undefined
@JessTheUnstill @geekysteven It's also easier to work on the train than on a plane.
One reason high speed rail was initiated in the UK was because back then it was hard to do work on trains, so getting there fast was what business travellers needed. (And we don't do a lot of in-country business travel by air in the UK.) But now with laptops, mobile phones and WiFi on the train, business people can get work done pretty easily. So speed is less of a factor, but reliability still is.
@JessTheUnstill @geekysteven I honestly wonder about how useful really fast trains are in the UK. By the time they've got up to top speed the next stop is coming up so they've got to brake anyway. And our track network is old and doesn't have a lot of long straight stretches. You can't go round the Morpeth curve at 200kph. But I can see them as being useful in huge countries between cities hundreds of miles apart and few stops in-between.
@geekysteven Was watching a video the other day about 200kph trains and how they're kind of pointless. It's better to have a 120kph train that is frequent and reliable, and has capacity to accelerate to 150kph if there's been a delay, to get back on schedule. Absolute speed isn't everything.