英语高手请进!拒绝翻译软件的直译,谢谢

英语高手请进!拒绝翻译软件的直译,谢谢
This suggests that rail will be quite competitive with car for long distance journeys even without very high speeds. However, over longer distances it is air that is the main competitor. Given typical access and egress times from airports, it is rare to achieve a city centre to city centre time by air much below 3hours, however short the journey. Thus the three hour journey time is often seen as an important watershed for rail services. However, it is important to recognise that many business trips will have one or other end located out of the city centre, so that some access time for the rail service must be added on as well. The lower the rail journey time falls below 3 hours, again, the greater the potential catchment area for the rail service. On the other hand, where there is no direct air service, or frequencies are poor, rail may compete in the business market with substantially longer journey times.
The leisure market is generally much more price sensitive, with lower values of time. Nevertheless, improved rail speeds may lead to some substitution from the main leisure competitor - the car- as well as some diversion from coach amongst those with no car available. It is also in the leisure market that one would expect that the potential for generating totally new trips, for instance by making a day or weekend social or recreational trip feasible where it was not before, would be highest.
How does the evidence from introduction of high speed services to date match up to these expectations? In Britain, the history of high speed rail services in Great Britain so far rests mainly with two trains; the Advanced Passenger Train and the High Speed Diesel Train (or InterCity 125). The routes for which these two trains were primarily intended are illustrated in Figure 1.