http://www.german-embassy.org.uk/new_hauptbahnhof_berlin.html


Berlin's new central station opens this weekend

http://morgenpost.berlin1.de/z/photos/p/bahnhof/id108522eeb52dd0c17e3984bcbdbba4e_bmp.jpghttp://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632962,00.jpg

Berlin's latest architectural landmark, the Hauptbahnhof (central station), is now complete. The ceremonial opening takes place on 26 and 27 May with a spectacular light show for an expected 100,000 spectators and an address by Chancellor Angela Merkel.

http://morgenpost.berlin1.de/z/photos/p/bahnhof/if27fb9684161d5b166c7ff26b0cf8703_bmp.jpghttp://morgenpost.berlin1.de/z/photos/p/bahnhof/ie4abb737773b64a82b13cc2481386c16_bmp.jpg

The $850-million, five-level station has been nearly 15 years in the making. Planning began in 1991 just after the formal reunification of communist East and democratic West Germany, and construction took eight years.

http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/publications/week/2006/060519/Photo/Hauptbahnhof-klein_May06_dpa.jpghttp://morgenpost.berlin1.de/z/photos/p/bahnhof/i2eaa9563d6c2fedc6c6a4eae971a5de6_bmp.jpg
Each day, 1,100 long-distance, regional and local trains will pass through the new station — one every 90 seconds. dpa photo

Some 100,000 spectators are expected to attend the station's ceremonial grand opening on May 26.

It will include a spectacular lightshow and an address by Chancellor Angela Merkel, followed by a large party on May 27 before the station goes into operation on May 28.

some pictures of the Lightshow Test Installation last Night ...
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632946,00.jpghttp://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632951,00.jpg
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632957,00.jpghttp://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632965,00.jpg
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632949,00.jpghttp://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632959,00.jpg
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632955,00.jpghttp://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,632953,00.jpg

The new Hauptbahnhof will face its first big test in June, when Germany hosts the soccer World Cup. Several games will be played in Berlin and nearby Leipzig, and officials expect thousands of international visitors to pass through the new station.


a great earCandy => http://dojo.fi/~rancid/loituma__.swf

We already have a thread here:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=354745

It's Europe's biggest! More here: http://morgenpost.berlin1.de/z/photos/index.php/item/bahnhof/id108522eeb52dd0c17e3984bcbdbba4e

Only the biggest cross train station, not the biggest train station of europe, not even of germany.

Only the biggest cross train station, not the biggest train station of europe, not even of germany.


It is the biggest rail station in Europe at least according to BBC and other stories I just read. Maybe it is technically the biggest passenger rail station and perhaps there are some freight?? stations that are bigger but I am fairly sure it is the biggest passenger rail hub in Europe. However, I doubt it will be the busiest in Europe or even close as Berlin is on the periphery of the German rail network.
Either way its an impressive construction.

It is the biggest rail station in Europe at least according to BBC

The "biggest" by what measure? Sqare meter, number of platforms, number of passengers? It sure doesn't look that big on first sight. It has for instance onlys 12 platforms (4 in east-west and 8 in north-south direction) for long distance traffic, compare that to Frankfurt's main station which has 24 platforms for long distance trains. And the number of passenger expected for Berlin Hauptbahnhof is 300,000/day whereas Frankfurt already today serves 350,000/day. Where Berlin beats Frankfurt however is in the 70,000 sqm of space it offers (Frankfurt 60,000), but another German central station, the Leipzig Hauptbahnhof, has 83,000 sqm of space and beats Berlin once again. So I wonder by what measure the new Berlin Hauptbahnhof can be sonsidered to be "the biggest".

Frankfurt, twice as many platforms for long distance traffic. 50,000 more passengers/day than Berlin.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a26/beta29/sbs_d_841_b_blick_hbf_500x403.jpg

Leipzig, 13,000 sqm more than Berlin.
http://strombo.st.funpic.de/rundflug.leipzig/slides/hauptbahnhof.jpg

(...) Frankfurt's main station which has 24 platforms for long distance trains (...)

because Frankfurts station still uses the "old" concept of head stations of the last centuries ... this always means: many plattforms ...

the Berlin Rail Station follows a newer concept (and is no headstation but a cross station. it is europeans biggest Cross Station):
newer concepts avoid much plattforms. they NEED as less plattforms as possible ...
taktrates are important => trains came in, ultra short stay (90 sec), and out ... next train come in ... tack tack tack tack tack ...

why is it so important that the station is a cross station?

I mean, how many important trains are running on the stadtbahn viaducts?
In the end, those few regional trains could also use the new tunnels, no?

some reasons ...

one is: better connection to all directions ...

another one: you reach the service area (in the middle of the cross) from all plattforms within an 'half train length'. changing a train with full service support included (buying something, changing money, informations etc.) means in the worst case situation: max. 'one train length' for all directions/combinations ...

thats of course also important for the taktrate thing ...
and it is more passenger friendly ...

yet another reason for less plattforms: its more efficient and cheaper (in building and under the aspect of regular support payments)

Yes it is europe biggest cross station, still it isn't the biggest overall.

Can anyone give me a link to high res pictures of this...ive been looking for good pictures but cant find any on google. Please at least 1600x1200

AMAZING

Bavaria set to build high-speed maglev line from Munich to airport

© AP
25.09.2007 09:39:22

(live-PR.com) - MUNICH, Germany (AP) - Bavaria's state government said Tuesday that it has reached an agreement to build a high-speed magnetic-levitation train from Munich to the city's airport.
The so-called Transrapid line would be the first to operate commercially in Germany. So far, the German technology has gone into regular service only in Shanghai, China.
«The state of Bavaria, (railway operator Deutsche) Bahn and the major industrial partners yesterday signed an agreement for the realization of the Transrapid project in Munich,» the state government said in a statement.

The Bavarian government has long strongly backed the project, but it has faced arguments over financing. Regional authorities did not immediately offer further details of the agreement.
The German maglev trains are built by Transrapid International, a consortium including ThyssenKrupp and Siemens.

http://www.mdr.de/I/4866424-high.jpg
http://img.stern.de/_content/59/87/598708/transrapid250_250.jpg

Great news. Germany's first maglev line.

Another news source states that construction will will be finished in 2014.

btw, there is a special maglev newspaper, that is being published every second month...

http://www.magnetbahn.de/site/dbmagnetbahn/zubehoer__assets/de/dateianhaenge/10__minuten__07__02.pdf


and heres a pdf describing the project

http://www.magnetbahn.de/site/dbmagnetbahn/zubehoer__assets/de/dateianhaenge/flyer__10__minuten__englisch.pdf

some more maglev news concerning the go-ahead for the munich maglev line:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7011932.stm

Germany to build maglev railway

Shanghai's maglev train started commercial service in 2003
Germany has come up with the funds to launch its first magnetic levitation - or maglev - rail service.
The state of Bavaria is to build the high-speed railway line from Munich city centre to its airport, making it Europe's first commercial track.

Maglev trains use electric-powered magnets that enable them to float above their tracks, allowing for much faster speeds than traditional rail services.

The 1.85bn-euro ($2.6bn; £1.3bn) project had faced financing problems.

However, the Bavarian state government said it had signed an agreement with rail operator Deutsche Bahn and industrial consortium Transrapid that includes the developers of the train - Siemens and ThyssenKrupp

....

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,507668,00.html

Germany to Build High-Speed Transrapid Train
Germany developed the Transrapid monorail 'magnetic levitation' train decades ago but couldn't decide whether to use it. Until now: Bavaria plans to use it for a link between Munich Airport and the city center.


http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,977321,00.jpg

Great news indeed :applause:

new rendering with next generation of maglev trains TR09 published:

http://www.transrapid.de/basics/archiv/194/mu1011n_tr_vor_tower.jpg

I'd say they are getting a pretty good price on it as well, $65M/km. Decent.

Wonderful news!
:okay:
Congratulations!!
:dance:

Not so fast, gentlemen!

Let me translate this article from the German business daily Handelsblatt:

http://www.handelsblatt.com/News/Unternehmen/Industrie/_pv/_p/200038/_t/ft/_b/1327971/default.aspx/bruessel-entmagnetisiert-stoibers-traum.html

...The European Commision said it does not see any chance that the maglev line will be sponsered with EU money. The EU sponsors only cross-border or research projects, neither of which the Transrapid line in Munich would resemble...

..The mayor of Munich announced that he opposes the project and plans to use all legal means to stop it. He furthermore added that the current cost calculation is misleading and that the real costs would be roughly €350 million higher. The mayor also pointed to the fact that the project needs to be approved by the Munich airport in which the city is a shareholder and will use its vote to block any approval. As reason for his opposition to the project the mayor cited environmental and noise concerns....

Not so fast, gentlemen!
As reason for his opposition to the project the mayor cited environmental and noise concerns....
that's a nonsense!

Noise concerns? The Maglev will be limited to 50db at night and 60db in the daytime. 50db is equivilent to someone talking to you at 1m distance, and 60db is equivilent to the sound in an averge department store. This is the quietest form of public transport around (of any value and speed).

This Mayor is mad. I hope this standing destroy's his career.

actually and unfortunately, it even helps his career.

When it comes to pragmatic decisisions about future projects, he can be sure, that he has a majority backing him, as long as hes against it......

The reason is, that most supporters of the new stuff keep quiet and the nay-sayers should loud enough for two or three...

Very good news.
it's a 300km/h?

>Since 2003
It is 2004 that Shanghai TR let a general passenger take it.
It is only trial driving for 2003 years. And it is 2006 that full-scale business driving began.

Some more information and photos of the Transrapid exhibition from my Munich visit several years ago :

Transrapid Munich Airport Maglev Link
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=214714

Can't wait it gets finished.

I heard that Shanghai Maglev has been a commercial failure. How will Munich Airport manage to make its maglev commercially successfull, if it is ever built ?

World's first maglev ran in the U.K. in 1884.
The, being next is Germany of 1989.
It is in use at an exhibition in Japan in 1985.

maglev running commerce is only Shanghai and Japanese Linimo now.

yes its finally happening yes well i hope this sets an example of things

Let's just wait and see what Stoibers successor thinks about the project, it's Stoibers pet-project after all. And Hamburg - Berlin anyone, that didn't happen even though it had been approved.

Great for Germany's capital! Can't wait to ride it! :banana:

Err... As far as I remember, Berlin is the capital of Germany, and Munich the capital of Bavaria "only" ;-)

^ You've forgotten that Bavaria doesn't belong to Germany.

Just listen to our dear Ede and u'll understand:
WdcEeUgjFNE

^^That was really funny. :lol:
Despite my having forgotten most of my German, I can still tell when somebody can't figure out what they want to say in the language :nuts: Thanks for that :cheers:

Err... As far as I remember, Berlin is the capital of Germany, and Munich the capital of Bavaria "only" ;-)

Not as far as I'm concerned lol :P

The Transrapid-Alarm rings!

http://www.blogmedien.de/wp-content/2006/08/06-01-25-Stoiber-Transrapid.jpg

Ede, how long will it take to go by the maglev and head for the airport?

muhahaa funny vid .. ggg .. gonna miss ede hehe

Erbse proudly presents: A fresh spicy render of ze new TR09, flying over ze rails:

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/4121/tr09bmgcp4.jpg

The other threads are ordinary and boring. REPLY RIGHT HERE, folks!

@Erbse. Ze whole world is speechless due to zat piece of german engineering.


http://www.stefanrusche.de/wp-content/media/germanengineering.png

Haha! That's Peter Stormare, he is swedish btw! :P

erbsenzaehler has the coolest avatar around!! :colgate:

Ok, not exactly on topic, but a reply nonetheless.

haha!
those VW commercials were gold!

more German engineeeering in da house :


Today the Pro-Transrapid-Community in Bavaria was founded.

Its members are high representatives of the Industry, the IHK and more supporters...

And they made a nice Christmas Maglev rendering ;)


http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/6605/trsnoway1.jpg

http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/3540/tr2av1.jpg


http://www.bayern-pro-rapid.de/

And they made a nice Christmas Maglev rendering ;)


http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/6605/trsnoway1.jpg


That is extremely slick! :okay:

I support that first Transrapid track in Germany.

There are several reasons:
First of all, the Germans have to pay for it, and not we Austrians. ;)
But far more importantly, its fucking hilarious if not pathetic that you put a huge amount of effort and even more money into developing a technological gem like the Transrapid, which really comes up to the expectations, but then just dump all that globally leading top technology in the trash bin waiting that Japan who acts unlike Germany clever, catches up, and sees happily how it can take over the lead.

The discussion in Munich absolutely lacks any look over the own fence. Its so extremely narrow minded you can't bear it.

more christmas renderings from the Transrapid guys...



http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt2_1.jpg

http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt1_2.jpg

http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt3_1.jpg

http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt4_1.jpg

http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt5_1.jpg

^ Cool renders dude.

But Christmas is over, so let's turn to something summerly. Whoop!

http://www.reiserat.de/img/reiserat/transrapid.jpg

http://www.geolinde.musin.de/europa/module/Transrapid-mid.jpg

i really hope this train gets build, though i've my doubts :)

good to bring back this thread.

