Not so, because improvements in rail vehicles, changes in schedule patterns, etc, all need coordinated adjustments to track too
Sure...and different parts of the US are very different from each other, too. The dense, linear parts where rail makes sense...
-
-
...would presumably work best with a similar ownership scheme to Japan. No mandatory subsidies for routes which ppl won't use.
-
On the other hand, if people WANT to take on the burden of keeping an underused rail line active, there's no harm in that.
-
As is the case for 3rd-Sector railways in Japan, which aren't profitable, but which are sufficiently beloved to be kept running
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.