The fragmented nature of modern-day railways
The real *ways (not just rails, also roads) issue is one: evolution.<p>We start a project a day, with a certain set of needs and desires. The project takes time to be complete, let&#x27;s say 10-15-20 years, at the end some parts of the network are still useful and valuable many others are not. Change them is hard, demand again more time, once done (IF done) we end up in the similar departure scenario.<p>Society does not change that fast in general, but still do. In the past we have followed nature and people have started to follow transport networks, now with climate change, transport tech changes etc we experience issues.<p>The sole solution is IMO:<p>- do their best to create free networks, like privileging air and water transports who demand infra but only at their endpoints letting paths evolve much faster and simpler;<p>- do their best to avoid LARGE infra, preferring capillar ones were surely there would be useless parts but being a small local size and much connected network any segment cost far less so both profitable ones and unprofitable ones can be operated.<p>In the past we have seen something like this, for rails for instance: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;carfree.fr&#x2F;img&#x2F;2015&#x2F;06&#x2F;sncf.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;carfree.fr&#x2F;img&#x2F;2015&#x2F;06&#x2F;sncf.jpg</a> overall the old network worked LESS well and cost A BIT more, but the old one allow many paths from A to B so allow flexibility, the new one is far more efficient AS LONG AS transportation needs do not change.<p>We have seen the very same issue in modern just-in-time manufacturing and we see that solutions found so far are the same: less efficiency traded for more flexibility.