Today, newspapers wrote, that the new geneartion TR09 will start test runs on the test track in Emsland in April.

Its really about time...the accident will be 1,5 years ago by then....

http://www1.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/transrapid120.html


http://www1.ndr.de/media/transrapid74_v-gallery.jpg

Just saw this and all I can say is congrats to Germany, this is great I wish the UK would build a Maglev system.:(

new video published....

maglev at night.....somehow a bit stupid, because you can hardly see it

http://www.bayern-pro-rapid.de/bayern-pro-rapid-ev/ueber-uns/imagefilm/

Great project, nice movie!!! Also love the soundtrack, which is kind of monumental. But it's a pity that the movie is not downloadable. Anyway I can hardly wait for the Transrapid to shuttle between MUC and Munich City.

Rrrrrrrrrrrh!!Look into my eyes, Baby!
http://magnetbahnforum.de/phpBB2/userpix/252_Unbenannt3_1.jpg

Very nice, indeed! :)

It is time to build a Transrapid track in Germany otherwise the world could start thinking that this is a Chinese invention because of the only existing track in Shanghai...:nuts:

Just saw this and all I can say is congrats to Germany, this is great I wish the UK would build a Maglev system.:(

Or even keep the one they had in Birmingham!

Good to see Germany and Japan pushing forward with this technology, especially in a more practical way than Shanghai implemented it.

Very nice, indeed! :)

It is time to build a Transrapid track in Germany otherwise the world could start thinking that this is a Chinese invention because of the only existing track in Shanghai...:nuts:

Anyone who thinks this is a Chinese invention has to be incredibly stupid.

Everyone knows the sexiest things on Earth (including trains) come from Germany :)

Anyone who thinks this is a Chinese invention has to be incredibly stupid.

Everyone knows the sexiest things on Earth (including trains) come from Germany :)

Sorry, Germany does have sexy ladies and sexy music, but sexy trains, nonono, Japan has the monopoly on that one.

Fastech360 plus JRWest500 plus MLX-1 = Sexiest train fleet, das punkt! :D

You know that these japanese trains were designed by a german industrial designer?

Nemeister and Partner from Munich

http://neumeister-partner.com/pdf/neumeister%2Bpartner_de.pdf

You know that these japanese trains were designed by a german industrial designer?

Nemeister and Partner from Munich

http://neumeister-partner.com/pdf/neumeister%2Bpartner_de.pdf

ROTFL

ha ha ha, I told you that Germans were sexy :)

Especially Bavarians. Munich is 'da bomb'.

I think every large city (cough Austin) should have a maglev line from the city center to the airport.

Where can I find more photos of this station? Is there a thread on this station in SSC ? Can someone post some detailed photos on this thread. Amazing station by the way.

Thank you

...

Where can I find more photos of this station? Is there a thread on this station in SSC ? Can someone post some detailed photos on this thread. Amazing station by the way.

You find a few picture at ************** (http://www.**************/name/galerie/kategorie/Deutschland~Bahnh%F6fe+%28A+-+E%29~Berlin+Hauptbahnhof+%28Lehrter+Bahnhof%29.html). And flickr (http://flickr.com/search/?q=berlin+hauptbahnhof) is reliable source for station images too.

Thanks Flierfy

wow...german stations are realy huuuuge!

why is it so important that the station is a cross station?

That is basically not important. It just makes the station unique in a certain sense.
It was simply the cheapest way to create a main station in central Berlin that all long distance and regional trains pass through as no-one really wanted to re-erect the old termini that were in use until the 1940s.
The Stadtbahn-line alone doesn't provide enough capacity to carry all train through the central part of the city. So it either had to be widened or a new line had to be built. Widening would have been extremely expensive while the only extensive work for a new line was to bore a rather short tunnel under the Tiergarten to connect the still existing approaches of the defunct termini in the south (Potsdamer and Anhalter Bf) and in the north (Lehrter Bf).

I mean, how many important trains are running on the stadtbahn viaducts?
In the end, those few regional trains could also use the new tunnels, no?

Well, all trains are important. And those regional trains are the backbone of the rail traffic in Brandenburg and carry most of the passengers to and from Lehrter Bf.
These trains could all use the Tiergarten-line which they do in case of disruption on the Stadtbahn-line. However, the Stadtbahn-line is more popular as it passes Zoologischer Garten, Friedrichstrasse and Alexanderplatz. These three stations are way better connected to the underground and suburban rail network than Lehrter Bf will be in the next few decades. And the Stadtbahn-line is simply shorter for lines that passes the city from west to east and the reverse direction.

PROJECT CANCELED!

Reason: Germany is too poor... :cry:


:goodbye:


http://www.magnetbahn-bayern.de/Bayerns_Zukunft.gif

GERMANY SUX

Good decision!

The price rose from 1,85 billion to 3,4 billion ...

guesss how the price for the alternative S-bahn will rise, now that it must be built...

Good decision!

I totally agree. I'm glad the craziness is over.

the craziness is not over...it just started....

GERMANY SUX

...exactly my opinion...

Tiefensee said he sees a future for Transrapid technology. He said similar projects could work in other countries and praised industry's pledge to continue work on developing the technology.


He also said the technology has particular promise in countries where the rail system is not as developed as in Germany and the rest of Europe.


We see chances there that we'd like to pursue," said Tiefensee, noting that the government will continue to work with the Transrapid consortium to find customers in other parts of the world.


I am happy that Siemens AG (SI) and ThyssenKrupp AG (XET) will maintain the consortium for this technology and pursue its development in China and beyond, he said.


He noted that talks for Transrapid projects in China were proceeding well.

Tiefensee, you are such a motherfucking nerd!

Can you please watch your language and calm down, Tyron?

It wasn't canceled for fun. The project has become way to expensive (3.2 to 3.4 Billion Euros) and there was so much resistance against it. Even the city of Munich was against it, including 10 other municipalities along the way.

^^
But actually Tyron is right. Mr. Tiefensee is one of Germany's biggest fools - a complete miscast!

^^
But actually Tyron is right. Mr. Tiefensee is one of Germany's biggest fools - a complete miscast!

There are NO plans for any alternative airport link. It will take at least 7-8 years to get an adequate airport link. I completly agree with pflo: Any express s-bahn will be very costly.

:ohno::ohno: :cry:

....show is over...will finally leave this country...nothing doing...what a shame!

bye bye germany

....show is over...will finally leave this country...nothing doing...what a shame!

bye bye germany

Because one purely prestige project was cancelled? I agree that it's a shame, but at least you guys have a rail link to your airport in the form of the S-bahn - most other countries only have buses! Auckland (NZ) still doesn't have an airport link and has a city population of 1.4 million! It costs $90 to get a taxi from the airport to the city. Not only that but there is only one bus service and it is privately run costing you $15 to ride it and the journey takes up to 60 minutes when not in traffic - when in traffic it can take 15 minutes longer!

Count your blessings that Munich has what it does.

This is just rediculous! Just sell the technology to the Chinese, I'm sick of waiting for the Germans to start showing confidence in their own technology. Now that it looks like they're not going to bother with this, at least let a country with some ambition acquire and develop the technology. Once it's in their hands the Shanghai extension and the Hangzhou line will quickly go ahead, they will get the operational expertise, costs will come down and who knows, Munich might get it's maglev after all in 20 years when the Chinese build it for them.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This is just too funny. One of the richest countries in the world cannot afford to build a maglev line using the technologies of its own domestic company.

Really shows you how utterly commercially impractical maglev is at the moment.

Germans should really be thankful that the Chinese government was gullible enough to buy their overpriced technology.

€3bn is peanuts considering that the German government has wasted €20bn and rising with its investments in US credit instruments. Bavaria alone has lost €4bn via the state owned BayernLB bank. Let's hope its a lesson for them. Instead of lending other countries money that you won't ever see again, better invest it in German infrastructure the next time.

Good decision. 3 billion EUR for an airport link is just too much.

So much for German engineering.

Oh, the irony. :ohno:

Thyssen-Krupp wants to sell the maglev technology to China now.

€3bn is peanuts considering that the German government has wasted €20bn and rising with its investments in US credit instruments. Bavaria alone has lost €4bn via the state owned BayernLB bank. Let's hope its a lesson for them. Instead of lending other countries money that you won't ever see again, better invest it in German infrastructure the next time.

That is macroeconomics, and has nothing to do with an overpriced €3.4 billion investment in a 37 km Maglev line. Especially when you consider that there is an S-bahn link between the city and the airport already. Travel time would be reduced from 45 minutes to 10 minutes, what's the big deal. Upgrade the S-Bahn, and you can reduce the trip with 15 minutes probably.

This is just rediculous! Just sell the technology to the Chinese, I'm sick of waiting for the Germans to start showing confidence in their own technology. Now that it looks like they're not going to bother with this, at least let a country with some ambition acquire and develop the technology. Once it's in their hands the Shanghai extension and the Hangzhou line will quickly go ahead, they will get the operational expertise, costs will come down and who knows, Munich might get it's maglev after all in 20 years when the Chinese build it for them.



:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:


I totally agree....

http://www.wiesbadener-kurier.de/politik/objekt.php3?artikel_id=3218487

Translation:

Can Hesse save the Transrapid? Jörg-Uwe Hahn, head of the FDP Hesse, thinks so. Hahn demanded yesterday in the state's parliament in Wiesbaden that a study should be ordered about a link between the Frankfurt International airport and the Frankfurt-Hahn airport.

The Hesse ministry of transportartion was not available for a comment yesterday, but the idea to link the Frankfurt Intl and Frankfurt-Hahn airports is not new. Since many years there is a discussion about a high speed railway link. About 5 years ago minister president Roland Koch was supporting a plan to build a Transrapid line which was also broadly supported in parliament. Eventually the line could be extended up to Brussels and thereby link Frankfurt to the power center of the European Union....

...FDP politician Hahn urged to not abandon the plan for a German Transrapid line. Capacity restraints at the Frankfurt Intl airport could be solved by linking it to Frankfurt-Hahn he said.

http://tannhauser-gate.homeip.net/pics/2008/transrapid.jpg

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This is just too funny. One of the richest countries in the world cannot afford to build a maglev line using the technologies of its own domestic company.

Really shows you how utterly commercially impractical maglev is at the moment.

My thoughts exactly. It's been discussed over and over and over again on this website about how wonderful maglev is, and how it's actually cheaper or some such nonsense. Well, it's not. It's a great concept but the numbers don't add up, they never have, and slowly Siemens is beginning to realise it might not ever. Long live HSR.

It's been discussed over and over and over again on this website about how wonderful maglev is, and how it's actually cheaper or some such nonsense. Well, it's not. It's a great concept but the numbers don't add up, they never have, and slowly Siemens is beginning to realise it might not ever. Long live HSR.

What a nonsense. The increase in price was not caused by the providers of the Transrapid technology (Siemens and Thyssen-Krupp stuck to their original price estimates) but by the company which was supposed to do the concrete works and drill the tunnels (Hochtief AG). Hochtief argued that worldwide increases in commodity prices made it necessary for them to increase the price tag by more than a billion.

Hochtief AG has apparently major problems with its German construction unit.

Looks like they either tried to squeeze some extra profit out of the public Transrapid project in the hope that the government wouldn't be to strict with the budget, or they just wanted to bail out and sometimes it is politically better to do that by claiming that external factors make it necessary to increase the price beyond acceptability instead of simply saying "we want to bail out for internal reasons" which might make you look as an unreliable partner and can lead to problems if you want to compete for future projects.

http://www.welt.de/welt_print/article1840997/Schwacher_Dollar_macht_Hochtief_zu_schaffen.html

Translation

Dusseldorf, March 27th...The European construction unit of Hochtief, which is fighting with high losses in Germany, is supposed to become profitable again in the medium term. Hochtief now wants to be as selective as Bilfinger Berger and decline projects which offer only low margins...

Hochtief AG has apparently major problems with its German construction unit.

Looks like they either tried to squeeze some extra profit out of the public Transrapid project in the hope that the government wouldn't be to strict with the budget, or they just wanted to bail out and sometimes it is politically better to do that by claiming that external factors make it necessary to increase the price beyond acceptability instead of simply saying "we want to bail out for internal reasons" which might make you look as an unreliable partner and can lead to problems if you want to compete for future projects.

http://www.welt.de/welt_print/article1840997/Schwacher_Dollar_macht_Hochtief_zu_schaffen.html

Translation

Dusseldorf, March 27th...The European construction unit of Hochtief, which is fighting with high losses in Germany, is supposed to become profitable again in the medium term. Hochtief now wants to be as selective as Bilfinger Berger and decline projects which offer only low margins...

Pure speculation, the Munich maglev project is not even mentioned in the article you posted. If Hochtief could've made a profit on the project for the €1,5 billion that the project was quoted for, they would never have bailed out.

If Hochtief could've made a profit on the project for the €1,5 billion that the project was quoted for, they would never have bailed out.

