Rail Baltica will be completed in several stages -- the Warsaw-Kaunas segment should open in 2010, the Kaunas-Riga segment -- in 2014 and the Riga-Tallinn segment -- in 2016. According to preliminary data, the value of the railway project in each Lithuania and Estonia will make up 2.76 billion litas (0.8 billion euros). It will cost another 3.28 billion litas (0.95 billion euros) and 4.7 billion litas (1.36 billion euros) for Latvia and Poland respectively.

The new railway would enable to travel from Tallinn to Warsaw in six hours, Äripäev writes. :runaway:

Jacques Barrot, vice-president of the European Commission and European Union commissioner for transport, promised his personal assistance to Lithuania in implementing the cross-border railway project Rail Baltica.

Barrot said that as early as in April the Commission should nominate the coordinator for this project who would have to ensure the smooth and timely completion of the project in all the countries, on the territory of which Rail Baltica will stretch. The project for Rail Baltica has been included onto the priority list of the projects financed by the EU.


We want to launch preliminary studies in autumn, said Estonian economy and communications ministry transport adviser Anti Moppel, who is a member of the international working group of the project. “The studies should yield an answer on where the railway should pass through Estonia, which would be the shortest, yet most optimal route taking the developments of the Baltic region into account,” Moppel said.

Moppel said that it must be analysed whether the planned speed of trains would be 160, 200 or even 300 km/h.

If the choice is speed railway in the European sense of the word, then passenger and cargo transport must most likely take place on separate tracks since speeds are different. Cargo transport would be important to Finns too who could use to export goods to South or central Europe.

”Latvian transport minister Ainars Slesers said at the World Bank seminar in Vilnius last week that the Baltic region would benefit more from the new railway if its usage was to be expanded till St Petersburg,” Moppel said. “I think too that including North West Russia and also Finland in the project, initially in the research phase, would be very necessary.”


However, in a letter addressed to the Lithuanian government, Vilnius Mayor Arturas Zuokas requested that special attention be paid to Vilnius when making the plans of the railway, which should satisfy the interests of the state, the public, and the EU.

The mayor of Vilnius has proposed a couple of alternatives for discussion. One could go through Kaunas and Siauliai and have a linking section between Kaunas and Vilnius. The other could run through Alytus, Vilnius, and Panevezys.

According to the original plan, the Rail Baltica, a part of the European railway system, is supposed to be built along the eastern fringe of Kaunas. A terminal for servicing the track will be constructed in Karmelava, about 15 kilometres north of Kaunas. The terminal is expected to cost 1.192 million litas (345 million euros).

This article remonds a bit history - near Liepaja 100 years ago one forester managed to get railway engineer as his buddy and after heavy drinking they agreed that the railway will make a bend along the forester's house. So it was built. Nowadays the line is not in use anyway...
I hope that time will not be lost in discussions among the cities. I hope also that they will build brand new line with European gauge... and I imagine all the hassle with detailed planning, strategical impact assessment, environment impact assessment etc. etc.
- - -
I hope the best for this project. There has been talking about it (always presented as grandiose project) since 1996 at least... would be nice to see real works. Hope this would be much more radical transportation solution that Via Baltica in Latvian area (which is just an improved ordinary road). Hope for something like TGV...

Zuokas's "plan" was more like a PR action I guess, this story is already forgotten. Rail Baltica will go through Kaunas. There will be a high-speed traonin Vilnius-Kaunas though. One thing which I'm dissatisfied with is construction dates. So the whole project will be complete only in 2016. That's hell lot of time. Why does it take so long? The project is already prepared so all they need is to get $ and start construction. Does it take so long to lay the tracks and build or modernize a few stations?

Anybody knows here what exact benefit will/might be for our countries? As we know we, baltic people do not use railwas very frequently, we prefer cars. And talking about freight, just former SU states transport goods through our ports. So... .

^^^
I think one of the main advantages will be better transportation from Baltic countries to Poland. While Germany is easily reachable with planes, Poland is a more difficult case. There is a train but it's very slow. The situation should improve. And of course better communication among 3 Baltic countries. I'm sure if the trip would be short and price would be reasonable people would use it.

For Kaunas its huge invesetments, job places, fast and modern transportation to European countries. Not only RailBaltica but ViaBaltica as well as the new main airport will criss-cross Kaunas which will enable to become one of the most important transportation joints in Eastern Europe I think. Plus we will get fast train line to Vilnius (due to Vilnius ambitions to get access to RB ;))

Land connections with Central Europe are still poor, so Rail Baltica will be great Leap forward. North West Russia, especially St. Petersburg, is also highly interested (yesterday agreement between Siemens and Russian Rail Ways about 60 high speed trains for Russia and upgraded high speed line Moscow-St. Petersburg + possibly St. Petersburg-Helsinki, first train to be completed until December 2007).

I don`t know about Finland so far. Finns use Scandinavian transportation corridor through Sweden, Danish Straits and Denmark to the Western Europe, but also have difficulties with land access to Central Europe.

Helsinki - St.Petersburg - Tallinn high speed line at the moment doesn`t sound very realistic -
no EU priority status,
no funding.

Another problem is - Northeast Poland is thinly populated and major Polish infrastructure projects are weakly linked with Finland-Baltic-Poland corridors.

I think the transport of the future is plane and not train. Train nin any case will be more expensive as plane and also slowlier.

Plane is good to connect big centers far from each other, especially if area between these ceneters are sparsely populated.

Train is the best to link big centers that ar not far from each other, especially if area bewtween them is densely populated.

And the bus is the best to provide transport links between small centers and from small centers in sparsely populated areas to biger centers.


As Baltic satates, Finnland and eastern Poland is sparsely populated areas with big centeres far from each other. The best way to link all these areas is by plane. But for example to link Dusseldorf and Cologne and Frankfurt and Mannheim is better by high speed train because these are all millio cities and relatively close to each other.

And inside Baltics bus is the best way to connect smaller cities with capitals.

/\ I can't exactly say that I agree with you Janis. If I have to go to for example Copenhagen (300 km) or Hamburg (400 km) train would surely be my first choise. I think that trains are a lot more comfortable than busses, and I wouldn't dream of flying just to go some 300-400 km. Flying would surely be more expensive, and I wouldn't save much time anyway, getting to and from airports and all.

I think a good modern rail network would be a very good solution in the Baltic countries. It's a very good alternative to driving in my opinion.

^
Air links are not enough. We need developed and economy-based land and sea links as well.

