"Hatunen" wrote in message
news:vbebd1possk0rnicdu7itbegonce2dp9p7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:50:28 +0100, "Keith W"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"B Vaughan" wrote in message
>>news:fgiad1d43pr2oc3qen0ktlbv0rb21otpmc@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 07:55:46 -0400, "mdrawson"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>That's the sad truth. Too bad, because we really love train travel, and
>>>>this country is so far behind Europe that it's embarrassing. We're the
>>>>greatest nation on the planet and we can't figure out how to run a train
>>>>system?
>>>
>>> I hate to make apologies for the American rail system, because really
>>> it could (and should) be greatly improved. However, it really can't be
>>> compared to Europe where the population density is many times greater.
>>>
>>
>>Indeed the best analogy is Australia which has much the same
>>situation. However there is room for some improvement on
>>routes like San Diego-LA-SF where their is heavy traffic and
>>the distances are not too far.
>
> Unfortunately, the driving from LA to SF is also quick and
> considerably more convenient. I have driven downtown SF to
> central LA in a time of about 5.5 hours; the train is scehduled
> at 12:40 and will undoubtedly take even longer. And that's AFTER
> you get from downtown SF to Emeryville across the Bay.
>
Quite but if the train were operating to the sort of schedule operated
by the TGV in France the journeytime would be around 2 hours 30
minutes. Even if it were one of the 'slow' British trains as used
on the east coast main line it'd be under 4 hours.
We have cars and freeways in Europe too but passenger trains
are busier than ever.
Keith
|