Wrong reasoning. Hochtief apparently wants to restrict itself to HIGH MARGIN projects in the future. The Transrapid project might therefore very well have offered them a profit but apparently too low to compensate for the losses they are making elsewhere. And since they have limited ressources it is a rational decision to bail out of the Transrapid project and seek other ones where their limited ressources generate higher profits.

30. März 2007

Grüne warnen vor Kostenexplosion beim Bayern-Transrapid

Von Sebastian Fischer, München

Eigentlich soll im Herbst Baubeginn sein. Doch noch immer ist nicht klar, wer den Transrapid zum Münchner Flughafen eigentlich bezahlt. Jetzt präsentieren die Grünen ein Gutachten: Der Schwebezug kostet demnach auch noch über eine Milliarde Euro mehr als behauptet.

München - Er ist der große Traum des bayerischen Ministerpräsidenten Edmund Stoiber (CSU): der Transrapid. Auf der knapp 40 Kilometer langen Strecke zwischen Münchner Hauptbahnhof und Flughafen soll er in naher Zukunft im Zehn-Minuten-Takt verkehren. Baubeginn: Herbst 2007. Eigentlich. Denn die Einwendungen der betroffenen Bürger gehen in die Zehntausende, die Finanzierung ist nach wie vor ungeklärt.

Und jetzt prognostiziert ein Experte auch noch eine Kostensteigerung in Milliardenhöhe. Ein von der bayerischen Grünen-Fraktion in Auftrag gegebenes Gutachten kommt zu dem Schluss: "Die Transrapid-Trecke erfordert nach aktuellem Planungsstand Investitionskosten von rund 2,8 Milliarden Euro." Inklusive zusätzlicher Vorkehrungen zur Sicherheit kommt Gutachter Karlheinz Rößler auf einen Gesamtbetrag von 3,36 Milliarden Euro.

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,474917,00.html

Basically, this article from the 30th of March 2007 (!) states that the costs are likely to be 3,36 billion Euro instead of the 1,85 billion euro that was projected. I guess die Grünen did something right after all... The article mentions that the projected 1,85 billion Euro is based on calculations made back in 2002. Reasons for the higher project costs that are mentioned in the article are more expensive construction material, two tunnels, and a 1 km addition to the track. I guess Stoiber and the CSU should've let go of this projects months ago.

Reasons for the higher project costs that are mentioned in the article are more expensive construction material, two tunnels, and a 1 km addition to the track.

^^Which proves that it is not the Transrapid technology which is causing the cost increase but other factors.

What a nonsense. The increase in price was not caused by the providers of the Transrapid technology (Siemens and Thyssen-Krupp stuck to their original price estimates) but by the company which was supposed to do the concrete works and drill the tunnels (Hochtief AG). Hochtief argued that worldwide increases in commodity prices made it necessary for them to increase the price tag by more than a billion.

wait a sec, you are saying that the cost increase is partially due to the concrete works required by the maglev. so my question is, is the same concrete works necessary for a traditional rail that can run trains at 350KPH?

^^Which proves that it is not the Transrapid technology which is causing the cost increase but other factors.

I don't know about that. Are there any calculations that give an indication of the costs of a normal high speed rail between Munich and the Airport? Maybe the the Maglev track requires more expensive track construction works?

It's too late building Maglevs in Europe. We have an extensive HSR and conventional rail network, and we are heading towards integration now. Maglev means isolated systems. It's like building motorways not compatible with existing cars and trucks.

^^ well that's pretty much the case for every country that has a reasonably sized railway network. in other words, maglev is commercially impractical at the moment because:

(1) It's too expensive to construct
(2) It doesn't integrate with conventional rail networks well because you cannot run the maglev trains on the conventional rail, and you cannot run the conventional trains on the maglev rail.

(1) It's too expensive to construct

I don't think so. The German government has made a comparison study between the costs of a new Transrapid and a new HSR track between Hamburg and Berlin. They came out to be roughly the same at around €17million per km. The terrain of that Hamburg-Berlin line was largely flat though. If you have terrain with hills the Transrapid track should be cheaper because it can follow the natural topology better than HSR tracks which have to be very straight and therefore require more tunnels and bridges.


(2) It doesn't integrate with conventional rail networks well because you cannot run the maglev trains on the conventional rail, and you cannot run the conventional trains on the maglev rail.

That is most probably the biggest problem.

If Transrapid was such a great technology as some of the users here try to make believe, there would be more than one single Transrapid in public and commercial operation.

The truth is: There are hardly any advantages over conventional trains. Especially not on a commuter/automated people mover line, such as between Munich - Airport, where it wouldn't have been able to show its full speed potential. Classic railways are far more flexible, cheaper, they allow mixed transit, easy switches etc.

^^ The ultimate problem with the technology is not the technology itself but more about how people are trying to market the technology.

There's only one Transrapid, but there is more than one maglev in commercial operation (see Linimo)

The best application for the technology is not to be a competitor to high-speed rail, but to be applied as an urban transit mode. It has more advantages in an urban setting than a high-speed setting, including cost performance (better energy efficency at low speed than high speed). LINIMO happens to be an application of maglev in an urban setting, and others, like Taipei, are planning to make similar applications of the technology.

There are hardly any advantages over conventional trains. Especially not on a commuter/automated people mover line, such as between Munich - Airport, where it wouldn't have been able to show its full speed potential. Classic railways are far more flexible, cheaper, they allow mixed transit, easy switches etc.

Actually the Transrapid accelerates and breaks much faster than "classic railways" and is therefore very well suited for commuting people within a metro area.

It isn't! Its main advantage is speed and acceleration, but urban commuter transit requires smaller curves, which limits the maglev and makes it useless because they need incredibly large radii.

It isn't! Its main advantage is speed and acceleration, but urban commuter transit requires smaller curves, which limits the maglev and makes it useless because they need incredibly large radii.

Acceleration, yes, speed, no. There is no need for a maglev train to go fast to prove its worth. It offers several advantages over conventional rail in maintenance savings, low noise, rider comfort, and lower energy consumption. Except for rider comfort, all these advantages are negated when speeds exceed 400km/h.

The only real advantage theoretically is the lack of friction. Lower maintenance. Lower energy consumption. Less mechanical design complexities in suspension and other conventional bits of kit.

Discussed advantages which don't exist are anything to do with construction costs, radii of curve, gradients, passenger capacity (not mentioned on this thread though often brought up re maglev for some reason) etc etc. (Unless of course we are talking low speed commuter maglev in which gradients are significantly better than conventional).

The reality is that conventional rail took over a century of development to get refined enough to be an all-round effective product at high speed - and that was only because inner-city penetration already existed on the classic lines (without that high speed conventional rail would never have happened outside Japan). Even if Transrapid's figures are true, the vehicles on it's finished product are still just marooned Maglevs in a sea of conventional rail.

One day maglev will spread. It is better. The transrapid concept won't be it. To work it must evolve from conventional rail. They said changing guage was impossible but the Spanish have done it - I see the future of maglev to be hybrid conventional maglev trains.

urban commuter transit requires smaller curves, which limits the maglev and makes it useless because they need incredibly large radii.

Are you sure that a 270-300m curve radius is "incredibly large"? I failed to find data for a comparable S-Bahn like the BR 423 here in Frankfurt but from my experience the curve radii of S-Bahn tracks are also quite large, we are not talking about a tram here. And furthermore when the S-Bahn has to go through a smaller curve it creates a hell of a noise.

Very interesting interview with Engelbert Kupka, the Barvarian government appointee for the transrapid project:

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/,tt2l1/bayern/artikel/205/165732/

Translation

Sueddeutsche: Were you surprised about the end of the Transrapid project? Shouldn't it be common sense that a 6 months old calculation wouldn't be valid anymore?

Kupka: ...If within 6 months the price doubles in size you have to ask yourself what game is played here. I have the impression that parts of the consortium wanted to get out of the project as fast as possible and therefore quoted an unacceptable price.

Sueddeutsche: Isn't it vice versa? The industry stated that it was saddened that such an important reference project was canceled. There are voices who are saying that the new government under Beckstein didn't want the Transrapid project and therefore was more than happy to see unacceptable price increases.

Kupka: ...That is completely off the truth. If the industry does want to exit a project they of course wouldn't openly say "we are happy that the project was canceled".

...

Sueddeutsche: Should the industry now license or completely sell the Transrapid technology to a foreign country?

Kupka: I am actually very interested to know whether the consortium was still owning all rights and patents to the Transrapid technology at the point in time when they made the original offer and how potential licensing payments might have influenced the updated price.

Sueddeutsche: Are you suggesting that patents have been sold to China in the meantime?

Kupka: It was just reported in the press that Thyssen-Krupp is negotiating with China about a sale of the propulsion technology. What parts of the know-how is actually still owned by the companies? It is not logical that a Transrapid track in Germany should cost about 90 million € per km. Copper and steel prices are the same everywhere, only labor costs are cheaper in China, but that cannot result in triple the amount of costs that a similar track costs in China.

Sueddeutsche: Will the government now consider building an express S-Bahn track between Munich and the airport?

Kupka: The express S-Bahn is dead. It would cost over 2 billion € and Bavaria would have to pay at least 1 billion € of that sum. That is hardly possible.

...

I did a search and couldn't find anything as I was wondering if anyone had any pics or info on this HSR line in Bavaria and Thuringia.

Some pics and links:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnellfahrstrecke_N%C3%BCrnberg%E2%80%93Erfurt

Thanks.

Nothing else? Darn. This looked like a really interesting project.

http://www.vde8.de

Nothing else? Darn. This looked like a really interesting project.

You're being much too kind, Basincreek. 20 years to build 107 km of railway line? I could find some much more poignant adjectives than "interesting". The Germans are truly moving into the high-speed era at a snail's pace. :lol:

You're being much too kind, Basincreek. 20 years to build 107 km of railway line? I could find some much more poignant adjectives than "interesting". The Germans are truly moving into the high-speed era at a snail's pace. :lol:

Well, this looks like it'll have almost as many tunnels as the Hannover-Wurzberg line and that took forever to build too.

^^ Hum... Beijing-Shanghai has 400 km of tunnels and 200 km of bridges, and the line took five years to build. :) OK, let me say before someone else does it that I don't want to eulogise a dictatorship or blame a federal country for its lengthy planning process. That said... I don't think it should normally take 20 years to build 107 km of railway lines, and I strongly suspect that the reason it is taking so long is that this project has been used as a "fiscal pressure valve": turn it on when there was money in the treasury; turn it off where there wasn't.

There's nothing wrong about what you said - but:
This was only one of many projects to connect former East and West Germany, and this is the one that took longest by far. HRS between Hannover and Berlin came quite quickly, Modernizations of the Nürnberg-Jena-Leipzig-Berlin and Hamburg-Berlin connection also only took a few years.

Compared to these projects, the Nürnberg-Erfurt-Berlin connection was less attractive from the very beginning, so after having made some very ambitous plans, a reality check showed that - as not everything could be done in the same time - this would be the project to wait.
They started later than promised, stopped for several years after having finished maybe 30%, and then went on in a slower pace than possible in order not to spend too much money on this now.

To make my point clear: I don't think that the way this project was followed was smart at all. It always followed political, not economical interests and therefore wasted lots of money.
But it is neither symptomatic for the German Railways nor for German infrastructural developement in general.
I think 10 to 12 years would have been realistic and possible if not too many projects had been decided in the same time just after reunification.

^^Yeah, it's one of the main differences between federal Germany and centralist France: In France everybody is attuned to the idea that for the next five years (at any one point in time) one project, and one project only, shall enjoy nationwide priority. Then, of course, all the "local princes" (Les Barons, in French) fight - and fight dirty! - to see that THEIR region becomes the beneficiary of the national priority. At the end of the process most of the available money is spent on driving the chosen project forward "mit ach und krach". I have the strong impression that in Germany (in addition to the fact that your planning process is slower) money gets spread more thinly across the country? Each region wants - and is seen as entitled to - a slice of the cake?

That's still much better than the "process" in Canada.

If the federal government proposes to fund a big project somewhere, other parts of the country will be whining how their tax money is used to fund something they don't use, and all the journalists will be speculating what the government's election strategy will be. Opposition parties will be complaining the government wants to buy votes. Afterwards the proposal is put on hold, so nothing happens at the end.

This line is a classic example of why I feel _queezy_ about german HSR.

Today you can get to Warsaw from Berlin almost faster than you can get to München. I mean COME ON. You cant pinch every goddarn penny this much.
Yea, the classic lines are needed too, but former east germany got 2 (!) giga-airports already (Halle-Leipzig and BBI). I mean if you have money for both than surely 500 kms of HSR is within budget.


But what further enfuriate me is that they arent planning anything meaningful in the Paris-Wien connection. The french build 400 kms of 360kph to the border. Then the train will have to slow down to 160-250 'till Ulm (by 2020, maybe). Then nothing from Ulm to Augsburg (160kph maybe). Then 200kph from Augsburg to München.
Then again nothing is planned between München and Linz. Then 230, maybe 250 from Linz to Wien.

I mean, if we are planning europe to span from Glasgow to Ankara, then surely we would need a line that allows you to have breakfast in Paris, lunch in Budapest and dinner in Istanbul, no?