Major Finnish transportation Corridors (map) - Nordic Triangle is the most important by far atm.
http://www.mintc.fi/www/sivut/english/facilities/route.htm

The Nordic Triangle connects the capitals of Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark with the rest of Europe. It is Finland's most international route and comprises road, railway, water, and air traffic systems.

/\ I can't exactly say that I agree with you Janis. If I have to go to for example Copenhagen (300 km) or Hamburg (400 km) train would surely be my first choise. I think that trains are a lot more comfortable than busses, and I wouldn't dream of flying just to go some 300-400 km. Flying would surely be more expensive, and I wouldn't save much time anyway, getting to and from airports and all.

I think a good modern rail network would be a very good solution in the Baltic countries. It's a very good alternative to driving in my opinion.


From the point of view of persons living in smaller centers of course trains will be always the most comfortable way.

I was talking from the poin of view of people living in bigger centers, who always have airports with links to many destinationsa for flexible price. Even if a fast train for such short routes as Tallinn - Riga - Kaunas will be always more comfortable than plane - problem is that such train, regarding that on these routes won't travel that much passengers, because these cities are not very big and between these cities dodesn't live many poeple, will cost nearly the same what plain adn therefore the best option for budged travellers is bus and the rest can take a plain. Teher is realy no need to build a train links which cosst billions for couple of hundred of passengers driving everyday between Tallinn, Riga and Lithuania.

/\ The "problem" as I see it is that you're not really used to high standard trains. Maybe it's very hard to make people get used to the trains, but if they are it's a huge advantage. On the Danish rail network (which I would call pretty good) there was a total of 185.859.000 passengers in 2003, and it's not like we have tons of "big cities" (okay, about half of them on the Copenhagen lines but it's still a lot). There are trains between for example Århus-Copenhagen every 30 min most of the day, and most trains are pretty much full. Of course us Danes have been used to trains for many years, and it takes a lot of money to build a new network, but I think it's worth it.

I'm not saying that it IS the right solution, of course your politicians have to decide, but I think it is. :)

to all guys, who take a dim view of Rail Baltica: do you really think, that the decision to built RB was made without deep investigations, which are, I think, more professional than yours blablabla..?

/\ The "problem" as I see it is that you're not really used to high standard trains. Maybe it's very hard to make people get used to the trains, but if they are it's a huge advantage. On the Danish rail network (which I would call pretty good) there was a total of 185.859.000 passengers in 2003, and it's not like we have tons of "big cities" (okay, about half of them on the Copenhagen lines but it's still a lot). There are trains between for example Århus-Copenhagen every 30 min most of the day, and most trains are pretty much full. Of course us Danes have been used to trains for many years, and it takes a lot of money to build a new network, but I think it's worth it.

I'm not saying that it IS the right solution, of course your politicians have to decide, but I think it is. :)

Denmark is very densely poppulated country. Baltics isnt.As I told in densely populated countries trains are best way

Denmark isnt so densely populated ;) A RAIL link is very different from air link, i would travel by rail, this is very important, rail links are considered the stuff that connects nations... ;)

to all guys, who take a dim view of Rail Baltica: do you really think, that the decision to built RB was made without deep investigations, which are, I think, more professional than yours blablabla..?


This decision was political and not rational :)
As by the way many decisions EU makes. EU are using environmental arguments which are stupid, like - planes are using petrol adn are loud - it is bad for environment letds everyweher use trains whcih are silent and go with electri power I think they should instead usu exclusively economic arguments. Will be train more or les expensive in the ceertain situation. than planes.

Yes, Denmark is the most dense country in the region, but I still think trains are a good solution for you too. Just a few numbers to show the density in our countries:

People pr. 1 km2

Denmark 124
Lithuania 55
Latvia 36
Estonia 30
Sweden 20
Finland 15
Norway 12
Iceland 3

And a few others:

Germany 230
France 101
The Netherlands 386
Poland 123
Russia 8

Of course it depends a lot about wheater people live in a few big cities or in a lot smaller ones. There are tons of things to considder when deciding if it's "worth the money", and I'm sure your politicians will make the right choise for your countries. I guess I just like trains. :)

I think using enviromental arguments are very important indeed! Because, when the climate gets worse because of human interference, it will affect the economy in a bad direction in a much bigger way than the cost of a few trainlines...;)

The air over central Europe is already nearly packed to the possible limit with aircrafts.

Rail Baltica nie będzie się musiała kończyć na Warszawie, będzie miała przedłużenie do Wrocławia (mam nadzieję, że przez Łódź) jako kolej w standardzie szybkiej kolei (pierwszej w Polce) czyli ponad 250 km/h wg. PKP.
Obecnie nie ma między Wrocławiem a Warszawą żadnej linii.

Rail Baltica nie będzie się musiała kończyć na Warszawie, będzie miała przedłużenie do Wrocławia (mam nadzieję, że przez Łódź) jako kolej w standardzie szybkiej kolei (pierwszej w Polce) czyli ponad 250 km/h wg. PKP.
Obecnie nie ma między Wrocławiem a Warszawą żadnej linii.
In english please... :? :dunno: :( :wtf: :|

Rail Baltica nie będzie się musiała kończyć na Warszawie, będzie miała przedłużenie do Wrocławia (mam nadzieję, że przez Łódź) jako kolej w standardzie szybkiej kolei (pierwszej w Polce) czyli ponad 250 km/h wg. PKP.
Obecnie nie ma między Wrocławiem a Warszawą żadnej linii.

in humans language please.

in humans language please.
Wiedziałem, że tak będzie. odzywają się ignoranci z Zachodu, co nie znają takich krajów jak Polska. A wy jak tam na północy mówicie? W języku reniferów czy pingwinów :D
Rail Baltica nie będzie się musiała kończyć na Warszawie, będzie miała przedłużenie do Wrocławia (mam nadzieję, że przez Łódź jako kolej w standardzie szybkiej kolei (pierwszej w Polce) czyli ponad 250 km/h wg. PKP.
Obecnie nie ma między Wrocławiem a Warszawą żadnej linii.

IMO: The end of Rail Baltica won't be Warsaw- it will be Wrocław, because PKP (Polish State Rail Company) and PLK (Polish Railways) have planed the building of the first fast railway in Poland (more than 250 km/h) from Warsaw to Wrocław (Breslau/Wratislavia), probably through Łódź.
Currently, doesn't exist the railway Warsaw-Wrocław.
http://www.plk-sa.pl/pliki/infrastruktura/5000-35_strona_Agc_agtc.pdf (The map of polish railways)

OK, Adolf - these are very good news :)

sorry, if I offended anyone, but for me it is quite embarassing when someone speaks intentionaly in language, that nobody knows. sorry one more;)

So what exactly is this project?

