this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2025
198 points (96.7% liked)

Fuck Cars

13361 readers
278 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] eligibly@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

The Acela II has a technical top speed of 189MPH.

Sounds pretty comparable to 200 mph (320 km/h) to me..

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The 200MPH is not the top speed. It is the operational speed. High speed trains in Europe regularly travel at speeds exceeding 300km/h.

[–] eligibly@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago

Yes... The point is the maximum design speeds of both are very similar.

Yes TGVs run operationally at much higher speeds than the Acela II but that is due to infrastructure, not the train itself. The train itself, independent of track constraints, is capable of similar speeds. I don't think there's much more worth saying on the matter.