5 ms·
> Many places don't have the demand or physical possibility for a railway. This I don't get. I've seen rail stops in the smallest towns, where the train stops
by pkulak 13d ago
> Many places don't have the demand or physical possibility for a railway.
This I don't get. I've seen rail stops in the smallest towns, where the train stops for 30 seconds to let a couple people on or off. Places where even the smallest airplane makes no sense at all. Not 30-100, 1-2.
- boelboel 12d agoOld lines which have some more riders on other stops I imagine. You only need to maintain the rail which has been laid 150+ years ago.
- IAmBroom 12d agoI work in rail, in the US. This is not true. The FRA mandated a massive upgrade to rail safety for passenger rail about a decade ago, pushed by Congress, and it's still filtering through (though mostly achieved). That being said... federally supported rail is still far more economical than flight. It almost has to be: the train doesn't need to lift off the ground. (Why is it in Star Wars' universe that every 2-bit peasant owns permanently levitating "cars", but can't afford adequate lighting in their hovel?)