[…]
Yea, the classic lines are needed too, but former east germany got 2 (!) giga-airports already (Halle-Leipzig and BBI). I mean if you have money for both than surely 500 kms of HSR is within budget.

These both are no "giga" airports. Just normal german airports.


But what further enfuriate me is that they arent planning anything meaningful in the Paris-Wien connection. The french build 400 kms of 360kph to the border. Then the train will have to slow down to 160-250 'till Ulm (by 2020, maybe). Then nothing from Ulm to Augsburg (160kph maybe). Then 200kph from Augsburg to München.

Vmax on Ulm–Augsburg is today 200 km/h. Augsburg–München will be 230 km/h.


[…]
I mean, if we are planning europe to span from Glasgow to Ankara, then surely we would need a line that allows you to have breakfast in Paris, lunch in Budapest and dinner in Istanbul, no?

No. For such distances you better use a plane.

No. For such distances you better use a plane.

Tell that to the chinese

^^Now, now, Gramercy... such comparisons are dangerous. To finish the 1,200 km of HSR through the mountains between Beijing and Shanghai in five years the Chinese worked 24 hours a day, 365 days a year - including Christmas evening and Easter Monday.

Tell that to the Germans! :lol:

Tell that to the chinese

Why should I? I live in Europe, not in China. Distances up to 1000 km can be interesting for train, distances above this value are something for plane in Europe. Only exemption is perhaps Russia.

distances above this value are something for plane in Europe.

Except that Europe has the most crowded air traffic.

Except that today people regularly travel 5-6 hrs from Paris to the Cote d'Azur, so going at 300 kph average that would translate 1500-1600 km. People will EASILY use the train for such distances if they can get from Glasgow to the Alps or from Wien to the Black Sea etc.

Hell, today it takes LONGER to get from Berlin to München....and yet many people DONT fly.

Except that when the Spanish, Portugese, French and Italians are done you will be able to travel from Lisbon to Palermo on a dedicated high speed line.


Not many people drive their cars on the european highways from Uppsala to Alicante...but you the network exists.


There should be an inter-european network that spans 10s of 1000s of kilometres. And a Paris-Istanbul connection would be extremly crucial.

^^Yeah, it's one of the main differences between federal Germany and centralist France: In France everybody is attuned to the idea that for the next five years (at any one point in time) one project, and one project only, shall enjoy nationwide priority. Then, of course, all the "local princes" (Les Barons, in French) fight - and fight dirty! - to see that THEIR region becomes the beneficiary of the national priority. At the end of the process most of the available money is spent on driving the chosen project forward "mit ach und krach". I have the strong impression that in Germany (in addition to the fact that your planning process is slower) money gets spread more thinly across the country? Each region wants - and is seen as entitled to - a slice of the cake?

If it was a cake - where would the problem be? If there's a cake on the table, everybody has the right to get a slice.

Our Problem here in Germany is that quite often, it's not a cake. It's Spaghetti Bolognese with lots of Parmesano. And what happens? In year one, Stuttgart gets the noodles, Hamburg the sauce, and the cheese is sprinkled all over Bavaria. But no problem, next year, propably, if we don't run out of money, we should be ablo to give some sauce to Stuttgart...

So all money needed for one fine portion is spent, but nobody can yet enjoy dinner. And in two years, when cheese arrives in Stuttgart and noodles in Hamburg, in both places the sauce is totally cold already.


Between Ilmenau and Erfurt, this Sauce is waiting for about 5 years already. Bridges, tunnels, ..., everything. Just lying there more or less finished. Before finally opening the HSR in 2016 (+x), they will propably first have to renovate this section.

distances above this value are something for plane in Europe. Only exemption is perhaps Russia.
Except that Europe has the most crowded air traffic.

The crowded air traffic is due to the fact that still planes go from Vienna to Innsbruck, from Amsterdam to Hamburg, from Stuttgart to Lyon.

These are air travels that make no sense, technically. They all could take place on the ground within less than 2 hours, far more effectively, if the infrastructure was there.

Distances above maybe 1.000 km (please let's not discuss on the exact figure) still can take place more effectively in the air. Slots on European HSR lines will be rare also in a far future (hopefully!).


So, going from Glasgow to the Alps or from Lisboa to Palermo by plane is not only faster and more efficient, it also keeps the HSR lines able to provide necessary capacities for those who want/have to make a medium distance trip.

Today you can get to Warsaw from Berlin almost faster than you can get to München.
Considering even the direct distance between Warszawa and Berlin is 5% shorter than Berlin to Munich, is that really all that surprising? :ohno:

EC Berlin - Warszawa : 5 hours 51 minutes (via Poznan)
ICE Berlin - Munich : 5 hours 52 minutes (via Leipzig - Nürnberg)

^^ Yes, you're right kato2k8. But, really, it's like comparing one sad story with another. Berlin-Warsaw and Berlin-Muenchen are definitely shorter than Paris-Marseilles and - I think (do you know the exact distance?) - also shorter than Madrid-Barcelona. Both of the above offer non-stop connections with no more than 3 hours' travel time. The comparison is not perfect, of course...

...among other things, the "Mittelgebirge" north of Nuremberg makes it costly and time consuming to take decisive action. If anything then the flat plains between Berlin and Warsaw would be fast easier to concer. But... it's an international connection and hence low on DB's radar screen. Compare with the new Cologne-Brussels connection where the geography cries to high heavens for a direct line between Cologne and Liege. Not to happen. Last time I took the Thalys we lost an estimated 12-15 minutes in the agglomeration of Aachen. Three people left the train; one person got on. :soapbox:

hills and mountains are no excuse

the french will tunnel under the riviera for fraks sake

Except that Europe has the most crowded air traffic.

Except that today people regularly travel 5-6 hrs from Paris to the Cote d'Azur, so going at 300 kph average that would translate 1500-1600 km. People will EASILY use the train for such distances if they can get from Glasgow to the Alps or from Wien to the Black Sea etc.
[…]

There will be no lines on which it would be possible to reach 300 km/h average from Paris to Budapest or from Munich to Istanbul etc. It would not be economically to operate such lines. It makes more sence to substitute flights between Paris and Stuttgart and Paris and Munich for example.

[…]
But... it's an international connection and hence low on DB's radar screen. Compare with the new Cologne-Brussels connection where the geography cries to high heavens for a direct line between Cologne and Liege. Not to happen. Last time I took the Thalys we lost an estimated 12-15 minutes in the agglomeration of Aachen. Three people left the train; one person got on. :soapbox:

First of all Aachen is bigger than Liège, second today's inadequate connection between Liège and Aachen is not the fault of the DB but of SNCB. Their new LGV3 is not in service till today. Between Aachen and Düren Vmax is 160 km/h and between Düren and Köln it is 250 km/h.

Their new LGV3 is not in service till today.

Will be in service this summer - they say...

I don't get it, 20 years for such a project is basically quite fast (at least for German standards, i don't think that there's much of a difference to France)! You have to think of all the planning, protests by NIMBYs, etc. There are far more scary examples (A 94 is planned/under construction/stopped/and everything between for several decades now...).

^^As for France, I think you'll find that recent large projects (one example being the LGV-Est from Paris to the Voges) were rolled out in about 1/3 of that time. But, I suspect that the confusion stems from how much of the political preparations we count as part of the project time? It's quite correct that politicians in most other countries (or DEMOCRATIC countries: the political planning is quite swift in China...) also bicker forever. It can take literally decades to decide on a project in France as well.

All I meant to say is, once a law has been approved to build such-and-such a railway line then the process in virtually unstoppable. Even if the country hits the worst financial crisis in a generation, the project will continue without the slightest slowdown. The difference, as far as I've understood, is that public budgets in Germany are based on cash spending frames. If money runs out then, for that reason, work stops.

^^
Main problem in Germany is that NIMBYs and interest groups (ecologists, typically ;)) can block a project for quite a long time by calling the courts... The idea is not bad at all (but just democratic), but can result in delays of decades: For the A94 (Munich-Passau) they had to plan with several alternatives because some groups always found a way to block. Finally, the motorway will be build now...

Nimbyism is certainly a major obstacle for many project. In the case of this rail line, however, it was the lack of fund and more so the lack of political commitment that delayed construction works.

^^As for France, I think you'll find that recent large projects (one example being the LGV-Est from Paris to the Voges) were rolled out in about 1/3 of that time. But, I suspect that the confusion stems from how much of the political preparations we count as part of the project time? It's quite correct that politicians in most other countries (or DEMOCRATIC countries: the political planning is quite swift in China...) also bicker forever. It can take literally decades to decide on a project in France as well.

France's democracy is a much more centralized one than Germany's. In Germany there are simply much more layers involved with each decision. Doesn't necessarily make one system better/worse than the other, but when you're talking about infrastructure, centralization speeds up decisions: the smaller the number of parties that are involved in a decision, the faster that decision will be taken.

^^Yes, Koen, the fact that one party normally has a majority in France's parliament is half of it. The other half is the top-down approvals procedure. The Declaration d'Utilité Publique which is necessary for a project to start, land to be expropriated, contracts to be signed, is granted by the Conseil d'Etat - the highest judicial authority in the country. I should add that the CdE does not pull its decision out of a top hat: years of consultation at the local level (organised by the regional Prefects) preceed it and citizens are free to challenge every step of these before Administrative Tribunals. (Equivalent to the Judicial Review in the US system.)

BUT... once the CdE has declared that a given project is definitely in the public interest then that's the last word. To whom would you appeal? The supreme court has already spoken.

Nimbyism is certainly a major obstacle for many project. In the case of this rail line, however, it was the lack of fund and more so the lack of political commitment that delayed construction works.

Right, the problem of that line is a lack of funding. The line Munich–Berlin isn't seen as important as the line Frankfurt–Cologne for example.

... I couldn't help myself. Please take a look at this link to the home page of Reseau de Fer Francais: http://www.lgvsudeuropeatlantique.org/default.asp. It describes the plans that are already hatched for a new LGV, ultimately connecting Paris with Bordeaux in 2h05. Apparently it should stand ready 10 years from now - but I personally attach a large question mark to this forecast: the project is modulised in to a phase 1 (Bordeaux-Angouleme) and a phase 2 (Angouleme-Tours), and there's a very real chance that the other western LGV in the pipeworks (Le Mans-Rennes) gets wedged in between the two phases. What, you may well ask, does this have to do with Nuremberg-Erfurt? Well...

...the distance Berlin-Munich is identically the same as the distance Paris-Bordeaux. :rant:

Paris Bordeaux is 3h09m...today

compare that to Berlin München

^^Actually, Gramercy, the fastest direct trains (two per day, I think) need 3h01m to do Paris-Bordeaux. In France, this is commonly considered as being too slow. That said...

...the RFF site I just linked is mixing pears and apples: the speak of 300 km/h and of a target travel time of 2h05m in one the same breath. However, they'll only ever get down to 2h05m once they've introduced trains with a Vmax of 350 km/h.

yea, but they will actually do that not just talk about it....

actually, i think they will build 360kph just like the lgv est is 360kph ready

Happy May day, I just draw one Renfe-AVE-ICE 3.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Fdhs5n9-2XM/Sfj_PUKpkJI/AAAAAAAAA9U/OfwY4do7SCI/s640/renfe-ave.JPG

great

It looks really good.

I need to know how I can get the minimum price by Dauer Spezial? Every time when I try to get it on egc. Berlin - Munich - Berlin at least 3 days before as it says in the conditions I get only Dauer Spezial for first class. It shows me that my return or onward trip arent available and then I try to find different return or onward trip and all of them cannot make Dauer Spezial.

Try to book two single journey's
the Outbound travel first , some later the Inbound travel

Bookings can be made, not 3 months in advance, but 90 days

Well, Dauer Spezial is a special offer to fill empty trains. DB, however, seem to have cut down services between Berlin and München by 50%. (edit: reason are works on the rail line between Bamberg and Nürnberg which will last from Aug 1 to Sept 14) The reduced capacities mean less or no need to promote spare seats as there probably won't be any.

So the €58 offers are empty promises. There are probably no such tickets for the next few weeks. The twats of DB won't tell you that. They leave you searching for phantom tickets. The cheapest return ticket I could find at a random search were €113.

What are the REAL High Speed Rail Link in Germany?

Why don't they build a direct connection between Berlin and Munich?

Except Stuttgart S 21, what are the other HSR (V250 +) in Germany?

What about Maglev between Berlin and Munich? There are 550 km...it would be perfect...isn't it?

What about Maglev between Berlin and Munich? There are 550 km...it would be perfect...isn't it?

Yeah, maybe you are willing to invest in it?

What about Maglev between Berlin and Munich? There are 550 km...it would be perfect...isn't it?

Why not from Munich to Hamburg? Even better!

And from Hamburg it should continue on a floating track to London!
:nuts:

Why don't they build a direct connection between Berlin and Munich?

It's partly under construction (look there (http://www.bueker.net/trainspotting/map.php?file=maps/germany/germany.gif), it's the grey line).

Except Stuttgart S 21, what are the other HSR (V250 +) in Germany?

Look this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Germany) page.

