The average usual speed? 400 kph? or what?
No, not in the slightest.
The top speed for the high speed trains in use in Europe is closer to 300 km/hr, and that is their top speed.
They still need to accelerate as they leave their station and decelerate before arriving at their destination.
And they won't have perfectly straight tracks, especially if you want to look at a much larger distance between 2 separated cities.
So being generous and having the speed at 150 km/hr as an average (which hopefully also accounts for deviations from a straight line), you end up with ~600 km.
So far too short for your map.
Just like the flights when considered properly.
https://www.thetrainline.com/en-us/train-times/brussels-to-london
How come you having the most sophisticated technology, all of sudden becames "backward"??
Because you suddenly switched to Brussels.
1.5 hours flight is supposed to cover much more than a distance of mere 480 km. It would be 1600 km to 2000 km or even more.
But it is only actually 1 hour of flight.
Also, your number is pure insanity.
The plane does not magically accelerate to its cruising speed.
Even if it did, with a typical cruise speed of 900 km/hr, a 1.5 hour flight at this speed would be only 1350 km, much less than the 1.6 Mm or 2 Mm that you claim.
So once more your numbers are pure nonsense.
And you have still failed to address the flight I provided.
Why does it take 50 minutes to fly between Sydney and Canberra, a tiny distance of ~300 km?
The issue is your failure to comprehend how trips actually occur, including the acceleration and speeds involved.