Nah, comparing HSR to roads isn't a good a comarison. People don't take the train to go everywhere, they take it to get one far away place, fast. I would much rather take an HSR to get across the country than take a really long road trip.
I think you had a good point with your comparison of aviation versus HSR, because you made a fair case for the advantages of aviation, namely prices, but more importantly it was a comparison between two systems that both strive to achieve the same goal, reaching a distant location as quickly as possible
One thing I'm not clear on, is the cost of maintain roads really way cheaper than maintaining a rail line? You still need crews for filling potholes, enforcing speed limits, road signs, etc don't you?
As I think about it, I'm not sure the issue of efficiency is so clear cut, that simply saying one is cheaper to build is the final word. Sure you can have trains that are under capacity, but just as surely you can have roads to no where. For an extreme example, would people rather drive to Tibet, or take the train? Would they rather fly? Would flying really be that much cheaper if few people really want to go there anyway? Would maintaining a road up there really be the best way compared to simply building single, sturdy and fast rail line? I think simply citing infrastructure costs make an incomplete argument. You have to look at what people are moving to different places for, and why. Flying to a remote region might always be more cost efficient and faster than a rail line, while driving between two close cities will always be better than taking the train.
I remember reading about the inefficiencies of the current model of air travel, which they dubbed the hub and spokes method. Massive terminals with thousands of flights, and multiple connections just to get somewhere can make flying just as inefficient and costly as an under-capacity HSR. But what are you gonna do? Build terminals everywhere? Some places simply might not want to deal with the noise, lol, costs be damned. XD .
I don't understand why you would think it is not a fair comparison between railway vs bus-way?
Both form of transportation are almost identical except one runs on track, and the other one runs on road. If you ever taken an interstate coach service (like the ones in america) where you have toilets at the back and regular stops for rest, its pretty enjoyable, and relaxing to be honest.
Also, a bus is more modular than a train. You can increase number of buses on demand while you cannot do that with the train once it leaves the station.
One thing I'm not clear on, is the cost of maintain roads really way cheaper than maintaining a rail line? You still need crews for filling potholes, enforcing speed limits, road signs, etc don't you?
For one thing, with railroad tracks you need
flat-bottom steel rails (costly!) supported on timber or pre-stressed concrete sleepers (referred to as railroad ties in the US), which are themselves laid on crushed stone ballast. Cost of raw materials (iron ores, even coals are now imported from Australia) are increasing
EVERY YEAR for the past 10 years. That's something China needs to buy from
OUTSIDE CHINA. Making asphalt road on other hand are relatively inexpensive by comparison -
largely because you can get asphalt IN CHINA EVERYWHERE. Also, consider the maintenance issue - maintaining rail tracks requires specialized equipment and specially trained crews - while maintaining the road requires minimal training of the crew, and relatively inexpensive equipments (at most basic level - workers with shovels are all that needed. Most developed countries use road roller to compact the road surface). Also when you are maintaining the rail track, the whole rail track is almost always down, where as for bus-way/highway they can do that incrementally working on one lane at a time, thus the service can continue uninterrupted (closing only one lane while all traffic drive on the other lanes).
Now, also consider the train signal lights are all networked and
needs to be programmed and scheduled meticulously (to avoid catastrophic collisions). There are also overhead power line (and power substations) for trains that are highly specialized for design, construction and maintainances to consider. These are high skill, highly specialized works. Compare this to highway/busway, there is no need for traffic light. Road signs are needed but its not like it requires very high skill workers to put them up or designing them. On most highways, the speed limit is almost always either 100 km/hr or no limit (on European highway). So you don't really need to enforce speed limit since everyone knows its 100 km/hr (I never seen speed limit sign on highway). Just consider this scenerio: If railway track has problem, do you call any guy on the street to fix it??
You need highly qualified railway engineers to do it. For road surface, anyone with shovel can fill up the pot holes.
Of course, I know the bus/coach is slower than a HSR, but there is no reason to discard the idea. Its highly possible car makers in China can develop high speed buses that goes up to 200 miles per hour!! (and runs on fuel cell)
Obama Replaces Costly High-Speed Rail Plan With High-Speed Bus Plan
Seriously, I think there are merits to this satirical video.