- Will it be a brand new railway line, or an upgrade of the existing railway line?

- Will it be in European gauge (track width)? Seems sensible to me, but if so, what will happen to the other railway lines in the Baltics, which still have Russian gauge? And also, will Kaunas - Vilnius also be rebuilt to European gauge?

Will it be in European gauge (track width)? Seems sensible to me, but if so, what will happen to the other railway lines in the Baltics, which still have Russian gauge?
:D

:?

brand new one, and with european gauge, ofcourse ;)

Ok, thanks. But what will happen to the existing railways on this route? And what about Kaunas - Vilnius? Will a new line also be built there, or will passengers from Poland to Vilnius have to change trains in Kaunas?

I think, Vertigo, all this hasn' t been decided yet.

Ok, thanks. But what will happen to the existing railways on this route? And what about Kaunas - Vilnius? Will a new line also be built there, or will passengers from Poland to Vilnius have to change trains in Kaunas?Since Rail Baltica will go through Kaunas there is also a new link from Kaunas to Vilnius planned. But there are only talks about that link Vilnius-Kaunas, we don't know much about it yet.

^^^ The line should be started at 2010, shouldn't it? And if gets built it, of course, will be an European gauge since it is an additional expenditure for converting from the Russian gauge all the time.

About the existing Railways, it's not a problem since different types of trains will operate the different gauges and they won't interfere each other.

1
http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/1.bmp

http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/z1.JPG

2

http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/2.bmp

http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/z2.JPG

3

http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/3.bmp

http://foto.miestai.net/inkelti/20070110/z3.JPG

"Feasibility study on Rail Baltica railways".

Quotation is from http://tinkle.miestai.net/showthread.php?t=873

So which one? Your opinion and arguments please. (There is some mistakes here, in the descriptions, i think.)

Or maybe you should check these schemes.

No. 1. Price - 631 millions of Euros.
http://img02.picoodle.com/img/img02/7/1/16/f_PirmasRai_9043m_aeaaee1c.jpg

No. 2. Price - 1206 millions of Euros.
http://img02.picoodle.com/img/img02/7/1/16/f_AntrasRai_9043m_f7649815.jpg

No. 3. Price - 1299 millions of Euros.
http://img02.picoodle.com/img/img02/7/1/16/f_TreiasRai_9043m_75115f43.jpg

No. 1 won't be chosen, i'm sure of that in 100%.

120km/h???
That'd just be silly. No way should this be built with a lower standard than 200km/h.

btw - nice thread-necromancy :D

Thank you mate for these great updates. I'm personally for plan 3 from previous post in subjective reasons as you may see from my location, thus I'm against any crappy solution as like #1 shows and against the plan which directs the line through Pärnu! Lithuania gets the best from that project for sure but IMHO rail Baltica should be directed to St Petersbourg also from Tapa, this would make a real sense.

120km/h???
That'd just be silly. No way should this be built with a lower standard than 200km/h.

btw - nice thread-necromancy :D

You see that's expensive and budgets of little Baltic countrys aren't so huge like of the bigger ones ;) Do trains go faster than 200 km/h in Sweden's territory? If so, then you are lucky ;) We have old russian type of railways and it's big work to upgrade them to european standard and make them faster :) We need time for that :)

IMHO rail Baltica should be directed to St Petersbourg also from Tapa, this would make a real sense.

There were talks about that in official level, but i don't know any decisions made for that. Maybe it will come true.

Thanks, very interesting information!

Without connection with St. Petersburg (and northern Russia behind it) this line will have per 2/3 less sense. If St. Petersburg is connected, then this roundabout through Valmiera - Tartu is sensible. Otherwise it looks like old stories about countryside guys going with bottle of booze to railway engineer and after consuming the booze, asking "would you replan the line so that it goes through my backyard"?

In a case of new line construction expect problems with environmentalists in Latvia - in every case the line will cross important nature protected area. If it goes through Valmiera, it crosses Gauja National Park. If it goes along the coast, it crosses North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve. But I am sure that planners will do their best to decrease negative impact.

It would be also very interesting to see how the line will cross Riga. Where it will cross Daugava... Most likely new bridge will be needed. There is also a possibility that the line can be close to Northern Corridor, but this is still in early stage of planning.

Option 3 definately, I would consider anything else a failure.

I posted this a while ago in the S&B infrastructure thread.


The following projects have been presented by the 11 BaltMet cities and discussed by the BaltMet Infra Task Force. The projects include both completed and ongoing projects as well as more initial and tenta-tive strategic projects. Some of them are international, the others local, but all have impacts in the Baltic Sea Region infrastructure as a whole.
Rail Baltica

Warsaw-Kaunas-Riga-Tallinn
- TEN-T project 27
- New and upgraded railway
- 1269 MEUR

Rail Baltica link from Kaunas to Vilnius
- Construction of a new railway upto 100 km
- 260 MEUR

Warsaw-Berlin
- Upgrading of the existing railway
- estimated cost n.a.

Tallinn-Helsinki
- Rail ferry / tunnel
- cost n.a.

Helsinki-St Petersburg
- Nordic Triangle TEN-T project 12 with the extension trans-national axis
- Fast train connection, new railroad (to be completed 2006), upgrading of the existing railway
- 1800 MEUR

Tallinn-St. Petersburg
- TEN-T extension trans-national Northern axis
- Railway and road connection; rail and road bridges on the river Narva
- 64 MEUR
http://www.baltmet.org/pub/index.php?id=53

It seems St. Petersburg is considered to be included, and Berlin as well. Even a Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel is mentioned. Though nothing of this is anything concrete.

Joka, can you give me any more information about RailBaltica link from Kaunas to Vilnius? I would be very thankful.

Joka, can you give me any more information about RailBaltica link from Kaunas to Vilnius? I would be very thankful.

I know only what I posted, sorry.

i dont know what are you talking but i know that FRom vilnius to kaunas new train will be and vilnius investing

You see that's expensive and budgets of little Baltic countrys aren't so huge like of the bigger ones ;) Do trains go faster than 200 km/h in Sweden's territory? If so, then you are lucky ;) We have old russian type of railways and it's big work to upgrade them to european standard and make them faster :) We need time for that :)
Ah, but this is where EU funding should come in IMO. Imagine the line being built to operate at 250km/h, three cities as large and close to eachother as Tallinn, Riga and Kaunas - and with growing economies - why not??? :cheers:
I'd sure like to see my money spent on that instead of the CAP. :bash:

/\ not that close together, actually!

