>>1085670New York to London is less than 7h by a plane. At 70 mph, it would take 50h. You really think anyone would rather spend 100h to go both ways, or around 14, where you can sleep most of that time if going overnight?
Besides, they wouldn't be less expensive. Jet fuel is only fraction of a picture. Paying professional crew (obviously a bigger one than that on an airplane) for 48 hours of constant work, plus all of the maintanence, the costs of once again developing and producing this abomination would be absurd. Not something that airlines couldn't afford obviously, but if it would be plausible in any way, they would have already done that.
>>1085692>>1085691If your country can't afford roads, it won't afford airtravel as an alternative.
