TiptronicS
109676
1803
53
Apr 4, 2023 10:18 AM
TiptronicS
109676
1803
53
Isaveimages
This is so sad, I can't believe such a huge country doesn't have a proper railway system... It's not fair for the citizens and it's not fair for the environment.
Beardedagentman
Work for a Parisian company and run their US ops. We have a big climate impact focus due to what we do as a company and travel policy prefers trains > planes. Our expense people keep getting promoted to new roles as we grow and every 5-6mo I have to explain to a new person that taking a train...really anywhere outside the NEC isn't feasible. I'd love a good train option..
tesseract4d2
To be fair to the US (which I shouldn't, but I will) we DO have local passenger trains and other mass transit options in cities, this is only representing the railways that the national system (amtrak) runs on. Here in st Louis, we have a pretty good rail called Metrolink that's supplemented with buses.
Kazooski
Yeah I was gonna say in Philadelphia, you can get just about everywhere in or out of the city via train, subway or bus.
chefsoda
This is a bit like US voting maps, measuring land, not people. The US is monsterously behind in public transit, but it's also a huge nation, with many, lightly populated regions. The population density of the EU makes trains more viable, and the more rational politics makes public transit popular & expected.
littlecoatfatguy
It does help that roughly twice as many people live in the picture on the bottom.
ButtblasterMcAssmaster
So you'd expect California or New England, where the population density is much more similar, to have well-established rail networks. But they also don't.
HelloToe
Now do a population density map comparison.
tic32003
Not sure that US map is entirely accurate. Lots of the larger cities have local passenger trains and subways that don't appear to be included.
ongoglabogian
This is dumb, basic understanding of population density would clear this up.
ErgoVisaVisConcordantly
We use busses in America. People crowd together in busses for long uncomfortable journeys. But our busses fly.
jt42
Mexico busses are much better.
PSFE43X
I'm all for better infrastructure, but this is bullshit. Zoom out to scale and you'll see the problem. Don't cheapen the argument for better public transit with nonsense like this... population density and square mileage matter. A lot.
mycotoxin
I'd love to see more trains, but also, remember scale too
AndrewCanadian
Canadian rail options are abysmal as well.
FLLingerieLuvr
And yet the US averages 3 train derailments per day.
ruferto
It looks bad UNTIL you realize you're only seeing the Amtrak network (and that it actually hits most of the major population centers of the US 🤡).
- not all stops listed here.
Superchief86
Train travel in Europe is so fun. This was as we approached Interlaken
Absent
Car lobbyism is stronk!
wiltsjunk
Look I 100% agree that the US needs more passenger trains. But that top map isn't accurate - I live outside philly and take trains around PA NJ & NYC all the time, there are many more that just the couple shown here.
Apollymkatistrafia
"Oh but it's a huge expense!" No, it's a huge Investment that takes the money flow out of some big businesses' hands and puts it elsewhere, which is why they keep fighting it so hard.
shyasen
Now do Japan!
IamtheAIyoushouldfear
Looks like everyone is trying to get out of Chicago and they don't mind where to!
PballQhead
That's a relic of the meatpacking industry. Had to get the cattle from all across the country to the massive lots in Chicago, in a time before trucks.
Retrogames
Chicago runs light rail lines out to all the suburbs from the L. Most cities used to have light rail / streetcar networks; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb
ThatOneFriendWhoTriesTooHard
How about comparing population density, too?
Retrogames
Don't have it for the full US but this has been floating around orange-pill circles for years;
stonecw
That's a more fair comparison.
Retrogames
Not used to the longer post limits, lol. Czechia's population is 10.51m, Indiana is 6.8m.
BrdCdn
Indianas population is also likely to be much more concentrated. Majority of the empty space is farms. These map comparisons are asinine and stupid.
macgerdo
Keeping it on the ground level. I want to see how they upgrade planes to E-planes.
unpunnyfuns
Norway will move all domestic flights to electric by 2040, first commercial e-planes to go into traffic by 2028. https://avinor.no/en/corporate/klima/electric-aviation/electric-aviation
DustyMcKnuckles
https://www.popsci.com/technology/hydrogen-fuel-cell-aircraft-explained/ baby steps, but we're getting there!
marsgoose
Tough tiddies since a 2 ton battery has about the same energy as a 20l jerry can worth of gas. That's a problemo when the task is to keep said battery above the ground for hours.
