Let me put my comment at the beginning of this article instead of at the end. Simply enough, CNN’s writer offers this piece as if there is a battle in progress between airlines and passenger trains and. maybe, there will be a decision, real soon now, as to which system will be developed . One winner. One decision. One system.
The article examines costs and benefits almost exclusively of expanded rail and anyone reading the piece will likely conclude – as I did – that both industry groups will proceed with their plans for expansion, modernization, lowering costs to passengers. Both will continue to compete for traffic. And my bet is that both will be around in the next century.
Imagine a network of modern, super-fast and comfortable trains hurtling between every major city in the European Union, providing a reliable, comfortable and sustainable alternative to air travel…
Only a massive — and accelerated — expansion of the high-speed network can achieve these hugely ambitious targets, but are they a realistic and affordable proposition?…
The article wanders here and there through costs and benefits. But, I believe there is no question to be asked. The study will be completed and used as a guide for both private and public investment in passenger rail travel. If I lived in Europe, I’d be pleased as Punch. Prices will come down, service will improve. What’s not to like? And air travel will continue to compete in its own ways, in its own niche.
The Sound of (My) Music
Actually, just as well I don’t have one of these. My reflexes aren’t what they were 65 years ago.