We get very little EU money for our infrastructure, @Swede. Most EU money is spent as compensations for NOT doing like compensations for closing sugar factories, for cutting the fishing fleet in pieces, for early retirement of farmers etc. Environment gets a lot - but since I worked in this sector I know how hard it was to divert this money for real things, there always was hard pressure from EU to spend this money on salaries of Western European experts (10 000 EUR per month - in 1995 one year of useless foreign expert work was equal to cost of one wastewater treatment plant for medium sized village), useless reports, planning and replanning. It was very hard to convince EU to spend at least some part of money for wastewater treatment plants or modern waste polygons - itš not their policy here.

EU investment in Riga City infrastructure currently constitutes approximately 0,5 - 0,8% of total investment done, in next budget period Riga won't get anything at all - all support for low-floor trams projects and bridges were rejected. Meanwhile we get loads of money for weird "networking", "contact exchanges" and "experience exchange" etc.

Rail Baltica also struggles to get EU attention, most EU money goes for Western European infrastructure needs. It would be wonder if we will manage to get EU support for it.
http://ec.europa.eu/ten/transport/maps/doc/axes/pp00.pdf

Slightly offtopic,

I am too lazy to look for EU funds distribution in Latvia, but at least national road network has received quite a large influx of EU funds.

Use of state and EU funds on Latvian and Lithuanian road networks
RED - government expenditure, Latvia
GREEN - government expenditure, Lithuania
Blue - EU funds, Latvia
Yellow - EU funds, Lithuania
http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/1526/10205aj.jpg (http://http://www.lvceli.lv/LV/?i=651)



And as I infer from Latvian news media, it was the Latvian regions that were actively lobbying in Parliament for cutting EU funds to Riga based projects, not the officials in Bruxelles.

Nevertheless it's true that EU officials often don't have a sufficient understanding of priorities in Baltic countries.

EU investment in Riga City infrastructure currently constitutes approximately 0,5 - 0,8% of total investment done, in next budget period Riga won't get anything at all - all support for low-floor trams projects and bridges were rejected.
That's weird, because in Vilnius big infrastructure projects are mostly financed by EU.

what kind of trains will be used?

what kind of trains will be used?

That's the question i'm interested at too :lol:

That's weird, because in Vilnius big infrastructure projects are mostly financed by EU.
As I said above, afaik, it was local Latvian decision.

Underlying reasoning being that Riga is super developed comparing with the rest of Latvia and therefore it doesn't deserve any additional money from EU, money will go to the regional projects instead. Riga city officials were of course protesting, but the ministry that is responsible for funding distribution said "no" to giving EU money to Riga. Ach, and in the post above I was not exactly correct, it wasn't the parliament but some ministry, iirc, Ministry of Regional Development that decided not to give Riga the money.

Afaik EU only decides how much money each country gets, and most of the funds distribution is done locally, I guess the EU officials still have a large decision and veto power, but you can't blame all problems in funds' distribution on EU. :|

Please do correct me, if anyone has some inside information that contradicts what I just said...

That's the question i'm interested at too :lol:

I hope not soviet ones. What a horror!!

wow. Impressive sight at the money districution for Latvian roads. Then I am mistaken - because now I am working for Riga and we don't see much EU money here. Although I myself am working with EU money right now - but it is comparatively low part of total budget.

@chukchi - Soviet passenger trains = Latvian made trains, because most part of them were made in Riga. But you didn't insult me - these trains were good in 1960ies but not in any way in 2007.

i dont know what are you talking but i know that FRom vilnius to kaunas new train will be and vilnius investing

what kind of trains will be used?

These trains we will see in 2009 useing between Vilnius and Kaunas. Max speed 160 km/h. Colors will be diferent.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3494/holesovice7ol6.jpg

http://img309.imageshack.us/img309/6828/novypantak2aj8.jpg

http://img309.imageshack.us/img309/9282/radotin4mj5.jpg

/\thats pretty nice :)
Max speed 160, some soviet khm, latvian ones have the same speed, but is the rail up to it? Bah 2009? It will take you 3 years to get 2 trains? God damn!

It will take you 3 years to get 2 trains? God damn!

Yes because estonians are building them :lol:

2009 - 2007 = 2 years. :)

/\ depending if its beginning of 2009 or the end-middle.

2009 - 2007 = 2 years. :)
/\ depending if its beginning of 2009 or the end-middle.
Both of you are pathetic :lol:

EU investment in Riga City infrastructure currently constitutes approximately 0,5 - 0,8% of total investment done, in next budget period Riga won't get anything at all - all support for low-floor trams projects and bridges were rejected.
:ohno:
Probably there are some "clever" people in Latvia, who presented those projects so bad, that EU didn't approve. The hope, that EU will save Latvia from own idiots, is lost. Really sad about trams and bridge. I am so angry. It seems, Aksenoks is a loser, who can't fight for own city.
Gatis should be a new mayor of Riiga! :)
P.S.
I don't need Rail Baltica. It sounds like 19th century. Better good roads and planes every hour between Baltic capitals.

Better good roads and planes every hour between Baltic capitals.

Mate, i'm sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about ;) No matter if the speed of RailBaltica is just 200 km/h or less, Baltic states must integrate into European railways. In some time the speed should increase and there should run newer trains, just don't panic, ok?

:ohno:
I don't need Rail Baltica. It sounds like 19th century. Better good roads and planes every hour between Baltic capitals.

Ita, you absolutely have no idea what you are talking about (as usual).

Roads and airplane traffic (for such short distances) cannot be expanded infinitively. Look at the sad example given to us by the USA. They have almost destroyed their passenger rail transport in the 50's - 60's and now are struggling with the road and air congestion. Consequently more progressive parts of the country are desperately trying to rebuild the fast and efficient train system. Should we repeat their mistake?

Not only good train system resolves congestion problems it also gives people alternatives (not everyone can drive) and is much better for environment.

?
Not only good train system resolves congestion problems it also gives people alternatives (not everyone can drive) and is much better for environment.
ELF,
Firstly you should invest billions and billions in rail and trains. And in the end nobody will use that system. I don't see any way, how that sytem could be profitable. It will be slow, inflexible and unpopular.
Railway is doing bad even in rich France and Germany, although here are much more people and money.
The price for such system will be to high. It is not worth it.

ITA, it is better to look in the future! Plane and road traffic costs depend highly on cheap global oil prices and concerning the volatile political situations in the biggest oil and gas fields in our world, it is smarter to minimize the overall oil addiction of our transportation system! Imagine what would happen with oil prices when Iran decides to nuke Israel in one day(after it has built its own nukes). Our "booming" economy, which relies on cheap oil mainly, would probably collapse. So it is better that transportation prices would depend more on our own electricity and its cost, therefore we need Rail Baltica commuters even in political reasons.