Not saying impossible, just wont happen with li-ions, and we don't really have even a working prototype of something better on the horizon.
ScottNapalm
I imagine it runs into a lot of the same issues, but seems like hydrogen cell flights are testing recently. At least that addresses some of the weight concerns?
marsgoose
Hydrogen is interesting because it has gobs of energy density by weight and fuck-all by volume. The pressurized container holding it easily ends up weighing 10x more than the actual fuel you can safely store inside. It's also very explosive, one toyota mirai tank rupture is enough to hindenburg a city block, that's why they did that demo with firing a .50 cal AP rounds at the tank https://youtu.be/jVeagFmmwA0
marsgoose
But hey on positive side, this stuff is already out as commercial products, although in limited niche use, but there is promise.
DustyMcKnuckles
As a hydrogen fuel cell tech: 1) a little toyota having a "thermal event" isnt nearly as collaterally devistating as all that... of course shits gonna pop if you hit it with a .50 2) I work for a global company that uses fuel cells to cut out some nastiness associated with instant gratification shipping. No, its not ubiquitous yet, but it sounds like the scope of our network and infrastructure might surprise you...
DustyMcKnuckles
Hydrogen fuel cells!! There were some test flights recently, super cool stuff!
Coltaine
Possibly with liquid batteries. But considering how many variations of batteries are in development, who knows. Also pretty sure Hydrogen aircraft will be a thing for a while before battery powered ones.
glenlochie
I've always felt battery/electric was a temp fix. Fuel cells are amazingly efficient but still too large. Given time that will still be the future.
Coltaine
Making hydrogen is rather inefficient at the moment. I mean there's the unstorable overshoot production from renewables, but still currently the most efficient process is like 60% efficient? Then there's the hoopla of storing hydrogen as well, such a tiny thing it slips through a lot of materials, or bonds with them in unfortunate ways. Using electricity straight is likely the most efficient way forward. We'll see, how things shake out. The liquid anode & cathode battery seems rather amazing.
Doismellbacon
Whoever is downing you should see the link above
VibratingNipples
The map isn’t to scale. It the landmass that is the problem and money
idiotsonfire
We have 5x the landmass of Germany, sure. That's true. We also have 40x the GDP and wealth. We can fucking afford it. It'll just mean not building a new US Navy aircraft carrier battle group every two years for like, six years. And closing like 40 military bases in like, Africa or something. That's all it would take to break even, I bet.
Lichelf
If the EU was twice as big it would still roughly the same netwotk. It's not the landmass it's the lack of people populating that landmass. The governemt has little to personally gain by connecting the rural communities, compared to the costs.
DigiT00l
Landmass shown is about similar in size, and money isn't the issue, it's policy, several European countries with a GDP similar to similarly sized states have much more net, someone in this post compared Indiana and Czechia, which are similar in size and money
Thneitis
Land mass is not similar size. 3,794,080 sq mi vs 1,634,472?
DigiT00l
Contiguous USA is 7,663,942 km², Europe is ~10.180.000 km², so significantly larger than the 48 US states shown, Alaska would only add about 0.5m km² in actual landmass, the USA just counts like 2m km² of water as part of the territory
Thneitis
What’re you including in Europe?
