I tried to make it fairly realistic. Obviously I would like HSR absolutely everywhere, but a line through middle of nowhere Montana probably would not see much ridership and would come at extreme cost (especially in the mountains).

  • VoxAdActa@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    For high-speed rail? Basically, yes. Unless you’re into spending a couple million bucks per mile to rip out big chunks of the mountain. High speed rail can’t reasonably navigate tight turns or steep grades.

    • chansonnier@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m inclined to believe you, and have to say I love to see discussion like this here on lemmy’s version of fuckcars, but curious, does anyone know what switzerland does? Afaik, they have tons of rail and tons of mountains. Is it all/mostly low-speed? Sorry if it’s a dumb question or easy to answer.

      • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, it’s low-speed. There are only a handful of HSR lines crossing the Alps, afaik, but they’re generally huge, expensive projects that basically tunnel through many kilometers. For example, the Gotthard Base Tunnel is a 57-km tunnel through the Swiss Alps, but its feasible because it’s connecting large population centers with large existing HSR networks on both sides.