^ very well said! global oil production will most likely start to fall soon anyway.

The future belongs to those who can rid themselves of their dependence on fossil fuels, so extending the rail network is definately the way to go. Let's see who's laughing when oil is $200 a barrel. Not to mention we're destroying the planet with this highly unsustainable consumption of fossil fuels.

This project is part of a very forward-looking plan, and will have a positive effect on the baltic economy, and indeed contribute to the rest of Europe with time.

I think that having this Tallinn-Riga-Kaunas-Warsaw railway line would be great but it's not profitable. There just wouldn't be enough people to ride these trains. Some massive railroad upgrades should be made if they want to have 160km/h trains on the railroads. Besides...there are no electric railways from Tallinn to Valga(I don't know about Latvia) So these electric lines should be built too. Then the new trains and so on.....

/\ passengers railways are never profitable... for the love of god, its not mayor news! But in the future, THEY MAY BE!

Did you know that they actually don't plan the Rail Baltica for passengers?

This is a tough one, you never know what the future holds. In 2020 we mite be driving electric, biofuel, hydro-synergy cars, looking at the development of technology in the past 20 years! So you can never predict how they mite benefit or lose, but for sure oil will soon run out, may be not in 20 years but definetely in 100 years!

This project is part of a very forward-looking plan, and will have a positive effect on the baltic economy, and indeed contribute to the rest of Europe with time.
Do you know about massive deficits of electricity(buy from Russia? new dependence?), people( who will work there? should immigrants be invited?) and money (billions and billions as i said) ?
Even China needed many years to build railway to Tibet- but they had cheap workers, who could work for bread and water. There are no such slaves in Baltic states.

Did you know that they actually don't plan the Rail Baltica for passengers?
What? Will it be for cows and pigs? :lol:

What? Will it be for cows and pigs? :lol:

The second time i can see you don't know what you are talking about ;)

Building railway to Tibet is something much much much much harder than building railway from Tallinn to Warsaw. Such things can't be compared.

I personally doubt about economical feasibility of this project itself. But it is of great importance for economies and even socio-political status of our countries. High-speed rail is the future mean of transportation.

Costs - 1,2 - 1,3 billions EUR... this is far too little. Crossing Riga alone would be at least 0,5 billions.

Do you know about massive deficits of electricity(buy from Russia? new dependence?)
Estonia for example is not dependant on Russian electricity at all. And there are no deficits. Or what do you mean by massive? :lol:

The Baltic states are also planning a new nuclear plant being built by the year 2016.

Did you know that they actually don't plan the Rail Baltica for passengers?

What?! Seriously???

The second time i can see you don't know what you are talking about ;)

im curious why? Rail Baltica is for passengers, you dont "high-speed" cargo :lol:

im curious why? Rail Baltica is for passengers, you dont "high-speed" cargo :lol:

Mainly RailBaltica is for cargo. 80% of cargo throught Lithuania will be transit. Ofcourse it's for passengers too, everybody who will want to travel via RailBaltica will be able to do that. But most of the traffic will be made of cargo.

/\ no, im 100% sure you are mistaken there. Estonia has, im sure, the most rail cargo of the Baltic states, yet still passenger trains dominate and cargo is given the free spaces between passengers cars. Railbaltica is MAINLY for passengers, ofcourse cargo can use it, but the right of way will be for passengers, cargo though, im sure will provide most of the $$$

Ok, I already wanted to quit the thread.:D Btw, is the Rail Baltica 'only' bringing higher speed on rails, or will it actually establish rail connection? In other words, can you travel by train already now between Tallinn and Riga? (except if you go through Saint Petersburg:D)

cargo though, im sure will provide most of the $$$

Yes, that's true. That's why RailBaltica is mainly built for cargo.

How much Estonian railway transported last year (or at least in 2005)? Can't find it in Estonian Ministry of Transport page or Eesti Raudtee page. Latvian railway transported 48,7 mio tons in 2006.

44.25 mio tons on Estonian railways infrastructure, i should check how much Edelaraudtee infrastructure got.
So i spoke a bit too soon, was thinking of editing it, wrote Im sure instead of I think for some odd reason! (Really!) :D but i didnt :( Thanks for the info Gatis!

Gatis, Railfaneurope sais latvian railways transported 51mio tons, out of which 48,7(6) was international :)

In 2005 Lithuanian railways transported 49,287 mio tons and 6,7 mio passengers (in comparison they had 8,9 mio passengers in 2000 year that's quite big decrease).

3,26 8(+1% compared to 05)on elektriraudtee + 1,9(+6%compared to 05) Edelaraudtee + some unknown figure for Tallinn-Moscow :P

So thats 5,16mio passengers + moscow line (i dont know how much).

But it seems that compared to lithuania, our lines are getting more and more passengers, plus 2007 is set to become a record year =)

Don't worry @ch1le, may be sometimes we are too obsessed here by trying to be exact as some kind of state authorities. In fact - it is amazing that Baltic railways are transporting such a similar amount of goods. Latvian railways (+ports) currently are loosing to Estonia and Lithuania.
- - -
Latvian railway transported 25,5 mio passengers in 2005 - this figure is steadily increasing since 2000 when minimum 18,9 mio was reached.

If you think that 25 mio is much... in early 1990ies Latvian railway served 144,5 mio passengers per year.

68 passenger trains are getting overhaul here in RVR factory - this will help the trains to run for some more time until we buy really modern ones.
http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/3784/vilciens12mz.jpg

It seems that out of Baltic states number of passengers is decreasing only in Lithuania. Passenger trains here are really very unpopular, everyone choose cars or buses instead. Personally I have used train in Lithuania only one time in my life. :)

Do you know about massive deficits of electricity(buy from Russia? new dependence?), people( who will work there? should immigrants be invited?) and money (billions and billions as i said) ?
Even China needed many years to build railway to Tibet- but they had cheap workers, who could work for bread and water. There are no such slaves in Baltic states.

What I do know is that there is a finite amount of fossil fuels on this planet, but electricity can be converted from many other forms of energy. Take solar power. There's an abundance of renewable energy right there; we just lack the technology, knowledge and will to take advantage of it, but this will be forced upon us when the oil and gas runs out.

Development and people need infrastructure. No-one wants to live and work in the middle of nowhere. Well, maybe some do, but most don't. The point is, a good infrastructure is vital to the economy. It's a good investment. If you mean who will build it, I'm sure there's lots of people in this world of ours that want the job. I'm sure most railways were built by people who didn't live right next to it. It's not like people from one town build their part and then the next town takes over.