DigiT00l
Europe is commonly considered to be separated from Asia by the watershed of the Ural Mountains, the Ural River, the Caspian Sea, the Greater Caucasus, the Black Sea and the waterways of the Turkish Straits. That is the definition Wikipedia gives, which provided the number
Elroydb
It's not a lack of money it's that building rail in the US is just so much more expensive because everyone and their brother tries to block new construction
idiotsonfire
We might have more landmass than all of the EU, sure. But not all of that is populated and wouldn't need nearly as much expansion so long as there were other smaller lines connecting to the stations where the high speed rail trains can visit. We have more landmass than the entire EU...and almost the same GDP as the entire EU. We can fucking afford it. Its just that Josh Hawley would rather lie about trans people and elections than pass a tax to force Amazon and Netflix to pay income, then, voila
idiotsonfire
We'd have the money instantly. Then it wouldn't matter, because it would be trivial to pay for. Because we already pay an absurd amount just to keep our decrepit, barely functional infrastructure together, it isn't really all that much more to just build a high speed rail network, than it would be to declare war on Tongo.
idiotsonfire
We do not have high speed rail because of the GOP and their refusal to do anything but benefit business, not because of difficulty, or expense, but because the GOP actively wants to destroy the entire country for anyone but their moron base of what, half and half white supremacists and those who are too stupid to realize that they're sitting next to a white supremacist?
Copperbrat
d0o0o0d
...because people looked at the time and expense, and decided flying is better if you're going a long way.
Retrogames
That's the tragedy. We USED to have a great rail system in this country, especially inner city rail / trolley lines to get around without cars.
Copperbrat
yep
CatsIsTheAnswer
AFAIK this is a common issue, in my part of Italy we used to have more rail lines than we do now.
Copperbrat
In the US, our rails are now mostly freight-prioritized. We don't have a lot of accessible coast to ship freight by water, so it mostly goes by rail and road. Passenger lines got squeezed out when demand dwindled. This is what our rail map currently looks like:
FeChefImgur
I feel this could also be a zoom/scale thing as well ?
d0o0o0d
Yup. Lots of places have in-city commuter rail, but at the map's scale it's too small to show up as more than a pixel.
PballQhead
That's definitely part of it. London to Moscow is 2500 kilometers/1600 miles as the crow flies, NYC to LA is 3950km/2450mi. They are not about the same, as this map seems to show. Also 90% of the US is cornfields.
NoNameFred
True, the scale/zoom of those images doesn't quite match. It's zoomed out further on the Europe map… so should be showing *fewer* railways.
stonecw
... you mean zoomed in closer on the Europe map, right?
DigiT00l
Not really
DigiT00l
Europe is about 1m km² biggest than the USA
glastonberry48
This map is a bit misleading, as population density of Europe vs the continental United States is drastically different. However, the lack of passenger rails along the East and West coasts of the USA is downright criminal
distraingotnobrakes
There’s a reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy
whatsisname
80 percent of americans live in urban areas, and also the average is pulled down by huge swathes of completely uninhabited areas. The densities, where people actually live, are not a ton different.
whyexactly
this map shows travel between the densities, which is affected by those completely uninhabited areas.
nclu
Which is why it's largely a local and regional rail deficit we have. This is made worse by how our funding is apportioned. The federal transportation 80/20 rule is a huge factor here
MisterBrahanovich
To be fair there aren’t many people in those empty spots
eggmuffin
It is a question of connecting the hubs. The space between is not relevant.
NebulousToucan
That's fair. Unfortunately, its a shitty attitude. 1) There are still people. 2) we could ease over-crowding and spread out more if there was the framework for people to get around
redmangc
The one connection in Missouri Next to the "S" is a town of 12k also that Train never leaves for anywhere.
Lichelf
That's the vicious circle. Most Americans don't want to live there cause ot's so isolated, so nobody lives there, which means the government won't help the people there, repeat. Only way to fix it is by helping the people who live there by improving the country's infrastructure so others have a reason to move there and stop overcrowding in the bigger cities.
MisterBrahanovich
There’s an environmental argument for more people living in condensed cities and leaving more wild open spaces alone
Retrogames
Doesn't matter;
videopro10
>80% of Indiana is farmland compared to 46% of CR, CR has 1.85x the population density of Indiana.
Retrogames
All the more reason to offer quick, environmentally friendly light rail between hubs to move people between denser areas vs. miles and miles and miles of country road getting chewed up with thru traffic.
Retrogames
People everywhere should have alternatives to cars, not just in the cities. Indiana is actually a REALLY good example because that northern line between South Bend and Chicago (the South Shore line) is GREAT and MUCH better than driving the IN Turnpike and taking the Skyway if all you want to do is get into Chicago and visit the museums and such.
