[capote]

I wonder why so many people immediately jump to thinking about a car as an alternative to short distance air travel. Would people in the US never even consider a fast train system as a good option between Philadelphia and Chicago? (If it were built, of course. But self-driving cars need to be built too. But I guess they're easier; I'm just dreaming)

[ams6110]

Cost to construct high speed rail is not insignificant. There is not sufficient demand for it given the established interstate highways and air travel industry.

Cars are more flexible for more people. Trains travel to and from fixed points on fixed schedules.

For some reason people get all romantic about the idea of train travel but in the 21st century USA it's not going to happen.

[mjevans]

Likely because the TSA issue is something they expect to see infecting the train transport system if it existed and that the car is figuratively and literally a symbol of freedom and the ability to escape the rules of others in the American culture. (Source: I live here.)

[capote]

Interesting. To me the car is the least free method of transport. I feel like I'm in jail. There are thousands of rules, stay between the lines, listen to all the signs, careful to not hit children, it's so much more stressful than smoking a joint, sitting in a train and reading a book (my preferred way to get around).

[unprepare]

>careful to not hit children

What are the rules on trains?

[scld]

Those East-West train routes don't really have any pent up demand at the moment. http://www.america2050.org/pdf/Where-HSR-Works-Best.pdf. You can see those "islands" between which you would either need to have complete coverage between them like a spider web, or you'd need to travel from philly to DC or NY then over to Chicago. Now, take yourself a self-driving bus over to a large rail hub.....

[logfromblammo]

In the US, rail freight is king. Passenger rail only has priority to the extent that the trains can run on schedule. And they do not run on schedule.

Express service between Philly and Chicago would probably require new, dedicated, above-grade track, and would not be competitive with any of airline, automobile, or bus travel for decades. Existing passenger trains in the US (other than the Acela) just can't get from A to B fast enough--or even just arriving at a predictable time!--to be worth the fare.

It is definitely easier to build a self-driving car than fix passenger rail in the US, probably by two orders of magnitude.

[ovulator]

Is Philadelphia to Chicago short distance? It is the equivalent of Paris to Rome.

We have a very robust infrastructure for cars already in place, and it is pretty dynamic. The infrastructure for trains would have to be built and is a lot more static.

In the US cars are also associated with autonomy and independence. The train can take me from Philly to Chicago and I'm on it's schedule, but with a car I'm on my schedule and I can detour to Cincinnati or Detroit. In the US the needs of the individual for the most part trump the need of the masses.

[marssaxman]

It's easier to imagine that engineers might someday come up with a practical robot chauffeur than to imagine that US federal politics will ever un-bork itself to the extent that reintroducing usable passenger train service might become possible. It's just that much of a mess.

[ndirish1842]

Good point. I'd love if we had high speed rails in the US. I'd take it over a car everyday.