Is the Rail Baltica "only" bringing higher speed on rails, or will it actually establish rail connection? In other words, can you travel by train already now between Tallinn and Riga (as passenger)? (except if you go through Saint Petersburg, of course)

Please, anyone?

/\
worst case scenario (or least case scenario) tracks on the route get major overhaul :)

but i think it will be mostly some new and some heaviliy upgraded current :)

atm theres no connection Tallinn - Riga (unbelievable), however heard something about it opening in 2007 or 2008, just whispers

^ Thank you!:)

What about the railway between Riga and Vilnius? I know there is a railway there, but I heard that trains soon won't drive there anymore, this would be so sad. Is it true?

And just one last question::D there's currently no railway connection between Lithuania and Poland, right?

/\ i think there is a connection between Lithuania and poland!

^ Thank you!:)

What about the railway between Riga and Vilnius? I know there is a railway there, but I heard that trains soon won't drive there anymore, this would be so sad. Is it true?

And just one last question::D there's currently no railway connection between Lithuania and Poland, right?
Not really. ;) Here are some passenger routes:
http://www.litrail.lt/KelEN.nsf/WebMarsrutai?OpenView&Count=1000
And here is map:
http://www.litrail.lt/KelEN.nsf/Main?OpenForm

And map for cargo:
http://www.litrail.lt/krov.nsf/Main?openForm

Vilnius-Warszawa centr.

what do those in the end of the page mean?

Vilnius-Warszawa centr.

what do those in the end of the page mean?
Vilnius - Warszawa centralna train station or how is it called. Anyway, this route is not working anymore. When you click on it is said that only buses are running at this route. :D Though another route from Vilnius to Warsaw is working:
Warszawa vakar. - Vilnius (leaves Warszawa vakar. train station at 07:10 and arrives to Vilnius train station at 17:43 So the trip takes 10 hours and 33 minutes, funny isn't it? ;)).

Please, anyone?

Yes there is a train connectiob between Riga and Vilnius

Departs Riga 7.40 Arrives Vilnius 12.34
Departs Vilnius 12.12 Arrives Riga 17.00

There are currently no train connection between Tallinn and Riga, but talks have started about reestablishing it sometime this year.

Thanks for all the replies! I've got just one last question: is there really no (direct) train between Tallinn and Saint Petersburg? This would be quite unbelievable.

/\ yes there is, or yes there will be, they plan to open the line this year IIRC

. If you mean who will build it, I'm sure there's lots of people in this world of ours that want the job.
Exactly, lots of people "in this world of ours", but not in the Baltics. Importing immigrants? This would be the beginning of the end of latvian language and latvian state.

1. How do you think was there made a studio of economical foundation for this project or not?

2. How do you think if the results said that this won't give divident why are we building that?


The main debate here should be about how to make the best decision of the project development.

1. How do you think was there made a studio of economical foundation for this project or not?

2. How do you think if the results said that this won't give divident why are we building that?


The main debate here should be about how to make the best decision of the project development.
Nobody is building. There are just talks and papers with possible plans.

There are just talks and papers with possible plans.

And studios.

I think - we shouldn't be too obsessed with import of immigrants for making big works. I better live in lively, developing state which is open to the world but not in provincial, sleepy and conservative state which is critical of every larger project idea.

Ah!

According to eurostat, the biggest increase in Rail passengers in 2005 was in Estonia! (+28%), the runner up was Ireland with 13% and Greece and Latvia with 10%.

Biggest drop: Lithuania and Hungary -10%

=) But 2006 was another record year of growth for us =)

Exactly, lots of people "in this world of ours", but not in the Baltics. Importing immigrants? This would be the beginning of the end of latvian language and latvian state.

That's pretty pessimistic of you. I'm sure they'll be thrown out after it's finished. They don't need no stinkin' imegrants! Seriously, doesn't "the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital" ring a bell?

I don't want to see any foreign workers in Estonia. Why? Because the percentage of Estonians is already small (68,5 %) and foreign workers would decrease it even more....

Earlier in this thread some of you voiced concerns about incompatibilities between Baltic and European gauges. Apparently there is a nice solution for these problems which doesn't require rebuilding the actual tracks.

I stumbled upon Variable Gauge Axles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Gauge_Axles) in Wikipedia.

They also provide links to two companies making such axles. In a nutshell variable gauge axles are capable of dynamically changing from one gauge width to another by adjusting on a fly. In the video below you can see this happening in real time.

Video (http://www.caf.net/video.php?video=img/videos/brava02.wmv&accion=ver) from CAF (http://www.caf.net/ingles/productos/sistemas_brava.php#)

Another (http://www.talgo.com/htm/English/Productos/productosancho01.htm) solution by Talgo.

I found out that Spain and France have different gauge, and they have highspeed trains running between those two countries. Some of them using the technologies mentioned above.

However, I have to admit, that I don't know how much more costly variable gauge axles are than normal ones, as well as the costs of refiting the carriages that travel between Baltics and rest of Europe. So in the long term the standardization of tracks may be a wiser choice, but still variable gauge axles seem like a nice and elegant solution.

If anyone of you is more familiar with pros and cons of this technology, please do comment!

I don't want to see any foreign workers in Estonia. Why? Because the percentage of Estonians is already small (68,5 %) and foreign workers would decrease it even more....

and thats where you might, ironically, be wrong!
You see if we bring chinese or, arabians, they will actually help the russian population somehow melt in, but if we do actually keep brining more slavs, well thats where you might be right! :(

^^ which one is declining faster, the estonian or the russian population of Estonia...?

That's pretty pessimistic of you. I'm sure they'll be thrown out after it's finished. They don't need no stinkin' imegrants! Seriously, doesn't "the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital" ring a bell?
Hej
You know it would be unfair to throw those people out. And illegal and so on and so on. Furthermore,nobody would work in a country with great perspective to be thrown out. :) People are not slaves. So, if you invite workers from other countries, you must reckon, that 90 % will stay.
All the time i was speaking about not EU citizens. For EU citizens everything is open.
However, the majority of immigrants in Baltic States aren't EU citizens. All workers will come from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. They have the strongest interest to come to Baltic States.

^^ which one is declining faster, the estonian or the russian population of Estonia...?
I am sure russians are declining faster in Estonia like it is in Latvia.
However with Rail Baltica, we could invite 50 000- 100 000 russians. :)

/\ Hmm, i dont have anything against russians, but i have alot going for the naturalization of russians into Estonian (or Lithuanian and Latvian) society, thats why i think its a better idea if we imported from groups that are not that common as of yet, so they would have no other option but to learn the language, because its the language thats defines, atleast for an estonian, the nationality.