Illinifan88
There's a lot of empty space in Europe too. It's not as much about the space in between as it is about connecting major hubs.
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
That's Canada's problem though... so few major hubs. They actually *are* connected. Just takes 4 days to hit them all.
Illinifan88
To be clear, I'm emphasizing how ridiculous it is that we don't have better railways here.
Krauterhosen
It's almost like one county was built focused on public transport. One a couple hundred years later. I hate our transportation issues...but it's not the same.
whatsisname
The USA did have robust public transit, even in smaller cities, that was systematically dismantled so car companies could make more money. The USA wasn't built for cars, it was demolished for them.
ekzeko
Under appreciated point. A huge issue in NA is that once you get there by train, you still need to use a car to get around the city you're in. So you might as well drive there in the first place.
stonecw
Krauterhosen
I'm not saying rail isn't the way. But it's different here on the West. Society was built on cars. I get it! But it's not like the climate in Europe. One day
whatsisname
DeadnCold
This is why electric cars are being adopted much faster in Europe. You don't need 500-1000 miles of range when it's cheaper and easier to hop a train.
HouseOfEvil
Nobody is going to drive this lousy freeway when they can take the red car for a nickel.
Cr1msondark
Cheaper??!! *cries in English*
SoupCanMan
Americans acting like they drive 500 miles a day is some hysterics. And then they act like they work 18 hours a day and can't charge at home on slow trickle 120 V. I at least sympathize with renters.
WhoAteAllTheBananasAndTookAShitOnTheCarpet
I have an unlimited railpass and a subscription to an electric car-sharing service. For everything else, there's e the e-bike.
cosonfused
define "cheaper"
unclewookwook
Jumping on a train in England isn't cheap. It's a bastard
marsgoose
Lived in Europe for 20 years, only used trains when on vaccation and dealing with their schedules was actually convenient. Also helps that they more often connect touristy locations rather than where normal working people live and work on the daily.
As far as EV, I could've gotten away with it in EU more often than I can now in US, just because my travel circle was much much smaller and I was stuck with a compact anyhow.
marsgoose
If the tarrifs, rego, taxes, and gas for a V8 Ameribox was in my price range, I would've absolutely had one back than too. Unironicaly I would drive a canyonero.
DeadnCold
That's the point, the only time the vast majority of people in both NA and EU need the range is stuff like Vacations and business travel. Which is why the EU makes it much easier to own a car that doesn't have the range, because they have an extensive train network they can utilise instead.
brownribbon
You don’t need that much range for 90% or more of US driving.
DeadnCold
I agree with you. The problem is the gas companies have people more worried about that last 10% to keep them locked into gas cars.
taxirelaxi
It´s more because we import our oil
Funkypeeg
Trains are not a cheap way if transportation. Very often cheaper to fly.
veroniDiver
Sweden 90-day zone ABC card in västra götaland, unlimited travel with local buses, trains, etc for those 90 days, 5185 SEK (appr. 500 USD)... hard to beat that price by driving my own car (Specially with the gas prices being what they are) So it depends on where you are, and how long your commute is. America needs better local transportation options.
TK421isAFK
Also has a lot to do with the size of the roads. It's a lot easier to fit an i3 down some of their bike-lane-size roads than a larger car.
zimirken
Best thing Elon musk ever did was make electric cars palatable to conservatives
Ionotos
I kinda do. North west europe here. Train costs more then car takes longer and never on time and i drive for up to 600km per day. Electric is not yet an option.
HeWhoMustNotBeBlamed
I regularly drive >600km/day all across Europe in my EV. It’s perfect. Driving an expensive, noisy, high maintenance, raw materials burning ICE car is no longer an option for me. It would be torture having to go back to that.
DeadnCold
You are an outside case though. How many people where you live need to drive 600 km a day like you do? Norway is consistently the country with the highest EV adoption rate.