What about the line between Mannheim and Basel? Last year most of the work (fourth track on the existing line) had been done between Mannheim and Baden Baden. What's the current situation?

Some parts of this line have been built or are under cosntruction, but others are delayed because of NIMBYsm.

What about the line between Mannheim and Basel? Last year most of the work (fourth track on the existing line) had been done between Mannheim and Baden Baden. What's the current situation?

A lot of information can be found here:

http://www.karlsruhe-basel.de/

Just north of Basel the Katzenbergtunnel is currently under construction. Construction on the tracks leading to this tunnel is about to begin. Besides that not a lot is going on. A lot of planning, but no building yet.

What are the REAL High Speed Rail Link in Germany?
This thread can be closed. There are simply no real high speed links in Germany. Here and there a few short stretches were built which allow advanced speed. Hence travel times on these routes have been cut by a few minutes. Nothing stunning, however.

This thread can be closed. There are simply no real high speed links in Germany.

Really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanover–Würzburg_high-speed_railway

This thread can be closed. There are simply no real high speed links in Germany. Here and there a few short stretches were built which allow advanced speed. Hence travel times on these routes have been cut by a few minutes. Nothing stunning, however.

troll.

troll.

Twat

This thread can be closed. There are simply no real high speed links in Germany. Here and there a few short stretches were built which allow advanced speed. Hence travel times on these routes have been cut by a few minutes. Nothing stunning, however.

Yes it is about time that Germany built high speed lines. This slow train that I normally take from Frankfurt to Koln only travel at a maximum of 300 km/h on a dedicated newly built line and it takes a full hour for the more than 200km. (I thought that average is actually higher than the most French high speed lines)

Yes it is about time that Germany built high speed lines. This slow train that I normally take from Frankfurt to Koln only travel at a maximum of 300 km/h on a dedicated newly built line and it takes a full hour for the more than 200km. (I thought that average is actually higher than the most French high speed lines)
No, it's not. Travel speed between Frankfurt/M and Köln is 177 km/h. The French TGV travels faster. And not only on 100 km but on 700 km of dedicated high speed line.

Which isn't hard as there basically isn't anything important inbetween. ;)

No, it's not. Travel speed between Frankfurt/M and Köln is 177 km/h. The French TGV travels faster. And not only on 100 km but on 700 km of dedicated high speed line.

Average speed, you mean?

so...how important is limburg and montabaur ?:nuts:

so...how important is limburg and montabaur ?:nuts:

The stations in Limburg and Montabaur are the result of political compromises. Germany being a democracy and all that...
But not all trains stop there, and the stations do serve a larger area, thanks to connections with other public transport.

In fact, I think it's a good idea to have a station about every 20km or so on HSLs', just like on the Shinkansen lines in Japan. Of course, that implies you run a schedule with a mixture of direct, limited stop and all stop trains, but again the Japanese show that this is possible.

Last time I took the train between Frankfurt and Koln, the cruise speed was between 250 km/h and 290 km/h.
Actually, a real high speed line, such as Ingoldstadt - Nurnberg.

No, it's not. Travel speed between Frankfurt/M and Köln is 177 km/h. The French TGV travels faster. And not only on 100 km but on 700 km of dedicated high speed line.

TGVs run faster, but don't necessarily always transport you faster...

TGVs run faster, but don't necessarily always transport you faster...

But then France is not your immortal beloved Switzerland; not too many people want to travel from Bordeaux to Grenoble.

I think that German raiway policy is different from France, China, Japan, Spain, Italy these countries have dedicated HSL a HSL creates a fast mass transport for people this avoid many problems for this countries and reduce the road-based system needs. But Germany has a more important freight transport than other countries in Europe where is the best balance of this, I really don´t know. But a dedicated HSL liberates the normal tracks for freight and conmuter transport.

In theory yes. But only if you are in the lucky position that you need the capacity for freight trains exactly where it makes sense to build a HSL, too. That isn't too often the case.
E. g. the Hannover - Würzburg HSL was planned for both HSR and freight trains (and is equally important for both).

I think that transports systems must be multimodal there will be ever the plane routes main airports, HSR routes link to other cities and metro and commuters links. China is trying to change from plane to HSR the mass people transport this will make China less oil deppendent in the future ( a great achivement due to the size of China and the future of the oil market ), but many other countries don´t have the financial resources for that. Europe must be less-dependent on imported-oil in the next future and the investment in HSR and upgrading normal rail is a key for this, that´s for sure.

But then France is not your immortal beloved Switzerland; not too many people want to travel from Bordeaux to Grenoble.

But people do want to travel from Bordeaux to Toulouse, a market that is vastly underserved by SNCF too.

But people do want to travel from Bordeaux to Toulouse, a market that is vastly underserved by SNCF too.

Where is the evidence of passengers clamoring for hourly system timetable departures? Someone is clearly not doing a good jobs of separate facts from intuitions in the name of not weakening arguments.

As if you would do so... :ohno:

As if you would do so... :ohno:

But then thun is the absolute offender of all :lol:


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


Take a real look of what a desperate lying fool thun has made of himself in the "Stuttgart 21" thread.

thun is among the few whose postings are both sensible and fact-based in the railways section. most of the others are just posting rants and engage in dick size comparisons ("my tgv is fast than yours.....").

btw. he is right: German rail network, just like the swiss one, is poly-centric, whereas France's is mono-centric.

thun is among the few whose postings are both sensible and fact-based in the railways section. most of the others are just posting rants and engage in dick size comparisons ("my tgv is fast than yours.....").

btw. he is right: German rail network, just like the swiss one, is poly-centric, whereas France's is mono-centric.


...
Well, I don't have any data for the last post. But its not that such an argumentation would be too complex. You don't need data to see it,
...




...
I didn't say they have a few lines, I said that by a few lines (in numbers, not in length) you can connect all mayor cities, dumbass...

Realities:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV


...
There are actually two major stations in Frankfurt, Frankfurt Hauptbahnhof and Frankfurt Flughafen. Studying the service density map of DB carefully will reveal that Düsseldorf, Cologne, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Nürnberg and Munich receive the absolute majority of rail services in Germany and Frankfurt is clearly the hub of all these services.
...

^^
One single direct corridor in Spain connecting four of the five largest cities in the country (the sixth city of the country is connected by a rather short branch line). One single direct corridor connecting Frances' three largest cities. In Italy, one single corridor (will) connect five of the six largest cities in the country (maybe some day far away all of them). Where exactly am I wrong according to you? :dunno:

^^
One single direct corridor in Spain connecting four of the five largest cities in the country (the sixth city of the country is connected by a rather short branch line). One single direct corridor connecting Frances' three largest cities. In Italy, one single corridor (will) connect five of the six largest cities in the country (maybe some day far away all of them). Where exactly am I wrong according to you? :dunno:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AVE.png

The "single corridor" you are making it up was not built as "one single corridor" project.

Using the "single corridor" theory you have made up just to defend yourself can be applied to Germany as well.

One "single corridor" without Berlin for Hamburg - Hannover - Düsseldorf - Cologne - Frankfurt - Mannheim - Stuttgart - Ulm - Augsburg - Munich just starts looking like the most heavily traveled stretch of the Japanese Shinkansen network, Voila!




...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
So WRONG :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

Neither was the one in Italy or France. ;) You completely missed the point.
And why doesn't DB/the Germany government plan with it in your opinion?

Neither was the one in Italy or France. ;) You completely missed the point.
And why doesn't DB/the Germany government plan with it in your opinion?

You desperately keep making things up to make "your point," which includes lies such as:


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

In fact, they have been planning for it all along...

Cologne - Frankfurt
(completed; Frankfurt Süd ICE station was one of the many compromise casualties)
Frankfurt - Mannheim
(proposed)
Mannheim - Stuttgart
(completed)
Stuttgart - Ulm (aka Stuttgart 21)
(in construction; "common people" are rioting against it with bloody eyeballs)
Ulm - Augusburg - Munich upgrade

Huh? Suddenly upgrates like Munich-Augsburg are acceptable in your eyes?:uh:
Stuttgart21 is nor including the HSL to Ulm by the way, thats a completely different project and has always been. And where are the HSL plans for Cologne - Hannover if you would be right? :ohno:

And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:

Where is the evidence of passengers clamoring for hourly system timetable departures?


I don't think that you will be able to come up with an example where the introduction of hourly system timetable has not lead to more passengers.
The observations are always the same: The introduction of an interaval timetable always leads to a significant increase in passenger numbers. Always. I know of no example to the contrary. But feel free to provide me one.
When a new product sells better than an old product it replaces the logical conlusion is that the new product serves the needs of the customers better than the old.
Hence when a interval timetable manages to attract more passengers you can conclude the same. I don't need to show you "clamoring passengers" to prove that.
It's quite interesting that private operators seem to like interval timetables too. The "Westbahn" company that wants to run trains on Wien - Salzburg starting in 2012 intends to run a strict interval schedule. Of course, they have to make money, so they have to offer something customers are willing to buy.


Someone is clearly not doing a good jobs of separate facts from intuitions in the name of not weakening arguments.

Maybe. But not me. I seem to be able to come up with facts to support my arguments just fine.

One such fact is that two major Metropolitan areas in France, that are only about 220 km from each other and linked by a direct railway see less than on direct train per hour between them... I call that underserved.

Realities:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Spain


One of the realities in Spain is that potential of the network is not realised fully.

If for example Renfe would coordinate the schedules between the main lines and the branches better they would be able to attract a lot more passengers.

For example: There is an hourly interval schedule on Madrid - Sevilla. If Renfe were to introduce an hourly interval schedule on Sevilla - Cadiz with a arrival times in Sevilla coordinated with departures to Madrid they would effectively offer anyone living in between Sevilla and Cadiz a fast connection to Madrid every hour, and not only a few times a day as it is now.

Right now what you see is that most trains from Cadiz to Sevilla arrive there a few minutes after the AVE to Madrid leaves from there.

Now that is something you won't see in Germany. DB actually puts a lot of effort in coordinating services. The way the ICE services connect in Mannheim is a good example.
Transporting passengers in a speedy way isn't just achieved by speeding up trains. You have to look at the whole system. Going fast is only part of the story. Running often and regular is also important.
A transportation system is a network that a passenger enters at point A and leaves at point B. For the passenger it is important how fast het gets from point A to B, but how long he has to wait in A is part of the answer to "how fast". How many options he has, and having a lot of options that have a similar transit time and route is also of value. To a businessman finishing his business in Köln returning to Frankfurt the most important question is not if the train to Frankfurt needs 1h10 or only 55minutes. The important question for him is: in how many minutes is my train, and when will I be home. The speed of the Köln - Frankfurt train is only one element of the answer.

If I arrive in Bordeaux station at 12:40 it will be 16:51 till I'm in Toulouse, 210 km aways. That's not very speedy. If I arrive in München at any time during the daytime I can get to Stuttgart within 3 hours, regardless of when it is I need to travel.
Trains travel faster on Bordeaux - Toulouse than they do on München - Stuttgart, but passengers are transported faster. DB also transports a lot more passengers on that route.
DB plans on speeding up its trains on that route, and that is a good thing, but because DB never loses its view of the big picture gains in train speeds translate in equal gains in passenger travel speeds, something that is not always the case in France or Spain.

Take a real look of what a desperate lying fool thun has made of himself in the "Stuttgart 21" thread.

Ad Hominem.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem).

Ad Hominem.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

One of the realities in Spain is that potential of the network is not realised fully.

If for example Renfe would coordinate the schedules between the main lines and the branches better they would be able to attract a lot more passengers.

For example: There is an hourly interval schedule on Madrid - Sevilla. If Renfe were to introduce an hourly interval schedule on Sevilla - Cadiz with a arrival times in Sevilla coordinated with departures to Madrid they would effectively offer anyone living in between Sevilla and Cadiz a fast connection to Madrid every hour, and not only a few times a day as it is now.

Right now what you see is that most trains from Cadiz to Sevilla arrive there a few minutes after the AVE to Madrid leaves from there.

Now that is something you won't see in Germany. DB actually puts a lot of effort in coordinating services. The way the ICE services connect in Mannheim is a good example.
Transporting passengers in a speedy way isn't just achieved by speeding up trains. You have to look at the whole system. Going fast is only part of the story. Running often and regular is also important.
A transportation system is a network that a passenger enters at point A and leaves at point B. For the passenger it is important how fast het gets from point A to B, but how long he has to wait in A is part of the answer to "how fast". How many options he has, and having a lot of options that have a similar transit time and route is also of value. To a businessman finishing his business in Köln returning to Frankfurt the most important question is not if the train to Frankfurt needs 1h10 or only 55minutes. The important question for him is: in how many minutes is my train, and when will I be home. The speed of the Köln - Frankfurt train is only one element of the answer.

If I arrive in Bordeaux station at 12:40 it will be 16:51 till I'm in Toulouse, 210 km aways. That's not very speedy. If I arrive in München at any time during the daytime I can get to Stuttgart within 3 hours, regardless of when it is I need to travel.
Trains travel faster on Bordeaux - Toulouse than they do on München - Stuttgart, but passengers are transported faster. DB also transports a lot more passengers on that route.
DB plans on speeding up its trains on that route, and that is a good thing, but because DB never loses its view of the big picture gains in train speeds translate in equal gains in passenger travel speeds, something that is not always the case in France or Spain.

