Two Railways, One Subcontinent: A Study in Contrast

Indian Railways — with particular attention to Southern Railway — measured against the present state of Pakistan Railways

How one shared railway inheritance ended up following two very different paths after 1947.

Foreword

Few institutions on this ancient subcontinent mirror national progress as faithfully as the railway. Steel rails look mute and unfeeling, yet they quietly register the economic priorities, administrative habits, engineering capacity, investment choices, and social needs of the societies that built them.

The railways of undivided India were never the product of one uniform organisation. They grew out of a tangled mix of company railways, State railways, guaranteed companies, provincial interests, and princely-state systems. Over the decades, these separate undertakings were merged, reorganised, standardised, and folded into increasingly coherent railway administrations.

Partition in 1947 did far more than draw a political line on a map. It sliced through railway corridors that had never been designed with that line in mind. Workshops ended up on one side of the new frontier, the towns that generated their traffic on the other, and long-established operating patterns were broken overnight. Railway staff, their families, locomotives, carriages, wagons, stores, records, and administrative responsibilities were all swept into the upheaval.

India and Pakistan did not, therefore, start out with two neatly matched railway systems. What they did inherit, in large measure, was a common engineering and administrative tradition. What each side did with that inheritance afterward is what this essay sets out to trace.

This is not meant as triumphalism on one side, nor as an indictment of an entire nation on the other. Railways answer to long-term policy. They respond to investment, geography, industrial structure, freight demand, road competition, fiscal capacity, institutional reform, maintenance culture, and political priority. A railway can decline even when its railwaymen are skilled, just as a railway can advance because successive governments keep investing in infrastructure and operating capacity, year after year.

The contrast between the two, then, is best read as a study in institutional trajectories.

Translation Option

Tamil and other language translations available: Readers who would prefer to read this in Tamil, or another language, can use the translation option in the Blogger sidebar. The English text remains the authoritative original; machine translation may occasionally slip on technical railway terms, proper nouns, or historical nuance.

Constitutional Requirement: Article 51A(h)

Article 51A(h) of the Constitution of India asks every citizen to cultivate scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform.

A railway turns out to be an excellent vehicle for exercising that duty. It lets us weigh evidence rather than repeat hearsay, separate infrastructure from political rhetoric, grasp engineering constraints, compare measurable outcomes, and ask why two apparently similar institutions can diverge so sharply in their results.

The proper karthavya here is not simply to praise one railway or run down another. It is to inquire.

About the Author

I am Dhinakar Rajaram — an independent science writer, science communicator, amateur astronomer, and outreach volunteer based in Chennai. Railways have also held my attention for much of my life.

My interest doesn't stop at locomotives as machines. I find railway history, signalling, permanent way, traction, workshops, operating practice, traffic patterns, engineering choices, and the way a railway shapes a country's economic geography equally compelling.

I write here as a railway enthusiast and science communicator, not as a trained railway historian or railway officer. I have tried, as far as I can, to keep established fact separate from interpretation, and interpretation separate from conjecture.

Preface

When a railway crosses a national frontier, the steel itself does not suddenly change nationality. A rail, a bridge, a culvert, a signal post, a locomotive shed, a water tower, a workshop machine, a station building — each remains exactly what it was the day before. What changes is the institutional system that now governs it.

That distinction sits at the heart of the post-1947 railway story shared by India and Pakistan.

In British India, railway building was driven by a mix of strategic calculation, commercial opportunity, agricultural export, military logistics, port connectivity, and administrative convenience. The network that resulted was never laid out with the borders of August 1947 in mind.

Once Independence and Partition arrived, India and Pakistan each had to decide, in effect, what kind of railway they wanted to become.

India steadily consolidated its system into large zones, poured sustained investment into gauge conversion and, later, electrification, expanded track capacity on key corridors through doubling and multiple-tracking, built up domestic locomotive and coach manufacturing, and came to treat the railway as a strategic pillar of national infrastructure.

Pakistan, for its part, inherited a substantial and strategically placed railway system, but over the following decades rail investment steadily lost ground to roads. Pakistan's own Ministry of Railways has acknowledged that public-sector investment in rail fell away from the 1970s onward as policy tilted increasingly toward road transport — a shift that contributed directly to the deterioration of railway infrastructure and to rail's collapsing share of freight movement.

The contrast, then, is not a simple story of skilled railwaymen on one side and unskilled railwaymen on the other. It is a story about policy, capital formation, network economics, maintenance discipline, institutional continuity, and strategic choice.

1. The Railway Before the Two Nations

Railways first appeared on the subcontinent in the nineteenth century, but it would be a mistake to picture a single central authority designing and building one unified network from the outset.

What actually existed was a patchwork: private railway companies, State-owned lines, guaranteed railway companies, and princely-state railways, running on broad, metre, and narrow gauge alike. Each administration kept its own workshops, accounting systems, rolling stock, operating procedures, and commercial arrangements.

In short, the railway of British India was an ecosystem long before it became a system.

The later formation of large railway administrations was itself an act of rationalisation. Southern Railway's creation in 1951 illustrates this well. It brought together the South Indian Railway, the Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway, and the Mysore State Railway. The original proposal for the Southern Zone had in fact envisaged an even larger network, with considerable metre-gauge and narrow-gauge mileage included.

It's a useful reminder that today's Indian railway map is the outcome of repeated administrative reorganisation, not a network frozen in place since 1947.

2. Partition: When the Railway Map Broke

Partition handed the railways a strange engineering and administrative problem: the network had been built to connect economic regions, ports, markets, workshops, cantonments, agricultural districts, and industrial centres with no regard for the international frontier suddenly cutting across it.

The North Western Railway is the clearest example of this.

Its system had spanned territory that ended up split between India and Pakistan. Pakistan inherited the larger share of that network, while India retained the sections that became the foundation of railway operations in eastern Punjab and the surrounding region.

The disruption went well beyond geography. Railway staff had to choose which side they would serve. Locomotives and rolling stock had to be divided up. Workshop and stores arrangements had to be rebuilt from scratch. Traffic that had once flowed naturally toward Lahore, Karachi, Delhi, Amritsar, Rawalpindi, and other centres was cut off overnight.

The railway thus became both a casualty of Partition and, at the same time, one of the tools used to manage its aftermath.

That distinction is worth holding onto. A railway doesn't merely carry economic activity along — in a moment of national crisis, it can turn into an essential arm of humanitarian logistics.

3. India Chose Consolidation and Expansion

Independent India inherited a railway network that was extensive but far from uniform. Its post-Independence strategy accordingly became one of steady consolidation and standardisation.

Large railway zones were established. Gauge conversion became a long-term goal. Track capacity was expanded, line by line, through doubling and additional tracks. Electrification, modest at first, picked up pace across successive decades.

The scale of this transformation is hard to miss.

Indian Railways ran about 53,596 route-km in 1950-51. By 31 March 2024, that figure had climbed to 69,181 route-km. What's more telling than the growth in route length, though, is the growth in running and total track kilometres — a measure of how much track capacity was added on the busiest routes.

Electrification tells an even sharper story. Just 388 route-km were electrified in 1951. By March 2024, that had reached 62,253 route-km — roughly 90 per cent of the broad-gauge network.

This isn't simply an electrical-engineering footnote. Electrification reshapes locomotive performance, operating economics, maintenance regimes, energy dependence, acceleration, line capacity, and what a railway can do in terms of hauling heavier trains.

It is better understood, in other words, as a transformation of railway architecture — not merely the replacement of diesel locomotives with electric ones.

4. Southern Railway: A Particularly Revealing Case

Southern Railway is of especial interest because it represents one of the earliest post-Independence attempts to create a large, administratively coherent railway zone.

It was formed on 14 April 1951 through the amalgamation of the South Indian Railway, Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway, and Mysore State Railway.

The historical pedigree of its constituent systems reaches considerably further back. The South Indian Railway itself had antecedents in nineteenth-century railway enterprises, while the Madras and Southern Mahratta and Mysore systems connected different economic and geographic regions.

