Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as other scientific bodies, airplanes contribute between two and three per cent of the emissions associated with global warming.  This includes an adjustment for the so called high altitude impact.  I flew recently from Austin to Pittsburgh.  My flights were quick, comfortable, and on-time.  The cost was less than $300.  Had I taken the train it would have cost me more than $1,100 for a sleeper.  And it would have taken me nearly two days to complete the trip. No serious military planner believes that passenger rail is important for the defense of the U.S.  A small number of C-5As and C-141s could airlift more troops in one day over 500 miles than a troop train, i.e. flying back and forth multiple times to pick-up the troops as opposed to having them spend all day on a train.  Moreover, it is relatively easy to knock out a rail line.  Just ask the Germans who fought in WW II.  Also, the C-141 as well as the C-130 can operate off a grass field if necessary. Passenger trains make sense in high density corridors where building addition road capacity or expanding the airways is impracticable.  And this is the only place that they make sense.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag