Such a pity too, the shape of the country just really seems to make so much sense for trains - just run a big north-south line and connect basically everything anyone would care about.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Sure is compared to most trains in US.

[–] hangukdise@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Class 6 and above are pretty zippy

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

and about as common as a bigfoot

[–] Speed@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The US is a poor standard for high speed rail, or even trains in general. A better comparison would be with France, where trains can go up to 320kmph.

[–] naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago

Chile is also... Not as flat as France.

[–] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Something also built by china might be a good comparison. The new high speed trains in Indonesia (also built by china) regularly go up to 350 kmph.

[–] hangukdise@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

Building high quality rail networks requires legal framework to facilitate that given that initial costs are staggering. The US framework simply leaves everything to private initiative and given the multitude of local land regulation and lack of laws to support strategic mobilization at this scale, it is guaranteed the USA will never have a country-wide high speed rail network. There are just too many interests to satisfy in a very diverse legal landscape across cities, counties, and states.