The network has subsequently been reshaped by the creation of newer railway zones. Consequently, today's Southern Railway is not identical to the Southern Railway of 1951.

As of 31 March 2024, Southern Railway had about 5,092 route-km, with 7,761 running track-km and 9,505 total track-km.

These figures are more instructive than a simple statement that Southern Railway is 'large'. A route-kilometre represents the physical route; running track-kilometres reveal how much track is actually available for train movements; total track-kilometres include the additional track infrastructure associated with yards, sidings, and other railway purposes.

That distinction is frequently overlooked outside railway circles.

5. The Southern Railway Story Is About Far More Than Speed

It would be a mistake to judge a railway merely by the speed printed on the timetable. A railway is a vast engineering organism, and speed is only one of its visible symptoms. Beneath the advertised 110 or 130 km/h lie track geometry, rail metallurgy, sleepers, ballast, formation, bridges, signalling, overhead electrification, traction power, braking, rolling stock, level-crossing protection, maintenance machinery, operating rules, and, above all, the ability of the railway to sustain the promised service day after day.

Southern Railway offers a particularly instructive case.

Its network is considerably smaller than that of Pakistan Railways. Yet the size of a railway is not, by itself, a measure of its technological maturity. What matters is what the railway does with the network it possesses. Southern Railway's progress is therefore worth examining not merely as a regional success story, but as an example of how an inherited railway can be progressively modernised without possessing the geographical scale of a subcontinental system.

100 Per Cent Electrification: The Latest Milestone

In September 2026, Southern Railway reached a significant milestone: 100 per cent electrification of its Broad Gauge network, covering 5,068 route kilometres. The final link was the 71-km Pattukkottai–Karaikkudi section in Tamil Nadu, for which statutory inspection was completed on 9 September 2026. With that work, the zone became capable of operating electric traction throughout its electrified Broad Gauge network without the need to encounter an unelectrified gap merely because a train had crossed into another section of the railway.

This achievement has a rather interesting historical arc. Electric traction in the Madras area dates back to 1931. Nearly ninety-five years later, the zone has reached complete electrification of its Broad Gauge network. The journey from early suburban electric traction to an entirely electrified zone is therefore not a sudden technological leap, but a long process of engineering accumulation.

There is an important distinction here. 100 per cent electrification does not mean that every railway vehicle must henceforth be electric. It means that the infrastructure necessary for electric traction is available across the relevant Broad Gauge network. Diesel locomotives may still have operational, shunting, maintenance, or other specialised roles, but the railway is no longer structurally dependent upon diesel traction merely because a section of its main network lacks overhead electric equipment.

Why Electrification Changes the Character of a Railway

Electrification is sometimes described as though a diesel locomotive were simply exchanged for an electric locomotive. That description misses the larger engineering transformation.

An electrified railway requires overhead equipment, traction substations, switching and protection systems, electrical control, compatible signalling arrangements, maintenance facilities, and a dependable power supply. Once these systems are in place, the railway acquires a different operating capability.

Electric locomotives can provide substantial tractive effort, particularly valuable when hauling heavy trains or negotiating gradients. Electric traction also permits regenerative braking on suitable locomotives and multiple units, potentially returning energy to the traction system. Locomotive utilisation can be improved because the operational nuisance of changing traction merely to traverse an unelectrified gap is progressively removed.

For a busy railway, these are not cosmetic advantages. They affect the timetable, locomotive utilisation, maintenance planning, energy consumption, and the resilience of train operations.

From a Patchwork Inheritance to a Predominantly Unified System

The achievement becomes even more meaningful when viewed against Southern Railway's historical inheritance.

When Southern Railway was constituted in 1951, it brought together several older railway systems, including the South Indian Railway, Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway, and Mysore State Railway. The inherited network contained different railway traditions, gauges, operating arrangements, and geographical challenges.

The subsequent history of Southern Railway is therefore one of progressive standardisation and rationalisation.

Gauge conversion gradually reduced the operational complications associated with a mixed-gauge inheritance. Electrification steadily extended the reach of electric traction. Additional lines were constructed on congested corridors. Stations and yards were modified. Signalling systems became increasingly electronic. Track maintenance became progressively more mechanised. The railway has consequently moved far beyond the engineering environment in which its constituent nineteenth-century systems originally operated.

That is perhaps the more interesting story than the introduction of any individual train.

Capacity Before Glamour

Railway capacity is a rather prosaic subject until one discovers what happens when capacity runs out.

A single-track railway has to accommodate trains moving in both directions. Crossing stations, block sections, gradients, station dwell times, train lengths, signalling margins, and maintenance requirements all constrain the timetable. Add a second line, and the railway acquires considerably greater flexibility.

This is why doubling, tripling, and quadrupling are not mere civil-engineering additions. They are capacity multipliers.

Southern Railway has undertaken such capacity augmentation on important sections, particularly around the Chennai metropolitan area and other high-density corridors. Additional lines around Chennai Beach, Korukkupet, Basin Bridge, Tambaram, and Chengalpattu have helped address the difficult problem of moving suburban, express, passenger, and freight traffic through corridors where railway land and operating paths are at a premium.

The railway enthusiast may admire a new locomotive. The operating department may be more grateful for an additional line.

Speed Enhancement Is an Engineering Exercise

Southern Railway has also progressively raised sectional speed potential on suitable routes. But a speed increase is not obtained by merely instructing the locomotive driver to turn the regulator a little further.

A railway authorised for higher speeds must possess track geometry and stability appropriate to those speeds. Rail and sleeper condition, turnouts, bridges, signalling, overhead equipment, braking characteristics, level-crossing arrangements, and maintenance standards must all be compatible with the intended operating regime.

Modern track renewal practices, heavier rail sections, improved sleepers, better switches, mechanised maintenance, and systematic elimination of speed restrictions can therefore produce substantial journey-time improvements without constructing an entirely new railway.

There is a useful railwayman's aphorism hidden here: the fastest train is of little consequence if the railway cannot provide it with a fast path.

The Quiet Revolution in Signalling

Another part of Southern Railway's progress is less photogenic but arguably more consequential than a new trainset: signalling.

Modern electronic interlocking reduces dependence upon mechanical and manual processes in the setting and protection of routes. Track circuits and axle counters establish whether sections of line are occupied. Communication systems increasingly rely upon digital infrastructure and optical fibre. These developments allow railway traffic to be managed with greater precision.

The next layer is automatic train protection.

In March 2026, Indian Railways sanctioned deployment of Kavach Version 4.0 over 548 route kilometres on high-utilisation sections of Southern Railway, covering Jolarpettai–Erode, Chennai Beach–Tambaram–Chengalpattu, and Shoranur–Mangaluru. The sanctioned works also include associated optical-fibre communication infrastructure.

This is significant because Kavach is not simply a device fitted inside a locomotive. Its proper functioning depends upon trackside equipment, station equipment, communications infrastructure, signalling interfaces, and locomotive-borne equipment. It is therefore an example of a railway evolving from isolated mechanical assets towards an integrated digital operating environment.

Southern Railway and the Geography of Difficulty

The zone's achievements should also be understood geographically.

Southern Railway does not operate over one uniform plain. Its territory encompasses densely populated urban corridors, coastal plains, industrial belts, agricultural regions, forested areas, and difficult gradients. The railway has to cope with metropolitan congestion around Chennai as well as challenging terrain elsewhere in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and Puducherry.

The engineering problem is therefore not simply to make one straight line faster. It is to maintain a coherent railway across markedly different physical environments.

That becomes particularly relevant in the Western Ghats and other gradient-intensive territories, where traction, braking, curvature, drainage, bridges, tunnels, and monsoon resilience all become important considerations.

A Smaller Network, Yet a High-Density Railway

Here lies the central point of this comparison with Pakistan Railways.

Southern Railway's network is smaller in geographical extent than Pakistan Railways' system. But network length alone tells us very little about railway performance.

A railway serving densely populated cities and industrial corridors can require considerably more trains per kilometre than a much longer railway serving a lower-density region. Consequently, a shorter railway can be operationally more demanding than a longer one.

