in infrastructure or in subsidized fares. At least subsidized fares is a little less binary than infrastructure.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sudosysgen</author><text>If you also take into account the time you spend at an airport and the possible slowdown from the wind (900km&amp;#x2F;h is airspeed) while having a theoretical but technically feasible 450km&amp;#x2F;h high speed train as well as the time it takes to go to and from airports (you can put train stations downtown and near public transport) you can actually achieve parity in most situations, or near parity in others</text></comment>