However with Rail Baltica, we could invite 50 000- 100 000 russians. :)

Well technically it would be Ukranians, Belarussians, Moldovans, and possibly people from Central Asia, if we are dealing with our immediate neighbours. Russia itself takes a lot of legal and illegal workers from abroad, and I don't think that salaries on Rail Baltica project would be that much higher than salaries in Russia. If you take a look at salary/GDP per capita statistics of Russia and Latvia they are pretty much the same.

Even if I am wrong, and there would be enough Russians willing to come, Latvian government will for obvious reasons give priority to people from Ukraine, etc.

However, I agree that if Latvia takes immigrants it's better to take them a)from EU b) from countries which have very small/zero minorities in Latvia. In which case I would favor China, actually. Chinese people have proven that they are hard working, and since there is a choice it always is better to invite people from nationalities with good reputation.

/\ Hmm, i dont have anything against russians, but i have alot going for the naturalization of russians into Estonian (or Lithuanian and Latvian) society, thats why i think its a better idea if we imported from groups that are not that common as of yet, so they would have no other option but to learn the language, because its the language thats defines, atleast for an estonian, the nationality.
^ I agree with you. That's why I think that IF there is no other possibility than using foreign workers, let them be chinese for example.....

Edelaraudtee– Estonian Railways announced that it is intending to open a direct connection between Tallinn and Riga in 2009. The route is planned to go via Tartu and should take 4 and half hours. The railway company announced that it will have to retrofit the track between Tartu and Valga so the future thrain could travel at the speed of 120 km/h between these cities. LDz – Latvian Railways have not responded to the announcement yet, although previously they had a favorable attitude to such project.

Ugis Magonis – new director of LDz – announced that his strategic plan is the electrification of the “east-west’” rail corridor between Latvia’s eastern border with Russia and its western ports of Ventspils and possibly Liepaja. The electrification would make the corridor more profitable and ecologically friendly. The estimate date for completion of the project is 2010.

I already posted this in the S&B Infrastructure thread but might as well post it here too.

M3LJw4IGK9k

/\good vid! Great find!

That guy looks like Hybrid87, with no hair!

I just red the article saying that the EU Transport budget has been cut by one third from 20 bil to 8 bil. Will Rail Baltica be on the priority list? I am not really sure about it:(

Don't think that Rail Baltica will stay. And it's not the bad attitude of EU, just the feasibility of the project is... so so.

It seems that in the end we have to complete this project on our own and construct suitable trains in Riga for their cheaper price :D:D. This project is for our concern, not EUs, it's too local to be in the top 10 in EU priorities list :ohno: . But we'll see what we get.

I just red the article saying that the EU Transport budget has been cut by one third from 20 bil to 8 bil. Will Rail Baltica be on the priority list? I am not really sure about it:(

The project coordinator Pavel Telička recently told that the poject will be feasable and is moving forward.

What else Telička can say :D
OK so be it.

^^ He said that according to the study (not his own opinion) this project will be feasable. ;) And also he said that after this study project has started to move forward. :)

One thing is what officials who get paid by project, say about it's feasibility. Another is - what one sees when looking at reports himself (khm... now silence)

Once again, we are talking about feasibility study which showed that it'll be feasible, not just about opinion of official who gets paid for project.

These mentioned costs ~1,3 bio EUR about such a huge project looks funnily and super-mega-optimistic, if we are comparing its with Riga South Bridge costs which is approximately the same. Is it possible that one bridge could cost as much as whole railway project??? Bullshit...

If we're lucky, we'll have a 120km/h train running Tallinn-Tartu-Valga/Valka-Riga by 2011...

These mentioned costs ~1,3 bio EUR about such a huge project looks funnily and super-mega-optimistic <...>
I don't know about other countries, Lithuanian part of RailBaltica will cost 800 millions of EUR. And i'm still not sure if that's all. Because for the 1st stage we will build new line between Polish-Lithuanian border and Kaunas and will improve the existing line between Kaunas and Lithuanian-Latvian border. In the next stage there should be built new line between Kaunas and Lithuanian-Latvian border. Maybe 800 millions of EUR is just for the 1st stage, i'm not sure.

Edit: i've found some info. Price of whole project will be between 3.4 billions - 8.2 billions of Litas (depends on which version will be selected, i'm sure not the lowest one, coz it was crap it was just an alternative). So it will be between 0.985 billions - 2.376 billions of EUR.

It is also added that till the project will be finished the prices will grow up at a very large scale. Maybe these numbers are for the 1994 or wtf lol. Coz as you now project is going for a few years now.

2.376 billions sounds a bit more realistic but I think that we can to multiply it by four (at least).
I am sceptical about terms also. If there isn't even the final political decision of EU about Rail Baltica construction today, then how the first part could be built already after 3 years (in 2010)? No way...

2.376 billions sounds a bit more realistic but I think that we can to multiply it by four (at least).
I am sceptical about terms also. If there isn't even the final political decision of EU about Rail Baltica construction today, then how the first part could be built already after 3 years (in 2010)? No way...
Maybe we won't fit in those 2010, it's old numbers enough. But Lithuania have signed the border memorandums with Latvia and with Poland (Latvia and Estonia have also signed their memorandum). Now Lithuania will ask some money from TEN-T for studios (27 millions of EUR) and for the works to be started at border zones (212 millions of EUR). So i don't know how about others but Lithuania is moving forward on this.

If we're lucky, we'll have a 120km/h train running Tallinn-Tartu-Valga/Valka-Riga by 2011...

To Tallinn through Valka?? Waste of money.

To Tallinn through Valka?? Waste of money.

Come on! It's like +/- 60 kilometers, but the route through Valka probably serves Tartu as well, thus getting more potential passengers. I don't think the planners are as stupid as you think they are.

And if our Baltic railway companies put themselves together and upgrade the line to some speed standard worthy of human beings - like at least 160 km/h then those 60 km won't really matter anyway - you'll waste more time in station buffet than detouring through Valka.

Most beneficial situation here is for Lithuania - if there is built European gauge until Kaunas, Kaunas automatically becomes the most important logistics centre in railway industry in region.

It is highly unlikely that project will go further north - most likely there will be done some cosmetic things like improvement of signalisation etc. under the name "Rail Baltica" and that's all.

I am pessimist by nature :D. Btw. crossing the Riga alone will cost at least 3,5 billions for this project - now I am sure.