Southern Railway must accommodate intense suburban movements around Chennai, long-distance express services, inter-city trains, passenger services, freight, engineering blocks, maintenance possessions, and increasingly sophisticated trainsets on the same broad railway ecosystem.

In railway parlance, traffic density can matter more than geographical length.

That is why comparing Southern Railway with Pakistan Railways purely by route kilometres would be comparing apples with oranges.

The Passenger Railway Has Also Changed

The transformation is visible to the ordinary passenger as well.

Southern Railway has become an important operating ground for modern train services, including Vande Bharat Express services, alongside conventional express, passenger, suburban, and MEMU services. The significance of these trains, however, lies not merely in their appearance or acceleration. Their usefulness depends upon the infrastructure beneath them.

A modern trainset placed upon a congested railway cannot manufacture capacity.

Thus, the real progress lies in the combination: modern rolling stock, electrification, additional track, improved signalling, better station infrastructure, track renewal, speed enhancement, and increasingly sophisticated safety systems.

The Southern Railway Lesson

Southern Railway demonstrates a rather important principle in railway development: modernisation is cumulative.

There is rarely one grand technological leap after which a railway suddenly becomes modern. Instead, dozens of apparently mundane improvements accumulate over decades.

A kilometre of renewed rail here. An additional line there. A new electronic interlocking system. A traction substation. An improved turnout. A stronger bridge. An automatic train-protection installation. A newly electrified branch. A modern locomotive. A better-maintained yard.

Individually, these may appear almost pedestrian. Collectively, they alter the character of the railway.

Southern Railway's completion of 100 per cent electrification in September 2026 is therefore best understood not as an isolated ribbon-cutting achievement, but as another milestone in a much longer process of engineering modernisation.

And This Is Where the Comparison Becomes Interesting

Pakistan Railways possesses a substantially larger route network, yet its own authorities have identified ageing track, obsolete signalling, maintenance constraints, and the historical decline of railway investment as major challenges.

Southern Railway, by contrast, has taken a smaller inherited network and progressively increased its electrification, capacity, signalling sophistication, safety technology, and operational capability.

The lesson is not that a smaller railway is automatically a better railway.

Nor is it that Pakistan lacks competent railway engineers or railwaymen.

The lesson is considerably more prosaic, and perhaps more important: railway capability is built by sustained investment and institutional continuity, not by network length alone.

And that brings us back to the question of speed.

Speed is visible.

Electrification is visible.

A new train is visible.

But the real measure of railway progress lies deeper — in capacity, reliability, safety, maintainability, energy efficiency, asset renewal, and the ability to keep improving the system after the cameras have gone away.

Southern Railway's story is, in that sense, not merely a story about faster trains.

It is the story of a railway becoming progressively more capable.

6. Doubling, Electrification, and the Hidden Mathematics of Capacity

Consider a single railway line.

If trains travelling in opposite directions must share one track, the timetable is constrained by crossing arrangements, block sections, gradients, station yards, signalling, and the margins required for safe operation.

Double the line, and the railway gains considerably more than merely another strip of steel.

It gains flexibility.

Additional track can permit trains to pass without lengthy waits, segregate traffic patterns, accommodate maintenance blocks more conveniently, and increase the number of trains that can be scheduled.

Electrification can then add another layer of efficiency by providing higher-powered traction and eliminating the need for diesel locomotives on the electrified route.

This is why railway modernisation should not be judged by photographs of gleaming locomotives alone. The real transformation may be buried beneath the ballast, inside signalling cabinets, beneath station yards, or in the timetable.

7. The Pakistan Railway Inheritance

Pakistan's railway inheritance was substantial.

The present Pakistan Railways system traces an important part of its ancestry to the Scinde, Punjab, Delhi, Indus Flotilla, and other railway enterprises which were progressively consolidated into the North Western State Railway and later the North Western Railway.

Pakistan's own railway history records the opening of the Karachi City–Kotri line in 1861, followed by the development of routes northwards through Sindh and Punjab.

At Partition, Pakistan inherited the greater portion of the North Western Railway system. The Pakistan Western Railway subsequently became the principal railway system of the western wing, before the present Pakistan Railways structure emerged.

The inherited system was therefore not an insignificant branch line network. It was a strategic railway linking Karachi and its ports with the agricultural and industrial heartlands of Punjab and the frontier regions.

8. The Strategic Importance of Main Line-1

Pakistan's Main Line-1, or ML-1, illustrates the central dilemma of the country's railway system.

The corridor linking Karachi towards Lahore and onward to Peshawar is strategically important because it connects the country's principal ports and major population and industrial centres.

Pakistan's Ministry of Railways has itself described ML-1 as a lifeline, while identifying serious problems involving ageing rails and sleepers, old bridges, obsolete signalling, and inadequate mechanised maintenance.

The proposed modernisation has consequently never been merely a question of making trains faster. Its real purpose is to restore the engineering foundation upon which safe, frequent, economically viable railway operation depends.

A railway cannot timetable its way out of a deteriorating track.

9. The Road-versus-Rail Policy Choice

Here lies perhaps the most important difference in the two stories.

Pakistan's Ministry of Railways has acknowledged that public investment in rail declined from the 1970s as policy shifted towards roads. The consequences were cumulative.

Railways are extraordinarily capital-intensive systems. Track, bridges, signalling, stations, locomotives, workshops, telecommunications, electrical systems, and maintenance machinery all require sustained expenditure.

Deferred maintenance behaves rather like compound interest in reverse: the apparent saving of today becomes the larger expenditure of tomorrow.

If a railway does not renew track on schedule, speed restrictions appear. If bridges age without systematic rehabilitation, restrictions follow. If signalling remains obsolete, capacity suffers. If maintenance machinery is inadequate, manual work must carry a burden for which it was never designed.

Eventually the railway becomes slower, less reliable, less attractive to freight customers, and less competitive with roads.

And once freight leaves the railway, the economic problem becomes still more severe.

10. The Freight Question: The Most Important Difference

A railway's commercial health cannot be understood by passenger trains alone.

Freight is the financial workhorse of many railway systems because bulk commodities can be moved over long distances with comparatively efficient use of energy and infrastructure.

Pakistan's Ministry of Railways has noted that Pakistan Railways once held an exceptionally large share of the country's freight market, but that this share fell dramatically as road transport expanded.

This is perhaps the single most revealing contrast with Indian Railways.

Indian Railways remains a major bulk freight carrier, moving enormous quantities of coal, cement, foodgrains, petroleum products, fertilisers, containers, and other commodities. Freight therefore remains central to the economics of the Indian railway system.

Pakistan Railways continues to carry freight, and recent figures show signs of improved traffic and earnings. But the scale of its freight role remains much smaller than the role once envisaged for rail in the country's transport system.

The lesson is plain: once freight customers migrate permanently to road, winning them back is considerably harder than retaining them in the first place.

10A. A Remarkable Indian Innovation: The Electrified Double-Stack Freight Train

A RAILWAY ACHIEVEMENT WORTH PAUSING OVER

Indian Railways achieved a world first in June 2020: the successful operation of a double-stack container freight train hauled by electric traction beneath specially designed high-rise overhead electrification. The achievement was not merely a matter of putting two containers one above another. It required the railway to solve a rather awkward engineering problem: how to accommodate an unusually tall freight load beneath an electrified overhead contact system without compromising electrical safety, structural clearances, or operational reliability.

On 10 June 2020, Indian Railways successfully introduced double-stack container operation under high-rise OHE between Palanpur and Botad in Gujarat. The contact wire was raised to approximately 7.57 metres above rail level, creating the necessary vertical clearance for the double-stack containers and their high-reach pantograph arrangement. The Indian Railways' Central Organisation for Railway Electrification described this as the first operation of its kind in the world.

The significance becomes clearer when the problem is viewed from first principles. A conventional electrified railway has overhead equipment positioned at a height suitable for ordinary rolling stock. A double-stack container train, however, is substantially taller. The railway therefore had to create a larger structure gauge and electrical clearance without simply abandoning electric traction and reverting to diesel locomotives.