So, is "system timetable" something new Switzerland has to teach Germany?

Another "reality" about the Spanish rail network is that Spain is not planning a network exclusively forcing travelers to go through Madrid with different stations in the capital.

Huh? Suddenly upgrates like Munich-Augsburg are acceptable in your eyes?:uh:
Stuttgart21 is nor including the HSL to Ulm by the way, thats a completely different project and has always been. And where are the HSL plans for Cologne - Hannover if you would be right? :ohno:

And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:

Did I call "upgrade" "HSR"? No. By the way, the EU labels Paris - Budapest as an HSR corridor though many segments of the corridor are not 250 km/h tracks. I cannot do anything about it if the EU decides to call 200 km/h tracks HSR tracks.

I am sure that the Hamburg - Hannover - Cologne HSR will come in due course, but of course civil riots will slow things down. There were no mentions of Stuttgart 21, Cologne - Frankfurt HSR, etc. when the Hannover - Würzburg line was on the planning board back in the 1970s, but then the guerilla people back then were too busy with supporting the communists.

Infrastructure wise, the non-TGV network is NOT Paris-centric at all.

Lie 1

...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


Lie 2

...
One single direct corridor in Spain connecting four of the five largest cities in the country (the sixth city of the country is connected by a rather short branch line). One single direct corridor connecting Frances' three largest cities. In Italy, one single corridor (will) connect five of the six largest cities in the country (maybe some day far away all of them).
...


Previously, you claimed that one single line would solve Italy´s HSR needs. Now, you have turned around and claimed Italy is oh-so polycentric

Lie 3

...
Stuttgart21 is nor including the HSL to Ulm by the way, thats a completely different project and has always been.
...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21
"For planning purposes, Stuttgart 21 is part of the Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded line project."
Of course you have lied once again because of your Swiss fetish.

For God´s sake, realize and admit the irony of your lies and manipulations of facts. I get the irony alright.

...
Maybe. But not me. I seem to be able to come up with facts to support my arguments just fine.
...


Your estimates, intuitions, empirical observations, etc. are not exactly facts.

Infrastructure wise, the non-TGV network is NOT Paris-centric at all.
Well, as far as I can see, if someone else would have said such things you would accuse him to be a liar. :ohno::ohno:

Previously, you claimed that one single line would solve Italy´s HSR needs. Now, you have turned around and claimed Italy is oh-so polycentric
You really can't read, can you? I never claimed that one single line can solve Italy's HSR needs at all. I said one line connects five of the six largest cities (which is true). And the rail network as a whole certainly is polycentric. Do you have any idea how the network and the services look like?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21
"For planning purposes, Stuttgart 21 is part of the Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded line project."
Of course you have lied once again because of your Swiss fetish.
:lol::lol: Well, did you actually understand that sentence? It exactly says what I said. The HSL to Ulm is NOT part of Stuttgart 21 but an independent project. All taken together form a new corridor from Stuttgart to Munich. But like every other big infrastructure, it is divided in several independent projects in terms of planning - in fact the HSL from Wendlingen to Ulm itself is divided into three different planning sectors and could be well buildt without the new main station - hence it is an independent project.
(If you don't want to believe me, look at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21: The HSL from Wendlingen to Ulm is not mentioned at all). Both projects are connected at Wendlingen.

For God´s sake, realize and admit the irony of your lies and manipulations of facts. I get the irony alright.
Apparently you don't. You don't even get the facts right. :banana:

Another "reality" about the Spanish rail network is that Spain is not planning a network exclusively forcing travelers to go through Madrid with different stations in the capital.
Mainly because Madrid never had several terminus stations like Paris or London always had and still have. :lol:
And by the way, the Spanish network often forces you to take stupid detours via Madrid, mainly because there's a complete lack of radial services. A fantastic example is the Alicante to Granada/Málaga route. You would be stupid if you would take the train there.

It is actually that you lie, struggle with geography and cannot express yourself.

Well, as far as I can see, if someone else would have said such things you would accuse him to be a liar. :ohno::ohno:


...
Infrastructure wise, the non-TGV network is NOT Paris-centric at all.
...



...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"



...
You really can't read, can you? I never claimed that one single line can solve Italy's HSR needs at all. I said one line connects five of the six largest cities (which is true). And the rail network as a whole certainly is polycentric. Do you have any idea how the network and the services look like?
...


Fact manipulation alarm:


...
Wrong. In countries like Spain, Italy, and Japan, and even to some point France, you can build one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of a country. You can't do that in Germany. So if you want to improve service quality for all those cities, you have to find another feasible solution.
...



...
And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:
...




...
:lol::lol: Well, did you actually understand that sentence? It exactly says what I said. The HSL to Ulm is NOT part of Stuttgart 21 but an independent project. All taken together form a new corridor from Stuttgart to Munich. But like every other big infrastructure, it is divided in several independent projects in terms of planning - in fact the HSL from Wendlingen to Ulm itself is divided into three different planning sectors and could be well buildt without the new main station - hence it is an independent project.
(If you don't want to believe me, look at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21: The HSL from Wendlingen to Ulm is not mentioned at all). Both projects are connected at Wendlingen.

...


I did and have found out once again how much you love to label your interpretations as facts. Using the logic defined by your ego, the construction of the ICE station at STR is a project by itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21
"For planning purposes, Stuttgart 21 is part of the Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded line project."

Mainly because Madrid never had several terminus stations like Paris or London always had and still have. :lol:
And by the way, the Spanish network often forces you to take stupid detours via Madrid, mainly because there's a complete lack of radial services. A fantastic example is the Alicante to Granada/Málaga route. You would be stupid if you would take the train there.

Isn´t the absence of multiple terminus a reality?
We all know that schedules and connections often do not take advantage of the potentials of the existing infrastructure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_21
"For planning purposes, Stuttgart 21 is part of the Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded line project."
Once again. That sentence says exactly the same as I do. Stuttgart 21 is one element of the Stuttgart - Augsburg (-Munich) upgrate. The HSL from Wendlingen (where it connects to Stuttgart21) to Ulm is another element. The third is Neu-Ulm21, the fourth the upgrate of the line from Neu-Ulm to Augsburg. And of course, every single element could work on its own without the others as well (if it doesn't do so already!).
You're a liar (if we stick to your ken) if you claim something else. :bash:
However, if you want to claim to have a serious opinion, you should know such basic facts. If you don't want to believe neither me nor the Wikipedia, you can read exactly the same in that document by the Ministry of Transport: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/004/1700444.pdf (from page 80 on).

And regarding everything else: Dream on!

The German HSL network:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/ICE_Network.png/450px-ICE_Network.png
blue = upgrated tracks, 200 to 230 kph, yellow = new tracks, 250/280 kph, red = new tracks, 300 kph, grey = conventional tracks used by ICEs (?) up to 160kph
The lines planned/under constructions aren't shown. The combinated upgrated/new line from Karlsruhe to Basel and the new line (for 300kph) from Nuremberg to Leipzig are under construction. Stuttgart-Ulm will be 250kph.
A complete list of German "Schnellfahrstrecken" (existing, u/c, planned and projected) can be foundt here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnellfahrstrecke#Deutschland

The first two real HSLs were Mannheim - Stuttgart and Hannover - Würzburg, opened in 1991. At that point of time, there existed already about 1.000km of upgrated lines allowing speeds of 200kph.

A remarkable feature of the German HSLs is the high percentage of bridges and tunnels (up to 50% on the Ebersfelde-Erfurt line) due to the mountaineous terrain.
That is due to the fact that new lines were buildt where most can be gained (reduction of travel time or higher capacity for freight trains due to longer and heavier trains) - mainly in the mountaineous regions. That's why Mannheim-Stuttgart (cutting through the Northern Black Forest) was buildt as a new line whereas the flat section between Mannheim and Frankfurt was "only" updated - there wasn't much to gain out of it, the extra money which a new line would have costed was better invested elsewhere (as on a rather flat and straight conventional track, it is easy to get trains to top speeds of 200kph whereas it is impossible to do so on a hilly line with narrow curves - a completely new line is often the better alternative and the worth the money). That is up to today one feature of German planning: build the new line where its mountaineous, upgrate the existing tracks where it's flat (good examples are Munich-Nuremberg, Nuremberg-Berlin and Stuttgart-Augsburg). Therefore, more lines were speeded up with the same funds.
Critics might say that there is no real German HSL network up to today but it has several isolated stretches, but one has to understand that there actually is a logic behind the network planning which is applied for the whole high speed network.

Th liar is lying again.

Once again. That sentence says exactly the same as I do. Stuttgart 21 is one element of the Stuttgart - Augsburg (-Munich) upgrate. The HSL from Wendlingen (where it connects to Stuttgart21) to Ulm is another element. The third is Neu-Ulm21, the fourth the upgrate of the line from Neu-Ullm to Augsburg.
Your a liar (if we stick to your ken) if you claim something else. :bash:
However, if you want to claim to have a serious opinion, you should know such basic facts.

And regarding everything else: Dream on!

I know someone else thinks his opinions are more than serious but actually authoritative facts. Here comes my opinions. There would be no Stuttgart 21 and the associated HSR tracks altogether if all these projects had not been conceived together from the beginning.

Unfortunately, your "opinions" are down-right confused.


...
Wrong. In countries like Spain, Italy, and Japan, and even to some point France, you can build one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of a country. You can't do that in Germany. So if you want to improve service quality for all those cities, you have to find another feasible solution.
...



...
And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:
...

Another fact I do not know very well is that your Swiss dream turns you on big time LOL

...
That's why Mannheim-Stuttgart (cutting through the Northern Black Forest) was buildt as a new line whereas the flat section between Mannheim and Frankfurt was "only" updated - there wasn't much to gain out of it, the extra money which a new line would have costed was better invested elsewhere (as on a rather flat and straight conventional track, it is easy to get trains to top speeds of 200kph whereas it is impossible to do so on a hilly line with narrow curves - a completely new line is often the better alternative and the worth the money). ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt%E2%80%93Mannheim_high-speed_railway


... That is up to today one feature of German planning: build the new line where its mountaineous, upgrate the existing tracks where it's flat (good examples are Munich-Nuremberg, Nuremberg-Berlin and Stuttgart-Augsburg). Therefore, more lines were speeded up with the same funds.
Critics might say that there is no real German HSL network up to today but it has several isolated stretches, but one has to understand that there actually is a logic behind the network planning which is applied for the whole high speed network.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg%E2%80%93Munich_high-speed_railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanover%E2%80%93Berlin_high-speed_railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg%E2%80%93Erfurt_high-speed_railway

"Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded railway"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart%E2%80%93Augsburg_new_and_upgraded_railway

The so-called logic is actually a series of political compromises.

thun is among the few whose postings are both sensible and fact-based...

So many opinions built into the so-called facts presented. It is so obvious for everyone to see now that it is really about spreading opinions with tibits of facts peppered in.

Proposed. The future is not the past. You should have learned that in the first grade.
I wrote about the past, of course the missing links can be added some day.

Proposed. The future is not the past. You should have learned that in the first grade.
I wrote about the past, of course the missing links can be added some day.

You "should have" improved your English.

...mountaineous regions...


...
buildt where
...
where its mountaineous, upgrate...


... would have costed was better invested elsewhere...


... speeded up with the same funds....
???


...
Your a liar (if we stick to your ken) if you claim something else. :bash:
...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/ICE_Network.png/450px-ICE_Network.png

This map is deceiving. Lines appear faster on this map than they really are.

The German HSL network:
blue = upgrated tracks, up to 200 to 230 kph, yellow = new tracks, up to 250/280 kph, red = new tracks, 300 kph, grey = conventional tracks used by ICEs (?) up to 160kph
The lines planned/under constructions aren't shown. The combinated upgrated/new line from Karlsruhe to Basel and the new line (for 300kph) from Nuremberg to Leipzig are under construction. Stuttgart-Ulm will be 250kph.
A complete list of German "Schnellfahrstrecken" (existing, u/c, planned and projected) can be foundt here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnellfahrstrecke#Deutschland
I marked a few important corrections. It is necessary to understand that even these high speed stretches don't provide one constant vmax throughout its entire length. At least not in all cases. Speed restriction were often build-in right from the beginning.

300 km/h from Nürnberg to Leipzig would be too good to be true. In fact it will contain two high speed stretches which will allow speeds of up to 300 km/h. But average travel speed will struggle to reach the 150 km/h mark.

The first two real HSLs were Mannheim - Stuttgart and Hannover - Würzburg, opened in 1991.
There is another misapprehension. In terms of high speed Hannover-Würzburg is not one but four separated lines. Connected only by slow passages through stations in built-up areas.

