2 ms·
Not just passenger rail, but light rail. I'd think that upgrading disused tracks to that level is cheaper than a full restoration to some level capable of supp
by euroderf 3y ago
Not just passenger rail, but light rail.
I'd think that upgrading disused tracks to that level is cheaper than a full restoration to some level capable of supporting mainline-capable engines.
In any case, so-called interurbans were (AFAICT) the regional/intercity buses of their day.
- bell-cot 3y agoThere's a lot of devils in the details here - but yes, as a generality, interurban-style light rail can be done on far lighter-duty rails (& bridges, etc.) than even the bottom tier of "regular" railroading requires. Though it's not just the engines that are heavy on regular RR's. And many of the costs do not scale with track weight. And running a regional/intercity transit system is seriously non-trivial, even if Santa Claus somehow gifts you with a free and magically maintenance-free rail network.
- burkaman 3y agoYes, it was an incredibly extensive network before cars took over: https://urbanists.social/@straphanger/111059691532896415 https://urbanists.social/@straphanger/111059691532896415