India's solution was the high-rise overhead electrification system. It allowed the railway to retain electric traction while accommodating two tiers of containers. This was a particularly Indian answer to a problem created by the simultaneous pursuit of two objectives: high-capacity containerisation and railway electrification.

The achievement was subsequently demonstrated on the Western Dedicated Freight Corridor (WDFC). In January 2021, the Government of India described the 1.5-kilometre-long double-stack container train hauled by electric traction between New Ateli and New Kishangarh as the world's first such long-haul operation. The train used high-rise OHE, with the front locomotive being a 12,000-horsepower WAG-12 locomotive, supported by a WAG-9 locomotive. One such train carried 360 TEUs and had a gross weight of about 4,941 tonnes.

Here lies an important distinction in the present comparison. Double-stack freight itself is not uniquely Indian. The United States pioneered commercial double-stack intermodal operations decades ago, and China has also operated double-stack container services. China, in fact, introduced a double-deck container service from Ningbo-Zhoushan Port to Shaoxing in 2018, and Chinese authorities have subsequently pursued further double-stack electrified freight capability.

Nor, therefore, should the argument be reduced to the simplistic proposition that “India alone runs double-stack freight”. That would be incorrect. The more interesting achievement is this: India combined very tall double-stack container loading with high-rise overhead electrification and powerful electric traction on a dedicated heavy-freight corridor. It is the combination that deserves attention.

The contrast with the United States is nevertheless instructive. American double-stack intermodal freight developed principally on routes with generous vertical clearances and without conventional overhead electrification. Diesel-electric locomotives consequently remain the normal means of hauling such trains. India chose a different engineering path: raise the OHE, develop suitable pantograph arrangements, build dedicated freight infrastructure, and use electric locomotives.

The Western Dedicated Freight Corridor was conceived precisely for this kind of heavy and efficient freight movement. Its design incorporates double-stack containers, electric double-line operation, higher axle loads, longer trains, improved signalling, elimination of level crossings, and substantially greater freight capacity. DFCCIL describes the corridor as intended to facilitate trains of approximately 1.5 kilometres in length and heavy-haul operation with axle loads of 25 tonnes, with provision for 32.5 tonnes.

There is an environmental and economic dimension as well. Electric traction can reduce dependence upon diesel fuel on electrified routes, while double-stacking increases the amount of containerised cargo carried in a single train movement. In simple terms, the railway is attempting to move more freight with fewer train paths and without adding a second locomotive fuel system merely to obtain the necessary height clearance.

This is one of those railway developments which may appear almost prosaic until the engineering behind it is examined. Two containers may seem merely to be “stacked one above another”. In reality, the extra height affects the loading gauge, overhead contact system, pantograph design, bridges, tunnels, platforms, signalling structures, maintenance arrangements, route planning, and safety clearances. The apparently simple stack is therefore a systems-engineering problem.

It also illustrates why railway progress cannot be judged merely by route kilometres. A railway may possess thousands of kilometres of track, yet lack the infrastructure required for a particular form of high-capacity freight. Conversely, a shorter network may achieve considerably more when its infrastructure, traction system, rolling stock, signalling, loading gauge, and freight corridors are designed to work together.

And this is where the Indian comparison with Pakistan Railways becomes particularly revealing. Pakistan Railways possesses a substantial historical network and an important strategic geography, but it does not presently possess an equivalent operational system of dedicated, high-rise-OHE, electrically hauled double-stack container freight comparable with India's Western Dedicated Freight Corridor. The issue is therefore not merely one of locomotives. It is one of infrastructure, investment, electrification, loading gauge, freight policy, and long-term railway planning.

India's double-stack electric freight story consequently belongs in the larger story of railway modernisation. It represents the meeting point of electrification, heavy haulage, containerisation, dedicated freight infrastructure and engineering ingenuity. In a railway comparison, that is a far more meaningful achievement than simply saying that one country has longer trains.

Two containers high. Electric traction below. A railway engineered around the height of modern commerce.

Why the Achievement Matters to This Comparison

The double-stack electric freight train provides a useful test of the central argument of this essay. Railway advancement is not determined by the physical size of a network alone. It is determined by what that network is capable of doing safely, efficiently and repeatedly.

Indian Railways has progressively moved towards an integrated freight system in which electrification, dedicated corridors, high axle loads, longer trains and containerisation reinforce one another. The Western Dedicated Freight Corridor is therefore not simply another railway line. It represents a change in the conception of what a freight railway can be.

Pakistan Railways, by contrast, faces the more fundamental task of renewing ageing infrastructure, improving signalling, restoring freight competitiveness and attracting sustained investment. Its challenge is not a lack of railway heritage; it is the conversion of that heritage into a modern freight system.

That difference is important. India's achievement does not mean that every Indian railway problem has been solved. It means that India has demonstrated the capacity to solve technically difficult railway problems at system scale.

10B. When One Freight Train Becomes a Moving Railway: India's Long-Haul Trains

LONGER TRAINS, GREATER THROUGHPUT

There is another development which deserves particular attention when Indian Railways is compared with Pakistan Railways: the operation of exceptionally long freight trains. India is now among the comparatively small group of countries — alongside major freight-rail systems such as those of China, the United States and Australia — where very long and heavy freight formations form part of serious railway operations.

The idea is deceptively simple. Instead of operating several separate freight trains over the same route, railway operators can, where infrastructure and operating conditions permit, combine more wagons into a single long formation. One locomotive crew, one train path and one movement can consequently carry a very substantial quantity of freight.

But the engineering is anything but simple.

A very long freight train places unusual demands upon tractive effort, braking, coupler strength, draw and buff forces, gradients, signalling, loops and yards, track structure, train detection, crew management and train-handling technique. The longer the train, the more carefully the railway must manage the forces travelling through the couplers between the locomotives and wagons.

India Has Already Demonstrated the Concept

Indian Railways has experimented with, and successfully operated, several forms of long-haul freight formations. In October 2021, South Central Railway operated “Trishul”, a formation consisting of three freight trains coupled together, comprising 177 wagons. A second formation, “Garuda”, followed shortly afterwards. The Railway Ministry explained that such long-haul trains can help overcome capacity constraints, save train paths on congested routes, reduce transit time and improve utilisation of railway infrastructure.

This is more than an interesting railway experiment. It represents a change in the way capacity itself can be conceived. A railway does not necessarily have to increase the number of trains in order to increase the amount of freight moved. Under suitable conditions, it can increase the amount carried by each train.

The Dedicated Freight Corridors take this principle much further. DFCCIL has designed the new freight infrastructure for high-capacity heavy-haul operation, with the DFC network capable of handling trains of approximately 1.5 kilometres in length. The infrastructure is designed initially for 25-tonne axle loads, with provision for higher axle loads, and with larger clearances than much of the conventional network.

The Western Dedicated Freight Corridor adds another remarkable feature: double-stack container operation under high-rise overhead electrification. Thus, India is not merely making freight trains longer. It is simultaneously attempting to make them taller, heavier, more energy-efficient and more productive.

The Four Dimensions of Modern Heavy Freight

The significance becomes clearer if the developments are considered together:

• Longer: more wagons can be moved in one train.
• Heavier: higher axle loads permit greater payload per wagon.
• Taller: double-stack containers increase the amount of containerised cargo carried within a single train.
• Electric: electrification permits electric locomotives to haul these trains without relying upon diesel traction over the electrified route.

These four characteristics do not exist independently. They reinforce one another. A railway capable of running a very long train must possess suitable track, bridges, loops, signalling and operating procedures. A railway wishing to run heavier trains must strengthen its infrastructure. A railway wishing to carry double-stack containers must provide adequate vertical clearance. And a railway wishing to combine all these characteristics with electric traction must design its overhead electrical system accordingly.

That is why the Dedicated Freight Corridor should not be regarded simply as “another railway line”. It is a purpose-designed freight transportation system.

