That's a decent growth but man...if full service is just 16 daily trips, they're toast. Even the Hartford Line has that--and it has the advantage of serving more stations. America gotta realize that the only way to get money in passenger rail is in HIGH FREQUENCY servicehttps://twitter.com/MarketUrbanism/status/1046562405331988480 …
And as for LGV Sud-Est...I'm still wondering why they never ran the route through Troyes and Dijon back when they built it, or at least added stops at the few towns they DID pass, like Sens and Le Creusot
-
-
They skipped Dijon because detouring to serve it would add several tens of km to the route-length. And there is a Le Creusot stop.
-
Oh whoops re: Le Creusot... Granted Dijon would've made the route a bit longer, but if this graphic is any indicator, that would've been a better choice than what they're planning to do insteadpic.twitter.com/dPhFbH5CHr
-
[Dijon might also have required a tunnel. There are no tunnels on the LGV Sud-Est.] The LGV Sud-Est is ~100 km shorter than the legacy line.
-
The best Japanese comparison is the Chuo Shinkansen, modulo tunnels: ~400 km vs. 515 on the Tokaido Shinkansen and 550 on the legacy line.
-
Right so TGV could've afforded to be closer to the legacy route mileage and still been a huge success, and even when a greenfield route cuts out a ton of mileage it's still smart to have stops at whatever towns it passes (Kofu, Iida, etc)
-
I don't think it could have served Dijon centrally either way; the only intermediate stop on an LGV through a city center is Lille.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.