High-speed rail in California was a disaster, but there’s a better way

Re:High-speed rail in California was a disaster, but there’s... by speedplane on Thursday February 14, 2019 @06:22AM (#19161086)

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but a major problem I see with many train systems is relatively low utilization of land. Most of the time, train tracks are empty, awaiting an incoming train. Roads, in comparison are far more utilized. For any given foot of train track or road, a car will be passing over that road far more often than a train.

In popular US corridors where real estate is at a premium, that can be significant.

In our current economy, I simply don’t see how building new trains can be economical or even efficient (frok a traveler usage of real estate perspective).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:High-speed rail in California was a disaster, but there’s... by gumby on Thursday February 14, 2019 @02:14PM (#19164900)

Rail Roads called roads for a reason. Some paved roads are heavily used and some are not. Same for rail. But you are right that $/mi rail roads are more expensive than paved roads.

Also the right of ways are used for all sorts of things e.g. the SPRINT phone company was originally the Southern Pacific Railroad Internal Network Telecommunications

[ Parent | on HN ]