India Among the World's Heavy-Haul Railways

The United States has long been associated with exceptionally long freight trains, particularly in its vast western freight network. Australia operates some of the world's most spectacular heavy-haul mineral trains, especially in the Pilbara iron-ore region. China has developed an enormous freight railway system capable of operating long and heavy formations, including major coal and intermodal movements.

India has entered this select company in its own distinctive fashion. Its railway network is not merely a mineral-haulage railway like some Australian systems, nor is it primarily a privately operated freight railway like much of the American system. It is a vast mixed-use national railway carrying passengers, suburban traffic, bulk commodities, containers and military or strategic traffic.

That makes India's long-haul freight development particularly significant. The railway must accommodate heavy freight movements while simultaneously maintaining a passenger railway of enormous scale.

And What of Pakistan?

Pakistan Railways inherited an extensive railway system and continues to possess an important strategic freight geography linking Karachi and Port Qasim with the industrial and agricultural heartland of the country. Yet its present freight operation does not possess an equivalent dedicated heavy-haul system of the scale and sophistication now being developed in India's Dedicated Freight Corridors.

The contrast is therefore not simply that India has longer trains and Pakistan has shorter trains. That would be too superficial.

The deeper distinction lies in the supporting railway system. India's long-haul freight strategy is being accompanied by investment in dedicated tracks, higher axle loads, larger loading clearances, modern signalling, electrification, grade separation, longer loops and terminals designed around freight throughput. DFCCIL specifically identifies heavy and long-haul operation, double-stack containers, 25-tonne axle loading and double-line electric traction among the technological features of the DFC system.

Pakistan's more immediate challenge is different. Its railway authorities have to deal with ageing track and sleepers, obsolete signalling on parts of the network, maintenance constraints and the long decline in rail's share of the freight market. Modernisation of the ML-1 corridor is therefore intended to restore capacity and competitiveness before Pakistan can contemplate freight operations on the scale of India's newer heavy-haul corridors.

The Economics of a Long Train

There is also a simple economic principle behind the engineering. If a railway can safely increase the payload of each train, the fixed resources associated with train movement — locomotive crews, paths, signalling slots and terminal operations — can potentially be used more efficiently.

That does not mean that longer is automatically better. A train can become so long that it creates difficulties at loops, junctions, yards and terminals. Braking distances increase, train-handling becomes more demanding, and a failure anywhere in the formation can affect an enormous amount of freight.

Consequently, the real achievement is not merely length. It is controlled length — a train whose size has been matched by the infrastructure and operating discipline necessary to handle it safely.

This is an important distinction for our comparison. A railway should not be judged by the longest train that can be photographed upon it. It should be judged by whether long and heavy trains can be operated reliably, safely, repeatedly and economically.

India's progress in this field therefore complements the story of electrification and double-stack freight. From the 5,068-route-kilometre Broad Gauge electrification achievement of Southern Railway to the heavy-haul infrastructure of the Dedicated Freight Corridors, the larger Indian story is one of progressively increasing what the railway can do.

Pakistan Railways has the geographical advantage of a strategically important north-south freight spine and a substantial historical inheritance. What it now needs is sustained investment capable of converting that inheritance into a modern high-capacity freight railway.

A longer train is not merely a longer train. It is evidence of what the railway beneath it is capable of supporting.

10C. When the Lorry Boards the Railway: India's Roll-on/Roll-off Freight

ROAD FREIGHT, BUT ON RAIL

There is yet another Indian freight innovation which deserves mention in any comparison with Pakistan Railways: Roll-on/Roll-off, or RORO, transportation of road-going commercial vehicles by rail.

The principle is wonderfully straightforward. Instead of transferring the cargo from a lorry to a railway wagon, the lorry itself is carried by the railway. A commercial truck or goods vehicle is driven or rolled on to a specially designed railway wagon, secured for the journey, transported by rail and subsequently rolled off at its destination or an intermediate terminal.

In other words, the railway carries not merely the freight, but the freight vehicle itself.

This seemingly simple idea addresses a persistent problem in freight transport. A long-distance lorry journey consumes diesel, occupies road capacity, contributes to road wear and exposes the driver and vehicle to the hazards and fatigue associated with prolonged highway travel. If the railway can carry the lorry over the long middle portion of the journey, the road vehicle can be reserved for the first and last portions where road transport has a natural advantage.

A Particularly Indian Solution

Indian Railways has experimented with and operated RORO services in different parts of the country, particularly where geography, road congestion and the economics of combined road-and-rail transportation make the concept attractive. One of the best-known examples is the RORO service associated with the Konkan Railway, where commercial trucks are carried on specially designed railway wagons over the Konkan route.

The concept has an obvious attraction on difficult terrain. The Konkan region presents steep gradients, heavy monsoon conditions, tunnels, bridges and winding roads. Allowing heavy road vehicles to travel by rail for part of their journey can reduce the burden upon the road network while retaining the flexibility of road delivery at either end.

It is an excellent example of transport modes complementing rather than competing blindly with one another. The lorry remains useful; the railway simply undertakes the portion of the journey for which rail is particularly well suited.

Why It Matters in Our Comparison

Here again, the comparison with Pakistan Railways is revealing. Pakistan Railways does not presently have a comparable regular commercial RORO system in which complete road-going trucks or lorries are routinely loaded on railway wagons for long-distance transportation.

This is not to suggest that Pakistan lacks road freight. Quite the contrary: road transport carries a substantial share of Pakistan's internal freight. The point is that the railway has not developed an equivalent intermodal arrangement in which the commercial road vehicle itself becomes the railway's load.

The distinction is worth making because it demonstrates two different approaches to the relationship between road and rail. A modern freight railway need not attempt to eliminate the lorry. It can carry the lorry.

Beyond the Lorry: The Intermodal Principle

RORO belongs to the wider family of intermodal transportation. Containers provide one method: the cargo box moves between ship, rail and road. RORO provides another: the road vehicle itself becomes the rail-borne unit.

There is an elegant engineering logic behind this. Every time freight is transferred from one mode to another, time, labour, equipment and handling costs may be incurred. RORO can reduce some of those handling operations because the truck is loaded as a complete road vehicle.

It also illustrates a broader point made repeatedly in this essay: railway advancement is not measured merely by kilometres of track. It is measured by what the railway can do with those kilometres.

A railway capable of operating long and heavy freight trains, double-stack container trains under high-rise OHE, dedicated freight corridors and RORO services possesses a considerably wider freight vocabulary than a railway confined principally to conventional wagon movements.

India's freight strategy is therefore becoming increasingly diversified. Coal, minerals, foodgrains, petroleum products, containers, automobiles and road vehicles can each be matched to an appropriate railway technology or operating model.

The Larger Lesson

There is a temptation to regard road and rail as rival kingdoms, each attempting to capture the other's traffic. That is an unnecessarily narrow view.

The more sophisticated approach is to ask a different question: which mode is best suited to which part of the journey?

A lorry is extraordinarily useful for door-to-door collection and delivery. A railway is particularly efficient for moving large quantities over long distances. RORO attempts to combine those strengths.

That is why the humble lorry sitting upon a railway wagon is actually a rather profound symbol of modern transport thinking.

The road vehicle need not surrender its wheels. The railway simply lends it the rails.

11. The Present Condition of Pakistan Railways

It would be unfair to describe Pakistan Railways as a railway that has simply ceased to function. It has not.

It continues to operate passenger and freight services over a network of roughly 7,791 route-km. It has workshops, locomotive facilities, railway training institutions, stations, signalling personnel, engineers, operating staff, and a functioning timetable.

Recent financial figures also show that the system is capable of generating increased earnings when passenger and freight demand improve.

Yet the infrastructure problem is formidable.

A 2026 report citing the Pakistani Ministry of Railways stated that Pakistan Railways possesses about 11,881 track-km and 7,791 route-km, with nearly 67 per cent of existing track described as over-aged.

The distinction between track-kilometres and route-kilometres is crucial here. The larger track figure reflects the multiple tracks and other trackage that exist within the railway system. A railway may therefore possess considerably more physical track than its route-kilometre figure suggests.

The difficulty is not simply how much track exists, but how much of it can be maintained to the required engineering standard.