A remarkable feature of the German HSLs is the high percentage of bridges and tunnels (up to 50% on the Ebersfelde-Erfurt line) due to the mountaineous terrain.
That is due to the fact that new lines were buildt where most can be gained (reduction of travel time or higher capacity for freight trains due to longer and heavier trains) - mainly in the mountaineous regions. That's why Mannheim-Stuttgart (cutting through the Northern Black Forest) was buildt as a new line whereas the flat section between Mannheim and Frankfurt was "only" updated - there wasn't much to gain out of it, the extra money which a new line would have costed was better invested elsewhere (as on a rather flat and straight conventional track, it is easy to get trains to top speeds of 200kph whereas it is impossible to do so on a hilly line with narrow curves - a completely new line is often the better alternative and the worth the money). That is up to today one feature of German planning: build the new line where its mountaineous, upgrate the existing tracks where it's flat (good examples are Munich-Nuremberg, Nuremberg-Berlin and Stuttgart-Augsburg). Therefore, more lines were speeded up with the same funds.
This concept, however, has some flaws. The lack of uncompromised high speed lines means track sharing of fast, medium and slow services. This constrains traffic volume and reduces reliability. And the network is nowhere really fast to tackle air travel.

Instead of a proper high speed network we get airport expansions.

Critics might say that there is no real German HSL network up to today but it has several isolated stretches, but one has to understand that there actually is a logic behind the network planning which is applied for the whole high speed network.
There is no logic behind it. This is the result of provincialism and short-sightedness.

There is no logic behind it. This is the result of provincialism and short-sightedness.

One of the by-products of the supposedly all-perfect "Swiss Concept," which some claim that everyone else is supposedly to be so jealous about. Do not forget such concept comes with the "I will take this route down if you do not stop at my farm" side effect.

Well, there's a logic behind it and the network design follows general rules. Of course, one can agree with it or not.


@aab123: Proove my point wrong, not my grammar. :)

fact is, the fastest trains hannover-würzburg still need slightly more then 2hours for a distance of 327km.. if the trains would not be forced to run with about 100kph through some smalltown trainstations (so that most trains even stop there, because the difference from such a slowdown to an additional stop isn`t that much..), trains could run the whole route in less then 75minutes..
so yes, the german "highspeed"-rail-approve sucks.. no wonder that most people only take the train if they have no other choices, and you are even faster with your own car..

...
@aab123: Proove my point wrong, not my grammar. :)

You "should have" improved your English.
...


It is truly someone who fails in the English language, logic, geography, reading skills. It is also someone who lies nonstop without realizing and admitting it.

In the meantime, refer to post nos. 45 and 49.

Here is one of the ever growing examples:


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

If you like to refer to previous posts, you might allow me to refer to post 54 of this thread. ;)

If you like to refer to previous posts, you might allow me to refer to post 54 of this thread. ;)

Post nos. 45 and 49 answer post no. 54.

These posts show that someone just loves to pass opinions as facts.

Well, not really. You didn't prove me wrong. Seriously, I don't mind if you do so. Don't be considerate of me.
The one who most loves to pass opinions as facts is you.

Well, not really. You didn't prove me wrong. Seriously, I don't mind if you do so. Don't be considerate of me.
The one who most loves to pass opinions as facts is you.

You are the master of such art. In fact, you do mind it very much and have consequently decided to pretend as if none of your shenanigans have been exposed.


... That is up to today one feature of German planning: build the new line where its mountaineous, upgrate the existing tracks where it's flat (good examples are Munich-Nuremberg, Nuremberg-Berlin and Stuttgart-Augsburg). Therefore, more lines were speeded up with the same funds.
Critics might say that there is no real German HSL network up to today but it has several isolated stretches, but one has to understand that there actually is a logic behind the network planning which is applied for the whole high speed network.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg%E2%80%93Munich_high-speed_railway

"The Nuremberg-Munich high-speed railway line is a German high-speed railway 171 km (106 mi) in length. It links the two largest cities in Bavaria, Nuremberg and Munich.

The northern section, between Nuremberg and Ingolstadt, is a new 300 km/h (186 mph) track built from scratch between 1998 and 2006. It is 90.1 km (56.0 mi) in length with nine tunnels (total length: 27 km/17 mi). In order to minimize damage to the environment, it runs for the most part right next to Bundesautobahn 9.
..."

The new tracks do not run through the "mountainous" areas.

The "mountainous" areas are south of Munich.

Such a masterpiece example is simply priceless:


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

Erm... did you ever look into a map of Europe?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelgebirge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franconian_Jura The range between Nuremberg and Ingolstadt. Considered as a mountain range in Germany. So, where am I wrong exactly? The new line ("Neubaustrecke") cuts through exactly that range, the relatively flat part south of Ingolstadt is an upgrated line ("Ausbaustrecke"). Same is true for Stuttgart-Frankfurt and Nuremberg-Berlin.

So, what's this thread about?

Feeding trolls. :D

Actually the posts #47 and 52 are topic-related among some others. For SSC, that's not too bad... ;)

Erm... did you ever look into a map of Europe?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelgebirge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franconian_Jura The range between Nuremberg and Ingolstadt. Considered as a mountain range in Germany. So, where am I wrong exactly? The new line ("Neubaustrecke") cuts through exactly that range, the relatively flat part south of Ingolstadt is an upgrated line ("Ausbaustrecke"). Same is true for Stuttgart-Frankfurt and Nuremberg-Berlin.

I have in fact, I am very often in that part of the world and I travel on that HSR route very often.

First of all, it is time to teach you some more English:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mountainous
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hill

Then, it is time to teach you some real-life geography.

Munich itself is about 519 m above sea level. Ingolstadt and Nürnberg are actually in relatively lower sea levels. This HSR route rather slides down from Munich to Nürnberg without passing through great mountain peaks.

It is very obvious someone automatically equates hills to the Scottish Highlands, the Swiss Alps and the Bavarian Alps.

Feeding trolls. :D

Actually the posts #47 and 52 are topic-related among some others. For SSC, that's not too bad... ;)

Post nos. 45 and 49 respond to a particular troll who spreads false information by labeling opinions as facts.

I never used German railroads before, but you guys have it good to compared to US or many countries. Just saying.

You're probably right. However, the question is what you compare it to. And frankly, the US railroads are hardly comparable to the European ones (in terms of importance for a nation's transport system). Germany's railroads are quite good even compared to most European ones, but could perform better in a lot of areas. HSR is one of it, though I personally don't think the most important.

I have in fact, I am very often in that part of the world and I travel on that stretch of HSR very often.
That's really surprising, given the amount of bullshit you posted here.

First of all, it is time to teach you some more English:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mountainous
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hill{/quote]
That isn't exact enough to convince me. Where (at what elevation) is the difference between a hill and a mountain?

[quote]Then, it is time to teach you some real-life geography.

Munich itself is about 519 m above sea level. Ingolstadt and Nürnberg are actually in relatively lower sea levels. This HSR route rather slides down from Munich to Nürnberg without passing through great mountain peaks.
Just like the waters of the Isar flew directly into the Pegnitz. :lol::lol:

It is very obvious someone automatically equates hills to the Scottish Highlands, the Swiss Alps and the Bavarian Alps.
Still, that doesn't prove geographic science wrong.
You do know that terms can be used different in different languages and can in fact have very different meanings, don't you?

In German, Mittelgebirge are regarded as mountains (hence the name) by everyone, common people and scientists. There's no argument against it, you don't have to bother to look for one. And in terms of geography, elevation can't be equalled to "mountain" or "hill", it's rather the shape of a landscape and the vertical drop. How can, if we stick to your categories, Ben Nevis be a mountain if the higher Feldberg according to you is a hill? Is the Altiplano due to its elevation (3,600 m) automatically a mountain area or isn't it indeed a plateau?
The German Wikipedia unsurprisingly agrees with that:"Ein Mittelgebirge ist ein Gebirge, das im Gegensatz zum Hochgebirge eine bestimmte Höhe nicht überschreitet, jedoch, in Abgrenzung zum Hügelland, auch eine gewisse Reliefenergie (Höhendifferenz zwischen höchster Erhebung und Gebirgsfuß) haben muss, um sich vom Umland abzuheben." (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelgebirge): The important phenomena are a vertical drop higher than on a hill (different from region to region) to define a region as a mountain range. The English language is rather limited here (because in the UK, there's no need to differentiate several categories of mountain ranges). It has to use the rather unelegant circumscriptions of "high mountain range" (Hochgebirge) and "low mountain range" (Mittelgebirge).
And yes, the Fränkische Alb is a Mittelgebirge: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A4nkische_Alb

...
That's really surprising, given the amount of bullshit you posted here.

First of all, it is time to teach you some more English:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mountainous
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hill{/quote]
That isn't exact enough to convince me. Where (at what elevation) is the difference between a hill and a mountain?


Just like the waters of the Isar flew directly into the Pegnitz. :lol::lol:


Still, that doesn't prove geographic science wrong.
You do know that terms can be used different in different languages and can in fact have very different meanings, don't you?

In German, Mittelgebirge are regarded as mountains (hence the name) by everyone, common people and scientists. There's no argument against it, you don't have to bother to look for one. And in terms of geography, elevation can't be equalled to "mountain" or "hill", it's rather the shape of a landscape and the vertical drop. How can, if we stick to your categories, Ben Nevis be a mountain if the higher Feldberg according to you is a hill? Is the Altiplano due to its elevation (3,600 m) automatically a mountain area or isn't it indeed a plateau?
The German Wikipedia unsurprisingly agrees with that:"Ein Mittelgebirge ist ein Gebirge, das im Gegensatz zum Hochgebirge eine bestimmte Höhe nicht überschreitet, jedoch, in Abgrenzung zum Hügelland, auch eine gewisse Reliefenergie (Höhendifferenz zwischen höchster Erhebung und Gebirgsfuß) haben muss, um sich vom Umland abzuheben." (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelgebirge): The important phenomena are a vertical drop higher than on a hill (different from region to region) to define a region as a mountain range. The English language is rather limited here (because in the UK, there's no need to differentiate several categories of mountain ranges). It has to use the rather unelegant circumscriptions of "high mountain range" (Hochgebirge) and "low mountain range" (Mittelgebirge).
And yes, the Fränkische Alb is a Mittelgebirge: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A4nkische_Alb

Here is some hardcore geography science for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain

But then I did not come up with the best bullshit ever after all:


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

It is hilarious to get another piece of bullshit:


...
Just like the waters of the Isar flew directly into the Pegnitz. :lol::lol:
...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegnitz_%28river%29

Here is another trick from someone who bullshits a lot; he just claims certain aspects of the language he is not excellent at "unelegant." The compound noun "Hochgebirge" is more elegant than high mountain range simply because the adjective and noun are joined together. What a joke. Whatever, let´s turn high mountain range into highmountainrange.

Indeed, bullshit is everywhere.

One of the by-products of the supposedly all-perfect "Swiss Concept," which some claim that everyone else is supposedly to be so jealous about.

The only one who has been using "perfect" and "Swiss" in the same sentence is you. So please stop this senseless polluting of the discussion with hyperbole.
Start behaving like an adult, or leave.

fact is, the fastest trains hannover-würzburg still need slightly more then 2hours for a distance of 327km.. if the trains would not be forced to run with about 100kph through some smalltown trainstations (so that most trains even stop there, because the difference from such a slowdown to an additional stop isn`t that much..), trains could run the whole route in less then 75minutes..
[quote]

The Hannover - Würzburg line was a compromise. Don't forget that after WW II (Western) Germany had to completely reorganize it's network from one that mainly ran east-west to one that goes north south. The line also serves goods, and serves intermediate places too. It's a compromise that seems to work.
Had Germany never been split, the line would not have been built.

[quote]
so yes, the german "highspeed"-rail-approve sucks.. no wonder that most people only take the train if they have no other choices, and you are even faster with your own car..

Most people don't take the train in France also, so that's not really an argument.
I would say that the German approach serves the German geography better. Sure, stopping in Kassel slows down a Münich - Hamburg traveller, but it speeds up a Kassel - Hamburg passenger...

The only one who has been using "perfect" and "Swiss" in the same sentence is you. So please stop this senseless polluting of the discussion with hyperbole.
Start behaving like an adult, or leave.

Seconded.

The best fail aab7772003 has done is repeatedly trying to show that Thun is contradicting himself when he says Italy can have all the major centres all on one line and then saying Italy is polycentric. May I point out for the thread that this is not a contradicton. The mere fact of there being 5 major centres makes it poly-, if there were only one major centre it would be mono-. There is nothing in the term polycentric that says the multiple centres cannot all be in one line or corridor.

The only one who has been using "perfect" and "Swiss" in the same sentence is you.
You may not have said it openly. But from what we can read between your lines is exactly this.

The Hannover - Würzburg line was a compromise. Don't forget that after WW II (Western) Germany had to completely reorganize it's network from one that mainly ran east-west to one that goes north south. The line also serves goods, and serves intermediate places too. It's a compromise that seems to work.
The number of flights between Hannover and Stuttgart indicate the opposite. This is the kind of traffic the Hannover-Würzburg line was meant to carry. As you rightly said it's a compromise. But the design of high speed lines don't allow compromises. Either you achieve competitive travel times between big cities or you leave it altogether.