Wesugi
Say you live in germany without saying you live in germany. Sänk ju for travelling wis Deutsche Bahn.
riplikash
When people are talking about generalities and you KNOW you're an outlier, there's really no reason to bring up your specific case. No one said "No Europeans drive 600km per day."
BeesechurgerProductions
The issue is a lot of people talk about implementing rules or restrictions based on generalities with no care, concerns or regard for the outliers. I've had multiple conversations here and elsewhere with people who outright wanted to ban private vehicle ownership as a 'solution' to car-centric construction in places. Its easy for the needs of outliers to be lost in the discussion, reminders about them don't hurt.
riplikash
Ok, but that's not a discussion anyone here was having, or even close to having.
TheDrunkenWrench
600km per day? Why so low?
SherMattLockSmith
It's also europe, you drive for an hour and are in a different country, you drive for 6 hours in Texas and you are still in Texas. Take a look at a population density map of what is represented above, Europe is densely populated, most of the middle of America is full of nothing but farmland.
eltonpups
I agree. Was going to say make those maps to scale, don’t blow up Europe so they look equidistant.
riplikash
You'll notice the fairly densely populated areas aren't really that much better. What you're saying is technically true, but isn't actually meaningful when discussing the actual issues we have. It's a smoke screen.
unit48
Airlines and oil companies don’t want competition. Capitalism restrains progress.
Elroydb
Which is even more frustrating b/c you'd think building lines on sparsely populated land wouldn't be so absurdly expensive
Foxsayy
Let's be honest, even in the densely populated areas, most of them have awful public transit and no trains.
DigiT00l
Big countries got big because there are no people wanting to split, so they just claimed the empty space
stevencloser
Take any densely populated US state and compare it to a central European country then. It will still look like shit in comparison. My state in Germany has about the density of New York state or Florida, a little less actually. I guarantee you, we've got a more comprehensive public transit system, despite being significantly smaller and having less money to spend.
milkmymisanthropy
An hour and you're in the next country? Yeah, when you start in one of the european ministates or near the border. My last journey from west germany to mid poland took 10 hours. 1000km with 150km/h where possible. East germany to Austria ~800km 9 hours. You can eben drive for several hours straight through netherlands without crossing a border.
madwookie
And even in the denser populated areas we have piss-poor public transit. This argument fails when you look at it.
CatsIsTheAnswer
While this is obviously true, the "1 hour to cross a border" is a gross exageration
xj4low
6 hr is nothing in TX. Takes 10-12 to cross state. Elpaso is closer to CA than it is to Texarkana, TX. I also understand we don't hold a candle compared to alaska or Canada.
whatsisname
80% of americans live in urban areas. There is still no excuse not to have robust public transit in our communities. No one is commuting from North Dakota to Nebraska.
TheLordOfGiraffes
This. If Atlanta had a train that went out into its suburbs, the highways that run through it would be so much better. It already has some metro transit but everyone has to drive to get to it so it’s not heavily used
IOnlyNeedOneBall
I mean, the auto industry lobbied for it in a country with legal bribes. How do we correct?
xj4low
Here in the Dallas area, Denton didn't join DART (public transportation between Dallas and Tarrent county). Basically have a train stop to get off of 1 train and onto another.
alchemist12345
In the USA 100 years is old, in the EU 100 miles is far.
PunIshErnest
It's not far in Europe, it's more like miles are far away from Europe!
vegivamp
Judy across the puddle, actually, even if they fucked off on their own.
WhyWouldYouReplyToThisGuy
Miles are a lot closer to Europe than you think.
abion47
This. It's easy to decry the lack of passenger trains in the US until you realize that it's twice as big as Central Europe and most of it is unpopulated or sparsely populated plains. It's just not practical to have a spider web of passenger trains cutting through all that empty space.
SergeyPrkl
also European population size is twice the north America.