12. Why the Comparison Must Be Fair

It would be intellectually lazy to conclude that India succeeded merely because India chose better policies and Pakistan failed merely because Pakistan chose worse ones.

The two countries faced different geographical, demographic, economic, political, and strategic circumstances.

India inherited a much larger railway network and developed a vast domestic industrial ecosystem around it. It also possessed a very large internal market, substantial mineral traffic, major coal flows, extensive agricultural production, and enormous passenger demand.

Pakistan's geography is different. Its population and economic activity are concentrated along particular corridors, while substantial areas present difficult terrain and lower traffic density.

Defence requirements, fiscal constraints, political instability, floods, security problems, changing industrial patterns, and the rapid growth of road transport have also affected the railway.

Nevertheless, these factors do not invalidate the comparison. They explain it.

13. The Human Capital Question

There is another aspect which rarely receives adequate attention: railway institutions preserve knowledge.

Railway engineering is not merely a collection of machines. It includes permanent-way practice, signalling discipline, timetable construction, locomotive maintenance, carriage examination, bridge inspection, traffic control, accident investigation, workshop skills, stores management, and operating experience.

When infrastructure deteriorates for decades, institutional knowledge can also become fragmented because engineers and technicians increasingly spend their time coping with defects rather than improving systems.

Conversely, sustained modernisation allows an institution to move from reactive maintenance towards preventive maintenance, condition monitoring, mechanised track maintenance, computerised asset management, and increasingly sophisticated signalling.

That is why railway modernisation is fundamentally a human-capital exercise as well as a civil, mechanical, electrical, and signalling engineering exercise.

14. Workshops: The Unsung Backbone

A railway enthusiast naturally notices locomotives, coaches, stations, and signals. The railway engineer notices the workshop.

Workshops determine how much of a railway's rolling stock can be kept serviceable, how quickly components can be overhauled, how much equipment can be repaired domestically, and how dependent the system becomes upon imported spares.

The historical railway workshops of both India and Pakistan were significant industrial institutions. Some acquired reputations extending well beyond their immediate railway divisions.

Pakistan Railways still retains major workshop and locomotive-production institutions, including facilities at Lahore and Risalpur. India, meanwhile, developed a much larger ecosystem of locomotive, coach, electric equipment, signalling, and railway engineering production.

The difference is not simply one of technical talent. It is one of scale, continuity, procurement, investment, and the size of the domestic railway market.

15. Electrification: India's Strategic Advantage

India's railway electrification programme has become one of the most consequential transformations in its modern railway history.

By March 2024, Indian Railways had electrified 62,253 route-km, which was about 90 per cent of its broad-gauge network, excluding Konkan Railway in the cited calculation. As of September 2026, this figure has advanced to 99.6 per cent electrification, with approximately 70,084 route-km of the total broad-gauge network successfully electrified.

The implications extend beyond fuel substitution.

Electric traction offers high tractive effort, rapid acceleration, regenerative braking on suitable equipment, and the possibility of moving heavy freight with powerful locomotives. It also permits railway energy use to be progressively linked with the wider electricity system rather than depending solely upon liquid fossil fuels.

Pakistan Railways, by contrast, remains overwhelmingly dependent upon diesel traction. The absence of a comparable nationwide electrification programme has limited the potential for a similar transformation.

Electrification is expensive, however, and should not be treated as a magic wand. It makes economic sense where traffic density, operating patterns, energy policy, and capital availability justify the investment.

16. Signalling: The Railway's Nervous System

A railway's track is its skeleton, traction is its muscle, and signalling is its nervous system. Track and locomotives determine what a railway could move; signalling determines how safely and how densely it actually can. A double line with modern traction but primitive signalling still runs at the speed of its slowest safety margin.

Modern railway signalling determines how trains are separated, routed, protected, and regulated. The greater the traffic density, the greater the importance of reliable signalling and communications. Historically this job was done by mechanical semaphore arms worked from lever-frame cabins — a Victorian-era technology, reliable in its day, but slow, labour-intensive, and dependent entirely on human vigilance for safety.

India: Electronic Interlocking and Train Protection

India has moved substantially away from this legacy. Most trunk routes now run on electronic interlocking (EI), which replaced mechanical and relay-based route-setting with software-driven logic that cannot be defeated by an operator's mistake in the way a lever frame sometimes could. Automatic block signalling — colour-light signals spaced along a route, changing aspect automatically as a train passes — has become the norm on busy double and multiple lines, allowing trains to follow one another far more closely than the old absolute-block, semaphore-cleared system ever permitted. On select high-density corridors, centralised traffic control (CTC) lets a single control office supervise train movements over long stretches in real time, rather than leaving each station to manage its own block independently.

Layered on top of this is Kavach, India's indigenously developed Automatic Train Protection (ATP) system. Kavach uses onboard and trackside radio communication to continuously check a train's speed against signal aspects and permitted limits, applying brakes automatically if a driver fails to react — the same category of safety net that, in various national forms, underpins driver-protection systems worldwide. Its rollout is still working through the network rather than complete everywhere, but its direction of travel — from semaphore, to colour-light block signalling, to computer-based interlocking, to automatic train protection — traces the general evolutionary path that mature railways follow.

Pakistan: A System Still Largely Mechanical

Pakistan Railways presents a much more uneven picture, and one where the contrast with India is visible almost as soon as you look at what actually stands beside the track. Across large stretches of the network, particularly outside the two major cities, semaphore signalling — the pivoted mechanical arm, worked by wire and lever from a signal cabin — remains the dominant technology. This is not a minor holdover confined to branch lines; it is, by most accounts, still the majority system across the network as a whole, a genuine living survival of nineteenth-century railway technology operating a twenty-first-century traffic mix of express passenger trains and heavy freight.

Only in and around the two principal termini does the picture change meaningfully. Sections in and near Karachi and Lahore have been converted to colour-light electric signalling, giving those stretches the automatic, continuously-lit aspect displays that most modern railways take for granted. Lahore goes a step further, with pockets of Computer-Based Signalling/Interlocking (CBI) installed at some stations — the same underlying technology category as India's electronic interlocking, but deployed only in isolated locations rather than as a network standard.

Pakistan's own project documentation for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor-funded ML-1 line — the planned modernisation of the Karachi–Peshawar corridor — has explicitly identified obsolete signalling as one of the system's significant deficiencies, alongside worn track and ageing rolling stock. Investigations into fatal derailments, such as the 2023 Hazara Express accident that killed at least thirty people, have pointed to outdated systems, some unchanged since the colonial era, and have drawn criticism toward the government for neglecting signal systems and ageing track.

There are signs of movement. In 2025 Pakistan Railways launched a digitisation programme intended to upgrade communication and signalling on key sections, including computerised interlocking at Landhi, Jummagoth, Badal Nala, and Sarhad stations to replace manual controls, alongside a digital microwave radio communication system on the Karachi–Lahore section for more secure and uninterrupted data transmission. This is a genuine step, but it underscores how much of the rest of the network still waits its turn — a handful of stations converted at a time, against a system where semaphore remains the default rather than the exception.

The contrast between the two railways is nowhere more starkly visible than at the handful of points where the two networks physically meet — Attari, Dera Baba Nanak, Ferozepur, and Munabao. These border crossings offer something the statistics cannot: a single sightline in which both systems sit side by side. On the Indian side, electrified overhead wire and modern colour-light signalling; on the Pakistani side, track and signalling equipment that, even to a casual eye, look as though time simply stopped decades ago. Few images capture the diverging trajectories described in this essay more economically than that one glance across the border.

Why the Gap Matters

The difference again illustrates an important principle: railway modernisation is an ecosystem. A new locomotive cannot compensate indefinitely for inadequate signalling — however powerful the traction, a train can only run as close to the one ahead of it as the block system allows, and can only go as fast as a human eye reading a mechanical arm from a distance permits. Nor can a newly laid track deliver its full potential if trains cannot be safely and efficiently sequenced upon it. India's shift toward electronic interlocking, automatic block sections, and Kavach reflects an attempt to modernise the whole nervous system at once; Pakistan's islands of colour-light and computer-based signalling around Lahore and Karachi, set against a network still substantially worked by semaphore, show what happens when modernisation arrives at a handful of nodes without yet reaching the arteries connecting them.

