THE GREAT DEBATEhttps://www.strawpoll.me/16986120THREAD THEMES:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UHwkfhwjskhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkgUFBaOcm4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXlSQ-NrDkE
That's like asking melons or pumpkins. Both are good for their own purposes, trains for regional and short hop intercity travel, planes for long hauls.
>>1261881No, fuck you, trains are better for almost all kinds of travel except transcontinental and transatlantic.Long-haul can be served by HSR up to 1200 km and by sleeper trains up to about 2000 km (considering an upper limit of 14 hours for a practical overnight journey).I'd say about 90% of plane journeys in Europe could theoretically be served by trains without any infrastructure upgrades, just additional sleeper services.
>>1261897When is hsr going to be cheaper than air? Because taking the Shinkansen from Tokyo to Osaka is not only more expensive but takes more time.
>>1261926>Because taking the Shinkansen from Tokyo to Osaka is not only more expensive but takes more time.The first one I'll give you, but the bullet train takes less time than flying for a city center to city center trip between Tokyo and Osaka. Flying requires:>getting to the airport - 30-90 minutes travel time, need to be there at least 60 minutes before departure>gate to gate time, essentially flight time plus another 20-40 minutes depending on weather and congestion>disembarking, collecting bags, transfer to a bus/taxi/train - 20-40 minutes>transit to city center - 30-60 minutesMeanwhile for the bullet train, you're already in the city center so it's at worst a 10-15 minute train ride to the station, walk up to the bullet train platform, get on, comfy 142 minute ride to Shin-Osaka or Tokyo station.
Train for traveling under 350miles.Plane for traveling over 350miles.
>>1261869Trains are the most efficient mode of transportation when the infrastructure is set up for it. The one advantage that planes and other aircraft have is that it's a true point A to point B transport that requires practically no infrastructure at all. The high speed is a great advantage too. There will probably be more maglev trains connecting the world and less airliners as time goes on. The majority of aircraft in the far future may end up being just military and civilian drones. I don't know though, it just makes sense from an efficiency standpoint.
>>1261946That’s 563km for us in civilized countries.Also high speed rail is good up until 900km
>>1261967Supersonic passenger aircraft will blow your gay little train fantasy idea out of the water.
>>1261969Suck my dick, we're gonna have interdimensional maglev trains in the future
>>1261969(((They))) will not allow them, otherwise Concorde would be fixed already.Fucking soviets and Americans. First ones made unreliable shit, second ones just said that it is meme, since they cant do it.
>>1261973Why would you want an inefficient, unprofitable plane you probably can't even afford to fly on? Until portable fusion power becomes a thing, supersonic airliners are pointless.
>>1261974They had 'b' variant of Concorde, which should be more efficient.Problem is that part of niggers we're afraid of buying Concorde after ty144 crash, and other niggers were waiting b*eing abomination, which never happens, because they wanted to too many things.
>>1261975Bullshit, no supersonic airliner could compete with the efficiency of modern airliners. They were always a waste of money and a dick waving contest.
>>1261979I better pay triple, than sit in fucking aluminum bus for 12 hours.
>>1261946Heard it was 600 miles that bullet trains have over 50 percent market share over airplanes.https://youtu.be/03gA1xrnXWs?t=390
trains easilyI say this as a helo pilot who loves flying but hates airlines. Fuck everything about modern commercial aviation.
>>1261869Trains, since planes feature TSA and other rectal checks, and I'm too poor to get myself an airplane.
>>1262072But if they will force you to pass rectal checks on train - I will take a planes, since at this point train will be slower.
For any ~4 hour trip trains are superior, but anything greater than that you are better off on a plane.
>>1261973>>1261975>>1261979The real reason SST died out is not because it was a "meme", but because no one wants to have sonic booms over their homes. That restricts SST travel to being over water, which is not viable. NASA is working on fixing the sonic boom issue so maybe it wont be a concern in the future. Even if they succeed environmentalist will make it so SST travel will never be a thing again because muh pollutants.
>>1262172So, (((they))) killed SST.>Even if they succeed environmentalist will make it so SST travel will never be a thing again because muh pollutants.Fuck them too. They pollute air too much by breathing.
>>1262172Even if SSTs were still a thing, they'd still be a fucking meme. No average person will pay extra to get a little bit faster to their destination. Which results in a select few airlines having tiny fleets of SSTs because there isn't enough use for them. Ergo, they're a meme. If you really want to go ultra fast, stop being an atmosphere cuck and build a space shuttle. At least then you don't have to build a dumb pointy tube with triangle wings and overheating issues.
>>1262266>No average person will pay extra to get a little bit faster to their destination.I'd pay twice as much for economy on SST.
>>1262310Good for you.
>>1261967Point A to point B airlines can get to are still generally quite far from where you want to be from NIMBYism.
>>1262317>misusing nouns, verbs, and adjectivesPlease re-read an elementary school English textbook.