Travel times on conventional express trains are about the same as travel times driving on the expressway. HSR is much faster...
-
-
roads are open to any users; only the infrastructure itself must be managed. But rail = infrastructure *and* service
-
Simply having roads is enough for people to use them. Simply having tracks is not enough for good rail service.
-
If we had tracks & mandated owners provide service as a matter of "Public Convenice and Necessity" w/i fixed parameters it would be.
-
Not so, because improvements in rail vehicles, changes in schedule patterns, etc, all need coordinated adjustments to track too
-
Infrastructure and vehicles are tightly intertwined when it comes to rail, in a way they aren't for other modes.
-
I strongly recommend Kasai's "Breakup and Privatization of JNR" for more information here
-
I'm not looking to break anything up, and the US national system is relatively uniform in capability except equipment height.
-
Same with the Japanese one--capability has nothing to do w rationale for breakup
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don't agree with that. We just assume paved roads will exist and be available, why not local railroad lines & stations?
-
Most trains can easily meet their cost of operation & make an overhead contribution if not burdened w/ infrastructure costs.
-
Countries which divorce track management from operations run into a lot of problems--see UK vs Japan
-
See Amtrak. So I suggest track owners be required to provide a basic level of service as a condition of their operating certificate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.