:matt-jokerfied:

  • Staines [they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    hot take: trains aren't the solution to literally all transport problems

    • Catherine_Steward [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      :downbear: I will not be satisfied until I can board a train directly from my home's threshold and transfer from that train to another train which takes me to the Gay Sex Park, from which (after I have enjoyed my morning) I will take another train to the interplanetary train station and visit my family on the Red Planet (recently renamed since we have no need for war)

      This is what Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism means to me, if you criticize it you're being sectarian

        • iridaniotter [she/her, she/her]
          ·
          2 years ago

          No silly, we can use the corpses of the victims of communism as tunnel material to go from Alaska to Siberia. More scenic that way too.

    • Staines [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      or regional airlines that do air ambulances as part of their business, like Loganair.

  • AmericaDelendeEst [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I mean sometimes there are like mountains and stuff that make building rail difficult so while you can service a wide region more efficiently with rail you can't necessarily have point to point transit everywhere

  • Staines [they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    It's early technology, and it needs early minor early application to prove the technology.

    this would be extremely useful for the western and northern isles in the UK, places like port-adhair Bheinn na Faoghla, or newfoundland or maybe greece, phillipines, indonesia, alaska.....?

  • D61 [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    If it can handle cold weather and short landing strips, probably places that are remote or on the other side of protected areas.

    • Beaver [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      A nice feature is that if you have local power generation, you don't have to ship in fuel.

  • iridaniotter [she/her, she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Well moderately high speed rail can obviously make those trips in the same time or faster, but if you're just going to a small city that isn't on the way to a bigger one, it doesn't make sense to build HSR to it. Slower rail would probably make sense, but you'd want to compare the long-term costs of building rail vs a small airport, as well as the practicality of both given the geography of the area. Also it would be slower than the plane and people want to go fast. :dean-smile: I'd like to see an analysis on this that isn't Wendover 🤢

  • Coolkidbozzy [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I feel like this has some utility in sweden to cross the seas, but practically nowhere else

  • panopticon [comrade/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Meteorology and other sciences that use aerial platforms... Wildfire reconnaissance, regional transport in areas with lots of bays and islands, such as Washington State

    Plenty of things that even a very ambitious a train can't do, sorry

  • jkfjfhkdfgdfb [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    bombing fascists?

    wait no railway guns are both cooler and train gang

    • DefinitelyNotAPhone [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Introducing the new Railguns on Railways program for delivering mobile walls straight to fascists' camps in 30 minutes or less, guaranteed!

  • wtypstanaccount04 [he/him]M
    ·
    2 years ago

    China currently has trains that run at 350km/h and they could easily upgrade them to 400km/h. This plane journey could be done in an hour.

  • alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]
    ·
    2 years ago

    You know all those prop planes used for short-range flights to islands and other isolated places?

    This can do that, but without leaded gasoline.