17. The Economics of a Railway Are Not the Economics of a Bus Company

Railways possess enormous fixed costs.

The track exists whether a train is running or not. The signalling system must be maintained. Bridges must be inspected. Stations require staff and upkeep. Workshops require machinery. Locomotives and coaches need scheduled examinations.

Consequently, the economics of railway operation depend heavily upon capacity utilisation.

A railway carrying substantial passenger and freight traffic can spread its fixed costs over a large volume of movement. A railway with declining traffic may find the same infrastructure increasingly expensive per unit of traffic.

This creates a vicious circle:

under-investment → deteriorating infrastructure → slower trains and lower reliability → loss of customers → lower revenue → less capacity to invest.

Breaking that circle requires sustained capital expenditure, not merely occasional cosmetic refurbishment.

18. Why Indian Railways Has Not Been a Perfect Success Story

A balanced comparison must also acknowledge that Indian Railways has its own substantial challenges.

It operates one of the world's largest and busiest railway systems. Heavy axle loads, dense passenger traffic, mixed-traffic corridors, ageing assets on some sections, level crossings, congestion, maintenance windows, land constraints, and the enormous cost of new infrastructure remain serious concerns.

Electrification does not automatically solve congestion. A fully electrified single-track railway remains a single-track railway.

Similarly, a modern train running over a congested corridor cannot perform miracles.

India's railway transformation should therefore be regarded as an unfinished project rather than a finished triumph.

19. What Pakistan Railways Can Still Do

The condition of Pakistan Railways is serious, but it is not irreversible.

The most basic constraint, however, has to be stated plainly: the present economic condition of the country does not currently permit the kind of expansion, wholesale upgrade, or systematic replacement that the network actually needs. Rehabilitation is proceeding, where it is proceeding at all, in small, individually budgeted packages — a section here, a station there — rather than as a coordinated national programme. In the interim, the network has been quietly shrinking rather than growing. Narrow-gauge branches such as the Kohat–Thal line were abandoned decades ago and never rebuilt, and numerous stations along former North Western Railway branches — Kalabagh, Tank, Bannu, Hangu, Ustarzai among them — now stand derelict, their tracks misaligned or stripped for material, monuments to a colonial-era network that has contracted rather than modernised.

The scale of the deferred-maintenance problem is visible in the numbers themselves. By some estimates roughly four-fifths of Pakistan's track structure dates from the British era, laid eighty to ninety years ago or more, and much of it has never been comprehensively renewed since. The consequence is a network governed less by timetable than by speed restriction: trains built to run at 110 km/h are routinely held to 55-78 km/h on worn track, with more than a hundred separate engineering speed restrictions in force on the Karachi–Sukkur corridor alone at any given time, and officials warning that exceeding even 100 km/h on many sections risks a serious accident. Numerous branch lines — Wazirabad–Narowal, Shorkot–Sheikhupura, the Sangla Hill and Chak Jhumra routes into Kundian — are formally rated at speeds as low as 30 to 70 km/h, a fraction of what a well-maintained metre-or-broad-gauge branch elsewhere in South Asia would sustain. Even ML-1, the flagship Karachi–Peshawar trunk route earmarked for CPEC-funded rebuilding, presently operates across a wide 60-115 km/h band on infrastructure whose oldest sections date to the 1860s and 1870s.

Much of this deterioration has been documented not by official reporting but by Pakistani railfans themselves — enthusiasts running YouTube channels who ride these lines with a camera, recording rusted rail, bowed sleepers, semaphore cabins still in daily use, and stations reduced to a platform and a nameboard. Their footage has, in effect, become an informal public record of a network that official statistics understate, and it corroborates what engineering reports and journalists have separately found: a system where a lack of investment has compounded year on year until routine track renewal itself has become the exceptional undertaking, funded a section at a time when money can be found, rather than the baseline of ordinary maintenance.

The network already possesses the most valuable asset of all: established railway corridors connecting major population centres, ports, agricultural regions, and industrial areas. That right-of-way, once lost to encroachment or formal abandonment, is extraordinarily expensive to recover — which is exactly why the branches already abandoned represent a real and probably permanent loss, and why protecting what remains matters as much as improving it.

A rational revival would have to begin with asset condition rather than glamour.

• Renew the most critical sections of track.
• Rehabilitate vulnerable bridges.
• Modernise signalling on the principal corridors.
• Mechanise track maintenance wherever traffic density justifies it.
• Restore dependable freight schedules.
• Develop container and bulk-freight services.
• Improve locomotive availability and workshop productivity.
• Remove or protect dangerous level crossings.
• Modernise stations according to operational need rather than architectural fashion.
• Prioritise corridors according to traffic and economic return.

Recent track-safety allocations — several billion rupees apiece for sections like Rohri–Khanpur, Tando Adam–Rohri, Keamari–Hyderabad, and Khanewal–Shahdara — show this prioritisation beginning to happen in practice, even if the pace remains far short of what the backlog demands. Only after the underlying infrastructure is brought back to sound condition, corridor by corridor, should spectacular increases in passenger speed become the centrepiece of policy. A railway that cannot yet guarantee 100 km/h safely has no business promising 160.

20. What India Can Learn from Pakistan

It might seem strange to ask what India can learn from a railway system currently struggling with far deeper problems. But the comparison is useful precisely because it guards against complacency.

India's own record offers a partial answer to why it hasn't slid down the same path: its railway network is under continuous upgrade and renewal — track doubling, electrification, signalling modernization, rolling stock replacement — rather than investment that arrives in bursts and then dries up. That steady, ongoing commitment is what keeps infrastructure capacity ahead of, or at least in step with, traffic demand.

Pakistan Railways shows what happens when that discipline breaks down: maintenance deferred year after year, freight customers gradually lost to road transport, ageing infrastructure pushed well past its safe limits, and investment arriving in fits and starts rather than as a continuous commitment.

Pakistan's present struggles are, in that sense, a warning worth heeding — not a reason for India to feel smug.

The real lesson isn't 'we are ahead.' It's this: infrastructure renewal has to keep pace with traffic demand, year after year, without interruption — because the moment that continuity breaks, the decline that follows is very hard to reverse.

21. Two Railways, One Subcontinent

More than seventy-five years after Partition, the railway remains among the most tangible reminders that the subcontinent was once a single, interconnected economic geography.

That shared inheritance still shows through — in station architecture, bridge designs, workshop layouts, signalling cabins, embankments, locomotive lineages, operating vocabulary, and engineering conventions.

But the two networks did not travel the same road afterward.

India steadily expanded, reorganised, electrified, standardised, and technologically upgraded a vast system. Southern Railway illustrates this well: assembled from several older constituent systems, reorganised more than once, and gradually converted from a mixed-gauge legacy into a largely broad-gauge, electrified modern network.

Pakistan Railways, by contrast, held on to a strategically significant network but was worn down by decades of under-investment, growing road competition, ageing assets, and modernisation that never fully kept pace. Its current rehabilitation efforts suggest real potential remains — but so does a sizeable backlog.

The gap between the two, then, was not fated.

It was built up, decision by decision, over many years.

22. The Larger Lesson

A railway is a rare kind of institution: it cannot lie about itself.

It is unmoved by speeches, and steel does not respond to slogans. A bridge either bears its rated load safely, or it doesn't. A signal either protects train movement correctly, or it doesn't. A locomotive either produces the tractive effort demanded of it, or it doesn't. A timetable either delivers on what it promises, or it doesn't.

What railways reward is continuity.

They reward maintenance carried out before failure, capacity built ahead of congestion, engineering prioritised over ornament, and planning that looks decades rather than quarters ahead.

India's trajectory shows what sustained investment and institutional scale can build. Pakistan's present condition shows what it costs when infrastructure renewal is allowed to lag.

Neither story has finished being written.