The only one who has been using "perfect" and "Swiss" in the same sentence is you. So please stop this senseless polluting of the discussion with hyperbole.
Start behaving like an adult, or leave.


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

You´d better send another invitation then. Besides, no one stops you from starting an "Ode to the Flawless Swiss System" thread.

Seconded.

The best fail aab7772003 has done is repeatedly trying to show that Thun is contradicting himself when he says Italy can have all the major centres all on one line and then saying Italy is polycentric. May I point out for the thread that this is not a contradicton. The mere fact of there being 5 major centres makes it poly-, if there were only one major centre it would be mono-. There is nothing in the term polycentric that says the multiple centres cannot all be in one line or corridor.

I would like to "point out for the thread" that multiple HSR lines branch out from different major centers in a polycentric HSR system.

I would like to "point out for the thread" that multiple HSR lines branch out from different major centers in a polycentric HSR system.

Yes but as he said polycentric network and not polycentric HSR network he would be correct now wouldn't he? Italy has a polycentric network, centred on Rome, Naples and Milan, with secondary centres of Bologna and Venice.

Yes but as he said polycentric network and not polycentric HSR network he would be correct now wouldn't he? Italy has a polycentric network, centred on Rome, Naples and Milan, with secondary centres of Bologna and Venice.


...
Wrong. In countries like Spain, Italy, and Japan, and even to some point France, you can build one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of a country. You can't do that in Germany. So if you want to improve service quality for all those cities, you have to find another feasible solution.
...



...
And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:
...


The lastest interpretation of the opinions would then suggest that the railroad network of Japan is actually polycentric as well.

http://www.japanrailpass.net/images/map_en.pdf


...
Infrastructure wise, the non-TGV network is NOT Paris-centric at all.
...


Someone has to modify his definitions constantly in order to make his ill-defined points stick.

:uh:Indeed, one has to admire your logic skills.:master:
:popcorn::popcorn:

Can someone please remove the posts that have nothing to do with the German High Speed Rail.
I'm really not interested in the exact definition of mono- or polycentric rail systems, mounatins, hills, larger,...

Please I want to read some interesting facts about German HS rail, but most posts are more about flaming someone.

Now please stop those silly posts and be nice to eachother :grouphug:
(I'm sounding like a schoolteacher :nuts:)

:uh:Indeed, one has to admire your logic skills.:master:
:popcorn::popcorn:

Someone with non-existent logic skills is so desperate for admirations.

You're probably right. However, the question is what you compare it to. And frankly, the US railroads are hardly comparable to the European ones (in terms of importance for a nation's transport system). Germany's railroads are quite good even compared to most European ones, but could perform better in a lot of areas. HSR is one of it, though I personally don't think the most important.

Well USA has more freight transport by rail ( I think that is more than 60 % )than any European country does and could dream, despite our best railroad system and it´s a pitty . They don´t have HSR systems but, the distances there are higher than in Europe, most of them are plane routes except NEC corridor, and others around the USA but not linked. I think they should expend more money on good conmuters and regional systems than getting into the HSR race, which is incredible expensive.

You may not have said it openly. But from what we can read between your lines is exactly this.

Then I'll just take note off the fact that you don't read very well.

The number of flights between Hannover and Stuttgart indicate the opposite. This is the kind of traffic the Hannover-Würzburg line was meant to carry. As you rightly said it's a compromise. But the design of high speed lines don't allow compromises. Either you achieve competitive travel times between big cities or you leave it altogether.

Well, DB is making money on the route, so why should they "leave it altogether". The point of a business undertaking is normally to sell a product at a price higher than the cost of producing it. Being the largest provider of a service is nice, but not achieving the dominant position in the market is in itself not a reason not to take part in it. Being the biggest is nice, but should not be achieved at any cost.
However, don't forget that an ICE-1 set is worth three flights, and don't forget that the train servers more place than just their endpoints. If you are going from Ingolstadt to Göttingen I doubt there'd be any quicker way to go than by train.

But then, anno 2010 this line would not have been built. It dates from a time when Germany was a lot smaller and shaped differently.

Well USA has more freight transport by rail ( I think that is more than 60 % )than any European country does and could dream, despite our best railroad system and it´s a pitty .

The high share rail has in US freight is mostly due to geography. Most countries in Europe have a coast, and few population centres are far away from a major port. As a consequence within the EU about half the freight moves by Ship. The European equivalent of the several mile long container doublestack train is the river barge or the coastal freighter.
There is one corridor that does get quite a bit of freight, and that is the corridor from the North Sea Ports (Antwerpen, Rotterdam, Hamburg being the major ones) to Northern Italy. Rail actually has quite a good share there, even though even here half of the freight that leaves Rotterdam for it's hinterland does so by barge.

The area from the Low countries, via the Rhine and the Alps has been nicknamed the "Blue Banana" by one economist. Provining high speed rail in that area is quite a challinge because nowhere in Europe are so many users competing for the available scarce land as there.

...

Why don't they build a direct connection between Berlin and Munich?

...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anhalt_Railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt%E2%80%93Leipzig/Halle_high-speed_railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg%E2%80%93Erfurt_high-speed_railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg%E2%80%93Munich_high-speed_railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin%E2%80%93Palermo_railway_axis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TEN-1_Berlin-Palermo.gif

Then I'll just take note off the fact that you don't read very well.
Or you are not aware which impression your posts leave.

Well, DB is making money on the route, so why should they "leave it altogether".
The DB takes benefit from a piece of infrastructure it doesn't really pay for. Making money under these circumstances is not impressing.

However, don't forget that an ICE-1 set is worth three flights, and don't forget that the train servers more place than just their endpoints. If you are going from Ingolstadt to Göttingen I doubt there'd be any quicker way to go than by train.
High speed lines haven't been built for Ingolstadt or Göttingen though. Towns like these, however, are the ones that benefit of it. And this is what is wrong with German high speed. I don't mind if they benefit. On the contrary. There can't be enough benefits to justify the enormous construction costs. I just mind that travel between the big conurbations shifts progressively in the air and not there where it was intended to be. This high speed line doesn't fully achieve what it was meant for and what it could do.

You don't have to run a a full 400 m train for every service. There are shorter trainsets for less demanded services.

High speed lines haven't been built for Ingolstadt or Göttingen though. Towns like these, however, are the ones that benefit of it. And this is what is wrong with German high speed. I don't mind if they benefit. On the contrary. There can't be enough benefits to justify the enormous construction costs. I just mind that travel between the big conurbations shifts progressively in the air and not there where it was intended to be. This high speed line doesn't fully achieve what it was meant for and what it could do.


That line was however, as I've already pointed out, build for a different country than the one it ended up in...

Or you are not aware which impression your posts leave.

Well, I do have a problem with arguing style of aab7772003. Always looking for the most extreme interpretation of a statement doesn't really help a discussion.

Well, I do have a problem with arguing style of aab7772003. Always looking for the most extreme interpretation of a statement doesn't really help a discussion.

But then I am not the "extreme" one who resorts to "extreme" and "dynamic" fact-twisting.


...
In terms of the rail network, Germany isn't too different from Switzerland. Only a bit larger. The difference between Germany and France, the UK and Spain where all the main lines are centred to the capital certainly is higher.
...


"Only a bit larger. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Germany
"As of 2005[update], Germany had a railway network of 41,315 km. 19,857 km are electrified. The total track length was 76,473 km. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Switzerland
"Network size: 5,063 km"

But then I am not the "extreme" one who resorts to "extreme" and "dynamic" fact-twisting.


There's an old legal aphorism that goes, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."

If this was a court you'd be pounding the table.

There's an old legal aphorism that goes, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."

If this was a court you'd be pounding the table.

Then I'll just take note off the fact that you don't read very well.

If this was a court, you would tell the judge that he is wrong though you have no say in the verdict yourself. You and thun would fit right in with those abrasive and fast-talking class-action lawsuits lawyers.


...
Wrong. In countries like Spain, Italy, and Japan, and even to some point France, you can build one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of a country. You can't do that in Germany. So if you want to improve service quality for all those cities, you have to find another feasible solution.
...



...
And for the last time, both the Swiss and the German network are polycentric (other examples are the Austrian, the Italian, the Portuguese and the Dutch network). Believe it or not. And learn to get irony for gods' sake. :bash:
...


The lastest interpretation of the opinions would then suggest that the railroad network of Japan is actually polycentric as well.

http://www.japanrailpass.net/images/map_en.pdf

If you don't look at the fat Shinkansen lines only, it looks to me rather polycentric indeed on a first glimpse. Cities like Osaka or Kyoto certainly are major hubs of the system.
Don't you get it that having a polycentric network and a monocentric HSR network (or the other way round) is NOT a contradiction?!? You''re comitting a huge fallacy here.


The DB takes benefit from a piece of infrastructure it doesn't really pay for. Making money under these circumstances is not impressing.
Neither has to pay SNCF for it or the Polish lorry owner you're queuing behind on the motorway...

High speed lines haven't been built for Ingolstadt or Göttingen though.
I have to disagree. HSLs have to be build for the benefit of the whole network to realize the profit-making potential (on both the microeconomic and the macroeconomic level). And that means that it shouldn't only connect the largest few cities. Germany has a rather evenly spread population, so of course the network itself has to follow that circumstance. The most benefit of HSR is gained by improving services (travel times, connections, etc.) in the whole network (regional and inter city services included). I believe that in a country which has an area-wide rail coverage regarding HSR as an independent system in competition first and foremost to air travellers is a point of view that can't nearly use (also in terms of profit-making) the potential of HSR. On the other hand by integrating the HSR network into the existing network with more hubs, you can improve utility of the whole network (and therefore the willingness to) for much more people - also resulting in a larger customer base.
There are a lot of people travelling between Kassel and Ingolstadt (unlike like e. g. between Lleida and Guadalajara) on the HSR line as that's the fastest way to go from their actual start to their destination (faster than going e. g. from Schrobenhausen to Munich to catch the ICE, leaving at Hannover only to get back to the Harz). If they wouldn't have good connections, they would very soon switch to the car.
Probably a system with both Sprinter-ICE bypassing the smaller cities and normal ICEs stopping there (both at decent intervalls) would be best. But applied to the whole country that's very unrealistic to happen in the forseeable future.

There can't be enough benefits to justify the enormous construction costs.
That's exactly why letting ICEs stop at smaller stations (you always have to keep in mind that these stops don't serve only the city itself but creates more hubs to integrate the conventional services into the high-class ICE system!) is justifiyable.

I just mind that travel between the big conurbations shifts progressively in the air (...)
I doubt that. Do you have any data available?
Of course, you're right: That's not what should happen in a modern and ecological aware country.

This high speed line doesn't fully achieve what it was meant for and what it could do.
As always with big investments, the outcome is the result of political decisions and narrow funds. That is not only true for HSR.

If you don't look at the fat Shinkansen lines only, it looks to me rather polycentric indeed on a first glimpse. Cities like Osaka or Kyoto certainly are major hubs of the system.
Don't you get it that having a polycentric network and a monocentric HSR network (or the other way round) is NOT a contradiction?!? You''re comitting a huge fallacy here.
...


I get that whatever you think you say is absolutely fact-based, accurate and logical; you find whatever you feel like for a particular moment to make comments that contradict the later ones you make.


...
Wrong. In countries like Spain, Italy, and Japan, and even to some point France, you can build one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of a country. You can't do that in Germany. So if you want to improve service quality for all those cities, you have to find another feasible solution.
...


In fact, it is possible to build "one or two lines and connect basically all the very important cities of" Germany. The German rail network is obviously polycentric, but it is possible to build only a couple of HSR routes to serve Germany.


...
One "single corridor" without Berlin for Hamburg - Hannover - Düsseldorf - Cologne - Frankfurt - Mannheim - Stuttgart - Ulm - Augsburg - Munich just starts looking like the most heavily traveled stretch of the Japanese Shinkansen network, Voila!
...


The really "very important" cities in Germany are just Hamburg, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Berlin, Düsseldorf and Cologne. Hannover, Ulm and August are not really "very important" cities by most definitions, but they just happen to be on the hypothetical "German Shinkansen" route. It is one thing to know that Germany is a federal country; it is another thing to pretend that so many cities in Germany are "very important" because of the federal political structure. It is human nature to think the list of "very important" cities in your own country simply keeps growing and growing just because you are from that country; so many people from so many British cities in different threads all over the internet come up with the the idea of "London and Britain" to make their cities one of the many "very important" British cities. I am sure that Japanese themselves find Sapporo, Hiroshima, Nagaski, etc. "very important" too.

I get that whatever you think you say is absolutely fact-based, accurate and logical; you find whatever you feel like for a particular moment to make comments that contradict the later ones you make.

Thun's point is logical. The thing about logic is that opinion is irrelevant, and so is your interpretation of logic.

You have stated something is a contradiction, when it isn't. This is probably due to you misunderstanding the premises, either that or your a dimwit.

Hannover, Ulm and August are not really "very important" cities by most definitions,

I think most people would disagree with you about Hannover. Hannover is one of the most important exchibition and congress cities in Europe. Ever heard of CEBIT?