Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How far can you go by train in 5h?

chronotrains-eu.vercel.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 457 posts

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#321

Post by not2b »

Robotbeat wrote: post #26
qalmakka wrote: post #22

As a European it boggles my mind seeing how trains are basically non-existent in the USA (just look at Houston station), given how dominant the whole "Wild West" railroad rush is in everybody's immagination. Railroads are super ubiquitous here, and we've to work with a pretty hostile terrain - Italy has lots of mountains, hills, rivers, and yet has one of the best networks in the world. Most of the USA are basically…

The fact the US is basically empty means the cost to build a HSR route to go between population centers is super high because of the sheer distances involved. You’re talking like 1000 miles, not 200. The places which are closer together, like the East Coast, do have some passenger rail but they’re also much denser, like Europe, and so they have the same kind of constraints (or worse). The US has a lot of freight rail…

You'd only want to build regional HSR systems that would connect cities that get a lot of traffic and flights between them and are under 300 miles / 500 km apart. So, the northeast corridor, connect California major cities, connect Portland to Seattle, connect Dallas/Austin/Houston/San Antonio.

In Canada, half the population lives near a nearly straight line from Quebec City to Windsor; you could put a high speed rail line down the middle of that.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#322

Post by rootusrootus »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #183
geraldwhen wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No thank you. I live near enough howling dogs. I will never forget the peace and quiet when I stepped into my first house. Why anyone lives in apartments by choice is beyond me. The noise is absurd.

> Why anyone lives in apartments by choice is beyond me. The noise is absurd. I am sorry but you westerners have no clue how to make decent apartments. London is full of 'luxury' highrises with basic design mistakes and complete failures. In czech republic they would never build drywall separation between apartments, its always brick or concrete with real noise insulation. The staircase is never attached to the walls…

Plenty of condos in the US (and I'm guessing London) use concrete walls between units. This isn't something magic that only the Czech Republic understands.

But concrete is pretty unfriendly to the environment and has a low expected lifespan. Much of the US is covered in trees, so an average apartment is primarily constructed from wood. Condos and apartments are generally constructed to different standards, due to the former being intended as a purchase, and the latter as a rental.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#323

Post by rootusrootus »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #146
geraldwhen wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No thank you. I live near enough howling dogs. I will never forget the peace and quiet when I stepped into my first house. Why anyone lives in apartments by choice is beyond me. The noise is absurd.

Noise? My kids make noise. With that, the difference between a house and an apartment is negligible. I love living in a nice city. Ultra convenient.

I love living in a walkable suburban neighborhood with a supermarket and home store within easy (sub-5 minute) driving distance. Quiet, spacious, ultra convenient. More so than living in the city, because I can carry my purchases in my car all the way into my house.

YMMV. Live where you want. There is no objectively better answer, just preference.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#324

Post by rootusrootus »

simongray wrote: post #234
rockostrich wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, it doesn't really boggle my mind at all. We have a very car-centric culture. Just look at how we treat cyclists/cycling infrastructure, especially in cities. It's night and day compared to most European cities. To be fair though, the continental US is almost double the size of Europe and Amtrak is actually alright in the areas that it serves (although my experience with trains in Switzerland/Italy was…

> the continental US is almost double the size of Europe Europe (the continent) is slightly bigger than the entirety of the USA... I guess you are talking about continental Western Europe where much of the high speed rail is?

> Europe (the continent) is slightly bigger than the entirety of the USA...

And a good bit more than double the number of people.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#326

Post by Kon-Peki »

TylerE wrote: post #285
Kon-Peki wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I fully accept that point :) But as long as it exists, New Orleans means something to America.

But why does "mean something" translate to "build non-ecomically viable HSR"?

Are we stipulating that it's less economically viable than a brand-new line somewhere else?

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#327

Post by rootusrootus »

solar-ice wrote: post #153
geraldwhen wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to walk past a bus station to lunch most weekdays. Nearly every single day I witnessed an assault at the bus station. Mass transit hubs do bring crime. Why minimize that?

They just… don’t, elsewhere. That’s not a normal state of affairs. Something is horribly wrong with how you’re doing something - either with the stations, or with society - if that’s the case.

Assaults on mass transit in the US aren't what I'd call a normal state of affairs. I haven't seen it yet in person, though clearly it happens. Petty theft is a good bit more common, though like 99% of the time I just see people doing their thing and ignoring everyone else on the bus/train/whatever.

I read comments on HN and kind of wonder if this is why people believe all these terrible things about the US. Never been here, and only have comments online to judge by. Explains a lot.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#328

Post by rootusrootus »

madeofpalk wrote: post #171
wgnmstr12 wrote: post #165

There is a lot of what-if here, but the reality is that most people in the USA prefer the flexibility and speed of (1) Driving wherever and whenever and carrying all your stuff with you, and then (2) flying to your destination for speed. You can cross the east coast in 3 hours or the go to the west cost in 6 on a convenient red-eye. Taking the train is more a novelty, and unclear who would actually use it regularly b…

You can still drive in Europe. Cars and roads still exist.

Not only that, cars are still more popular than trains. Wouldn't believe it from comments on HN, of course.

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#329

Post by have_faith »

alexott wrote: post #313

I can’t say that’s accurate. For my area it shows that Kassel is 3 hours away, although direct train goes in less than an hour, and even with intermediate stop, it’s slightly more than an hour. South of Germany isn’t connected at all, although I can get to Ingolstadt in less that 5 hours…

Similarly it told me Sheffield to London (kings cross) is 4 hours when it's a little over 2 hours normally.

edit: I think I read it wrong wrong, it put a small darker ring around kings cross and I got 3hr and 4hr colours mixed up (:

Re: How far can you go by train in 5h?

#330

Post by mitchdoogle »

black_puppydog wrote: post #11
stratom wrote: post #8

It also shows how much the train networks focus on domestic travel. In nearly all bigger countries it is possible to reach most bigger cities within the 5h. But journeys in this time-frame seldomly go much beyond the border. There is still much optimization potential for transnational travel in Europe's train network.

It also shows an effect that the focus on high speed rail brings: rural areas are often very badly connected. Here in France they've even kept shutting down regional lines. That creates the train equivalent of "fly-over states": areas that you see from the train while going through, but that it would be impractical to go to .

Except "flyover" states are not just rural areas. There are tons of big cities in non-coastal areas of the US. I don't think people who use the term are maliciously doing it, but it does diminish the lives of millions of people as unimportant and inconsequential compared to the "important" areas on the coasts
Post reply on HN