Re:What’s a Gadgetbahn? (2017)
by adrianN on Tuesday February 12, 2019 @02:50AM
(#19141800)
Automobiles are easier to scale until you hit a brick wall. Subways and trains can transport a lot more people than roads. A subway line with modern signalling can have a train every 45 seconds or so. It's impossible to match that with normal roads. Dense cities can't function without trains. Imagine London, Tokyo, or New York without the subway.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:What’s a Gadgetbahn? (2017)
by someguydave on Tuesday February 12, 2019 @03:06PM
(#19146999)
1. Yes trains in very dense areas or connecting dense areas make sense - that's why my comment says "nearly all" trains
2. Everywhere else, even in dense cities, cars are very good at delivering people from where they are to where they want to go, without a large investment in single-purpose facilities like passenger railroads.
Especially in the US, it makes almost no sense to send passengers on rail when it would be more time efficient to fly between dense areas, and use the railroads for transporting freight - a task where they excel.
I'd argue that in dense cities cars are about the worst mode of transport for able-bodied people. For almost all trips a combination of a bicycle and a train is faster. Cars are expensive. Cars pollute. Car infrastructure, especially parking, consumes valuable living space. Cars cause deadly accidents.
Re:What’s a Gadgetbahn? (2017)
by someguydave on Thursday February 14, 2019 @12:42AM
(#19159858)
All those things are true, but you must balance the bad against the huge good - cars are effective at moving people around the city and to the suburbs.