CheetoDustedMalcontent
No one is trying to serve a rail line from Wyoming to North Dakota. Southern California is smaller than the Netherlands with more people and has a fraction of the rail service. Likewise for the North East and densely populated sections of urban swaths of the US. Our rail is a joke by choice, and they serve this nonsense as an excuse
abion47
Sure. I'm all for expanding rails and other public transit options in urban and suburban areas. The graphic isn't saying that, though. It's showing a picture of Central Europe which is much more densely and uniformly populated next to a picture of the US that looks pitiful in comparison without mentioning the fact that Central US is almost entirely rural or unpopulated. If you want to make your point, then show a side by side of Boston and Paris or something.
stevencloser
Uhh, that map shows entire states with no rail whatsoever.
FlippedOut
You have some of the biggest cities in the world with no to minimal transit. Cities that high speed could do in half an hour with millions of people. Its a choice not an environmental obstacle. Private companies are kow building rail because your government has failed you, they have decided lobbying money is more important than their people and built highways instead.
GriffinMann41
That still isn't a reasonable conclusion though given something like 80% of the US Populace lives on the coasts. Rail would absolutely work incredibly well, especially HSR, for both coasts. Between-them wouldn't work nearly as well sure, but to have literally no genuinely easy-to-use or affordable intercity rail in the most populated areas of the country is a fucking abysmal failure
bieresdelameuse
Uh, no, doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't do inter- and intra-city rail, and I would point out we already have a spiderweb of highways cutting through all that empty space.
DigiT00l
Except no, that doesn't quite work when there is no solid rail net remaining in the city clusters, like the north east, like there barely is anything there, it used to be better, but instead of expanding and upgrading, they reduced, like, don't start NYC LA, start NYC to Boston and Chicago, I mean Europe started small scale, per country, they just expanded because it was convenient, make train hubs and spokes, you get pretty far that way
Kehy
Seattle and greater western Washington is rapidly expanding their light rail and other mass transit systems
DigiT00l
For a country build on the railway, they really abandoned it, there should be enough room for short distance demand, many states could easily make a good net that can be linked up with good long distance options, you don't need everything direct, transfers are good
DrDresDog
Um....that exists already. I've used Amtrak multiple times to get between NYC/Boston/Philadelphia/DC. It's basically almost as effective as flying and quite a few Business people use it for weekday commuting between these cities. Metro-North services Upstate NY/Southern CT. SEPTA services Phil/Western NJ. Boston Metro services Boston AND the surrounding towns. DC Metro services DC/Alexandria/Bethesda. Should there be more? Yes but I would say Ohio or CA might be better.
localsurfer
UK here -I drive for an hour and don't leave the county, let alone the country. It's not THAT small.
SpeerNA
Took me 6 hours to drive from Nottingham to Glasgow
gypsyspot
lit is compared to the US, which was the comparison.
gypsyspot
For example, California is 3 times the area of England. And it's one of 50 states. and not the largest (although still large)
ThePunishersVengefulBrother
I don't fly unless the drive is longer than 6 hours in the US.
Anonyte
Interesting! For me (FR), the 6 hour mark is for jumping from train to plane. From car to train that would be 4 hours. However, train over car most likely won't save commute time like plane over train. It's just less taxing and gives back some of that time to work/read/eat/sleep while traveling.
ThePunishersVengefulBrother
When I go to Europe (France next year, I hope!!!), I love the train system but where I live, the local airport almost never has direct (affordable) flights, so I spend 6 hours in flights or layovers anyway, PLUS I still have to rent a car at the destination. Just easier to drive.
stevencloser
I am always train over car. Driving yourself is just such a hassle. I can just lay back and read a nice book instead.
themobileappisbroken
Australia is even worse.
slinkiisu
Bouttecriss
Dont think they realy need more.
NoNameFred
I mean, that's still showing a trainline to every city in Australia except Hobart (which is on the island of Tasmania), and to 50% of the towns too…
OnlyPositiveFavourites
That only shows interstate ones. Our major cities have many trains!
themobileappisbroken
Well yes but I don't think we're discussing commuter trains.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
The title says passenger train, as opposed to a cargo train. Aka human sit in choo choo machine.
themobileappisbroken
The photo I posted is passenger trains. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Passenger_trains_in_Australia.jpg
SafarimanHubertLegrange
The note under it specifies that it is non-urban
rbudrick
Yeah, but no one lives anywhere else there.