That, in the end, may be the point that matters most.

A railway is not simply a leftover of the colonial era. It is an ongoing test of whether a modern state can plan several decades into the future.

Two nations inherited fragments of one railway civilisation.

Each went on to write its own chapter.

The rails are still there.

The verdict is not.

Expanded Glossary

Axle Load

The load carried by an individual railway axle. Higher permissible axle loads can allow heavier freight trains, provided track, bridges, wagons, and other infrastructure are designed for them.

Broad Gauge

A railway gauge wider than the standard 1,435 mm gauge. Indian broad gauge is 1,676 mm. It became the dominant gauge of Indian Railways and Pakistan Railways.

Capacity

The practical number of trains that can be operated over a railway section within a given period while maintaining required safety and operating margins.

Double Line or Doubling

The provision of a second running line alongside an existing single line, generally allowing trains travelling in opposite directions to operate with far fewer crossing constraints.

Electrification

The provision of an electric traction system, normally involving overhead equipment, substations, signalling interfaces, and associated electrical infrastructure.

Gauge Conversion

The alteration of a railway from one track gauge to another. In India, the conversion of metre-gauge and narrow-gauge routes to broad gauge has been a major long-term programme.

Interlocking

A signalling arrangement that prevents conflicting routes from being set simultaneously, thereby protecting train movements through stations and junctions.

Level Crossing

A point where a railway line crosses a road or other public way at the same level. Level crossings can create substantial safety risks where traffic density is high.

Main Line-1 (ML-1)

Pakistan's principal Karachi–Lahore–Peshawar railway corridor, historically and strategically one of the country's most important railway routes.

Metre Gauge

A railway gauge of 1,000 mm. Large parts of the historic railway systems of South Asia once used metre gauge before extensive conversion programmes.

Permanent Way

The railway term for the fixed infrastructure comprising rails, sleepers, fastenings, ballast, formation, and associated track components.

Route Kilometre

One kilometre of railway route, irrespective of how many tracks exist along that route.

Running Track Kilometre

A measure of the actual running track provided for train movements. A double-track railway therefore contains more running track kilometres than route kilometres.

Total Track Kilometre

A broader measure including running lines and other railway trackage such as sidings and yard lines.

Signalling

The technical system used to regulate and protect train movements, including signals, block systems, interlocking, train detection, and associated communications.

Tractive Effort

The pulling force produced by a locomotive at the wheel rim. It is a key factor in starting heavy trains and hauling them over gradients.

Track Renewal

The replacement of worn or life-expired track components to maintain safety, geometry, load-bearing capability, and permissible speed.

Route Capacity

The effective ability of a railway corridor to accommodate trains. It depends upon track configuration, signalling, junctions, station layouts, gradients, train speeds, dwell times, and timetable margins.

Kavach

An Indian automatic train protection system designed to assist in preventing certain train collisions and overspeeding incidents by automatically applying brakes when required under specified conditions.

References & Further Reading

1. Indian Railways Annual Report and Accounts 2023–24. Ministry of Railways, Government of India. Particularly useful for network size, electrification, rolling stock, traffic, and railway statistics.
2. Indian Railways Year Book 2023–24. Ministry of Railways, Government of India. Useful for route kilometres, track kilometres, zonal statistics, traffic, and infrastructure development.
3. Indian Railways Budget Speech 1951–52. Ministry of Railways, Government of India. An important primary source for understanding the original post-Independence zonal reorganisation and the formation of the Southern Zone.
4. Southern Railway — Tiruchchirappalli Division: Brief History. Indian Railways. Useful for the history of the South Indian Railway and the formation of Southern Railway in 1951.
5. Pakistan Railways — History. Government of Pakistan. Useful for the origins of the Karachi–Kotri railway, the development of the North Western Railway, and the railway inheritance of 1947.
6. Ministry of Railways, Government of Pakistan — ML-1 documentation. Particularly useful for understanding the condition of the Main Line-1 corridor, ageing track, bridges, signalling, maintenance, and proposed modernisation.
7. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics — Pakistan Statistical Year Book. Useful for historical route-kilometre and track-kilometre statistics of Pakistan Railways.
8. Pakistan Railways Academy. Useful for understanding the institutional and training heritage of railway administration in Pakistan, including the historic Walton Railway Training School.
9. Comparative railway statistics. Whenever figures are compared, the date and definition of the statistic should be checked carefully. Route kilometres, running track kilometres, total track kilometres, train kilometres, passenger-kilometres, and net tonne-kilometres are not interchangeable measures.

Note: Railway statistics are periodically revised. Figures quoted in this essay are therefore associated with their stated reporting dates rather than presented as timeless quantities.

Copyright & Usage

© Dhinakar Rajaram 2026

This essay, including its original prose, structure, analysis, presentation, headings, selection and arrangement of material, and the accompanying original illustrative poster, is prepared by Dhinakar Rajaram for educational, scientific, historical, and non-commercial public-interest discussion.

Readers are welcome to share the link to the original article and may reproduce reasonable extracts for educational, scholarly, review, criticism, or other lawful non-commercial purposes, provided that the author's name, the original article, and its source are clearly acknowledged, and that the extract is not presented in a misleading manner.

The accompanying poster is an illustrative visual created specifically to represent the subject of this essay. It is not an official Government of India publication, railway document, survey map, or governmental endorsement. Any depiction of the territory of India in the poster is intended to follow the territorial representation prescribed by the Government of India. The depiction of Pakistan and the wider subcontinental geography is likewise intended for geographical and historical context and must not be construed as an independent legal or political determination of territorial sovereignty.

No part of the poster is intended to reproduce, replace, or purport to be an official Government of India map. Where an official map or geographical source is required for legal, governmental, surveying, navigation, academic, or other authoritative purposes, readers should consult the appropriate official Government of India source.

The names, emblems, flags, railway markings, station references, locomotive identities, technical terminology, geographical names, and other recognisable elements appearing in the illustrative visual are used solely to identify and explain the subject matter. They do not imply ownership, sponsorship, affiliation, endorsement, or official approval by the Government of India, Indian Railways, Southern Railway, Pakistan Railways, or any other governmental, railway, or institutional authority.

Facts, historical events, geographical information, railway statistics, institutional names, technical terms, quotations, and other material originating from official records, public-domain sources, or third-party sources remain subject to their respective rights, licences, conditions, and applicable laws. Attribution is retained wherever appropriate.

The original expression, editorial arrangement, prose, analysis, compilation, presentation, and visual design of this essay remain the copyright of Dhinakar Rajaram, subject to applicable law and to the rights of third parties in material incorporated or referred to herein.

Substantial reproduction of the essay or poster, republication as a separate work, commercial exploitation, incorporation into another publication or product, modification presented as the author's original work, removal of attribution, or systematic redistribution requires prior permission from the author where such permission is legally required.

Nothing in this copyright notice is intended to restrict any right or exception available under applicable Indian copyright law, including lawful quotation, criticism, review, research, education, reporting, or other uses permitted by law.

The author does not claim professional railway engineering authority, official railway status, surveying authority, governmental authority, or legal authority concerning territorial boundaries. Technical, historical, geographical, and comparative observations are presented for informed public discussion and should not be treated as operational railway instructions, official governmental advice, a legal determination of territorial boundaries, or a substitute for authoritative railway or governmental documentation.

The author has endeavoured to ensure that the article and its accompanying visual are presented responsibly and without derogatory or inflammatory intent towards either India or Pakistan. The purpose of the comparison is institutional and engineering analysis: to examine how two railway systems arising from a shared subcontinental inheritance have followed different trajectories since Partition.

Any inadvertent factual, cartographical, typographical, or attributional error brought to the author's attention will be reviewed and, where appropriate, corrected in a subsequent revision.

Hashtags

#IndianRailways #PakistanRailways #SouthernRailway #RailwayHistory #RailwayEngineering #RailwayInfrastructure #Partition1947 #RailTransport #RailwayHeritage #TransportHistory #IndianEngineering #Pakistan #Bharat #ScienceCommunication #DhinakarRajaram