Taintbraids
I didn't know our rail system was so big
VindictiveBathToaster
Antarctica is at the end of the pack.
badatediting
JCBalance
Crazy that there's a railway around the entire perimeter and no station to board at.
badatediting
Snowpiercer
DionysianMask
Crickey
Emulen
Jupiter even worsier
vindik8or
We've got the population of Tokyo spread over the area of the contiguous United States. It's unreasonable to expect any more rail than one of the world megacities especially when you factor in the distances that need covering.
Raileks
"There's more people living in Tokyo than Australia" is a fact I would have lost a bet on disbelieving before looking it up.
xizar
"In the cursed earth where the mutants dwell..."
ElmyrDeHory
Comparing the access of citizens to the train, Australia has a European level, not an American one. Personally, I am impressed with this north-south central line. It leads many thousands of kilometers through the... void!
StillNotYouTube
well....where else did you want to go?
Goldensands
As a European who spent years in straya, their trains are perfectly fine. Having also spent months in America... that was a nightmar3
NZSheeps
*Cries in New Zealandish*
tjinme
Australia has huge areas where people don't live, and less than 10 percent of the population that the United States has. That in mind, I think it looks better than the United States.
thelegendofthetwistednavigator
US population is 13 times larger. Most of Oz that isn't outback is about 6 sheep farms
RabeMeansRaven
How so? Looks like it connects all three cities.
GemsAreOutrageousTrulyTrulyTrulyOutrageous
Get fucked, west coast!
HaikuSorrow
Less of a west coast, more of a west city.
GemsAreOutrageousTrulyTrulyTrulyOutrageous
Get fucked, west city!
Cilvaa
To be fair, the areas where the tracks don't go are basically all barren red desert.
Somerandomoldguy
If they bred any more trains one would eventually adapt venom.
xsynosis
seems to tick all the "big population center" boxes though, not much point running rail through the middle when there's no one to use it.
UltimaDoge
Haha, good one!
ExplodingRobotColon
Wait till you see Antarctica
InTheDistanceAPlaintiveEnglishHorn
InTheDistanceAPlaintiveEnglishHorn
DJOldguy
Not really, the fact that they have trains that run north-south and east-west from Adelaide (where I lived for 4 years, great place, a hidden gem) through the GAFA (the Great Australian Fuck All) is pretty cool. Fucking expensive passenger service, though.
Ginkou24
I’ve lived in both the states and Australia. Melbourne has some pretty good public transport in comparison. Multiple train, bus, and tram lines. Not to mention the free tram zone in the CBD. No need for passenger lines in the outback.
ThomasHarris111
That's were the people live. Id argue that's better than the states. I'm amazed at that yellow line cutting through the middle
tennessine
If one commits a crime, that would be a perfect place to hide!
Chromentor
Or you know, be sent to.
tennessine
Indeed, indeed.
GrandPubabofMoldistan
The biggest difference is, as everyone lives on the East Coast. Except Perth which is connected
CelestialSea
US and Europe have somewhat comparable population density though. US is about 1/2 Europe, whereas Australia is about 1/20th the population density of Europe.
brownribbon
Yeah but like 8 people live more than 20 miles from the coast.
annoyedOnion
We definitely have alot of trains in Melbourne
Bangarang88
Yes but Australia is wider than the moon! So, when you think about, there's a few...
astronomypictures
25 million people versus ~800 million.
abczyxttt
Umm.... 800 million what now?
astronomypictures
squid
Primary1
Why do those ones just go into the outback and stop? Train yards? You'd think they'd connect em all
Cranbananarama
Animals eat'em.
vindik8or
Each state has different rail gauges as a hangover from prior to federation. The Indian-Pacific and the Ghan were built specifically with one gauge. Those in QLD go to Mt Isa, Longreach and Charleville. There's not much past that before you reach a different state.
SilkStockingFullOfShit
Trains go from the mine to the port. Where else would you have us take the dirt?
Primary1
Idk, thats why i asked why
invenio
It's not worse. This is about population density. Low pupulation densiity makes rail infeasible. Different demands require different modes of transport.
SergeyPrkl
true, but even the densely populated areas in USA are without rails. USA is basically built for cars.
armagetz
Ehhh not really. Map is inaccurate. Can’t speak for entire country, but I know New England (only place of comprable population density to Europe over large areas) has far more extensive rail system.
armagetz
(By comparison, Western Europe has a density of around 237 per square kilometer, to the US’s 35)
invenio
The Northeast corridor has rail. But otherwise there are no large areas of continously densly populated regions like Europe. Maybe the exception is Southern Califronia where they tried to get a rail line but has been a complete disaster and a great model why rail does not work everywhere.
epicurusaquinas
There are elevated trains, complex bus systems and subways in those densely populated areas. From an investment/return point of view you have to do the actual calculations to find out what's worth it. Gut-check pseudo-economics don't work. New infrastructure has environmental impact which must be compared with daily environmental benefits to see which is best. Ground-based rail or any "either/or" kind of solution seems neat and tidy but doesn't mean it's the best solution.
youfshw2
While it's true that it's a complicated problem with a lot of factors to consider, I think it's safe to say that making cities entirely out of roads and parking lots was not the play.
epicurusaquinas
They are not "entirely" roads. Why do you ignore the elevated trains, subways and other "people mover" systems?
epicurusaquinas
Chicago's Metra (Train) Map
AntiProtonBoy
I flew across australia, and there is literally nothing in the centre.
TheAnswerWasAlwaysMoreLube
And what little is there is poisonous or venomous.
IUpvoteFuturama
To be fair there were severe concessions following the Great Emu war, and the second Emu war, and the Emu war on terror.
Boomshanker
I can't wait for the documentary staring John Cleese and Jim Jefferies to come out
Superchief86
There's a desert.
hitdog42
Same with The States, really. Just corn.
epicurusaquinas
The center of the USA is desert, flat grass plains and a mountain range.
mycleverusernameyousay
If aliens came down and choose me as their human, I would tell the alien visitors that central Aus is where we can go and build our new country. It’s perfect!
Zega000
There's spiders!
ViscousCousCous
I thought that's where Oz is?
orangearcadi
Well there's a big rock, at least
docwilco
Alice Springs begs to differ
Neurisko
But you need clearance to get there.
brownribbon
Lol wrong
docwilco
It's just a city, no clearance needed.
UWAGAGABLAGABLAGABA
There's also a top secret joint spy base there. That's what they were referencing.
beoluves
Oh there is a lot, but it doesn't want you there.
ThorGodOfHammerz
Like my ex-gf then
CitizenClam
Ever seen Mad Max? No particular reason.....
Shaukhan12
Ofc it wants them there. The 6foot spiders gotta eat something
snoozer
Referring baby spiders to 6foot is misleading
Corbenic
GuyBlunder
Don't they have 8? : )
Shaukhan12
The 8 foot ones eat the 6 and foot ones. Noone eats the 7 foot ones for very obvious reasons
kancer2012
Lmao
pianostacatto
"Looks like old Shelob's been having a bit of fun."
hajimedj
90% of Australia is uninhabitable, though
UltimaDoge
*99% considering that basically anything on that island can and will kill you
swedeonamoose
Just gotta do like the mericans, divert a few rivers to feed wasteful desert citys and high water use crops /s
Kuroiya
Unfortunately we already do the latter... Yay cotton >.>
themobileappisbroken
Fishkeeper
Not uninhabitable, just not great for people. Loads of wildlife out there.
randomwalrus
That sounds a lot like "doesn't want to die of exposure, dehydration, and/or animal attacks" talk to me, if I ever heard it.
homoerection
Or human attacks…..
vindik8or
Uninhabited, not uninhabitable.
SilverbackGorrilla
Well, it's pretty hard to live with no water. Most of Australia is a desert, so yeah, uninhabitable.
flarflarf
its pretty close to uninhabitable.
Plooperoo
So is much of America. Lol
Ryebread91
Have you seen the spiders out there? It's uninhabitable.
Flexiblewarmth
The worst spiders are where people do live - on the east coast.