It is highly unlikely that project will go further north - most likely there will be done some cosmetic things like improvement of signalisation etc. under the name "Rail Baltica" and that's all.
I'll repeat one more time - i don't know how about others, but Lithuania will build new line not only to Kaunas but to Latvian border also and i'm sure that this line won't stop in the midlle of nowhere ;)

What good will this speculation based on nothing do?
There's people with more information than we have getting paid to figure out how much it will cost and what should be built.

i dont give a damn if its called rail baltica or not, i just want to be able to take a train to Riga or Vilnius!

This month Lithuania is taking contest for the projection of the 1st stage european rail line from Lithuania-Poland border to Marijampole.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q135/zagironas/railasbaltas.jpg
White Russia? WTF? lol

Truly amazing progression

white russia lol.
And glad to hear its extending the rail, finally something getting done, hopefully well take notice.

Ofcorse its one of the best project in the baltic states. But the speed of trains are very slow :ohno:

Well, I realize there are difficulties ahead, not least of all the enormous expense, but I surely hope that Rail Baltica will become reality! :) And so I go along with ch1le of Tallinn:

i dont give a damn if its called rail baltica or not, i just want to be able to take a train to Riga or Vilnius!

Yesss!!! :banana:

This month Lithuania is taking contest for the projection of the 1st stage european rail line from Lithuania-Poland border to Marijampole.
[...]
White Russia? WTF? lolLooks like the Rail Baltica project is really old :D

BTW:

Construction of Rail Baltica on Polish-Lithuanian border officially started on 23 July
24 July 2007, PAP (Polish Press Agency), :

On Monday, 23 July 2007, there was a formal celebration for official starting of construction of the Rail Baltica (the first stage) which will connect Warsaw with Tallin. In presence of representatives from both Transport Departments (Secretary B. Kowalski (so typical :lol:) and Minister A. Butkevičius) in Mockawa there was unveiled a memorial plate informing about place where Rail Baltica will pass Polish-Lithuanian border.

"The celebration is symbolic, but very important, as the Rail Baltica project will be one of most important transportation Polish projects for nearest few years" - B. Kowalski said. The first stage of the construction will end in 2013.
The main role for Lithuania in the project will be adapting its rail line to the European gauge (which is currently wider, just like on the whole ex-USSR territories). The role for Poland is modernization of its rail road.
As B.Kowalski informed, during next years there will be modernized (for Polish and European funds) two sections of Polish rail road network: Warszawa-Tłuszcz and Suwałki-Trakiszki. The maximum speed available on these sections are currently 40-50 km/h and the final speed will be 120 km/h for cargo trains and 160 km/h for passenger trains.

Next day (24 Jul) both representatives will meet in Augustow to discuss Via Baltica issues. Lithuanian government announced already Polish effort to build a bridge through Rospuda Valley (which is strongly protested by ecologists and European Commission).

This is the current condition of Estonian railways....riddiculous or what?
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/1633/er22101210205102006kehrtv2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

^^ r u sure that's not india or pakistan?

^^ Unfortunately it is Estonia...

The rail baltica is European Union trans European network project to be funded N. 27. Until it's on top5 it's not likely to get much funding, so the progress really lyes much for the country's in the route.

It's unlikely that a train tunnel connecting this part of EU, Helsinki and Tallin, as Eurotunnel connects at the western side, is unlikely to happen in the next 30 years.

^There is absolutely no point of making a tunnel. When you want to take a train from Riga to Tampere, for example, you first take a train to Tallinn, then a ferry to Helsinki and a train to Tampere from there. In both Tallinn and Helsinki railway terminals are close to the port. There have been discussions about creating a train-ferry line between Helsinki and Tallinn. That way goods from Finland could go by train down to Kaunas, then load goods to European gauge train and go as far as Portugal.

<...> in Mockawa there was unveiled a memorial plate informing about place where Rail Baltica will pass Polish-Lithuanian border.

Oh yeah baby:
http://www.i-manager.lt/upload/200707/Skulpturinekompozicijaatidengta_1.jpg

<...> during next years there will be modernized (for Polish and European funds) two sections of Polish rail road network: Warszawa-Tłuszcz and Suwałki-Trakiszki. The maximum speed available on these sections are currently 40-50 km/h <...>
OMFG!

The rail baltica is European Union trans European network project to be funded N. 27. Until it's on top5 it's not likely to get much funding, so the progress really lyes much for the country's in the route.
By EU agreement made on April 29th, 2004 RailBaltica was mentioned as European level underlying project.

But it's the 4th from the end (27/30):
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q135/zagironas/27-as.jpg

Can't believe it, damn EU!

The rail baltica is European Union trans European network project to be funded N. 27. Until it's on top5 it's not likely to get much funding, so the progress really lyes much for the country's in the route.

As far as I know the numbers are simply meant to distinguish the projects from each other and do not signify any sort of priority hierarchy. They could just as well be called project A, B, C etc. Could be wrong though.

So it's definitely settled now that Rail-Baltica will be built on European gauge? Or just the Lithuanian stretch? Is Lithuania planning on changing all of it's railways to European gauge or will they be running two separate gauges? I recall that at some point one of the options was to just improve existing Russian gauge, which would have led to considerable delays in passenger traffic. Great news!

So it's definitely settled now that Rail-Baltica will be built on European gauge?

Ofcourse. Atleast 3 countrys (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) will be integrated into European railroads. I'm not sure if Finland has it's joint with Sweden or with Norway, i think no, then it would be even 4 countrys and if yes, then it's a lil bit difficult to reach whole Europe while going throught Scandinavia by railways for Finland ;)

We can say that RB is made of two different pieces. The 1st is new European gauge and the 2nd one is upgraded Russian gauge. So that's true that existing Russian gauge will be improved, but that's just a parallel part of RB, it's not the main part of it ;)

Improved existing gauge:
http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/6654/railbaltica7al.jpg

New European gauge (number 1, schematic view):
http://www.tid.lt/uploads/images/Tr%20koridoriai.jpg

Real view:
http://www.rail-baltica.net/uploads/filedir/Image/item_275_bilde.jpg

For example what you can see here (http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q135/zagironas/27-as.jpg) as marked number 27th is Russian gauge which will be upgraded. You can know it while looking at part from Riga to Tallinn, if it goes around then it's Russian gauge which will be upgraded and if it goes straight then it is new European gauge ;)

Is Lithuania planning on changing all of it's railways to European gauge or will they be running two separate gauges?
We will work on both markets: 1. EU; 2. Russia, East Europe, part of Asia etc.

Ofcourse. Atleast 3 countrys (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) will be integrated into European railroads. I'm not sure if Finland has it's joint with Sweden or with Norway

Both Sweden and Norway have the standard European gauge while Finland has the russian gauge. It means railwise, Finland is not integrated with Sweden nor with Norway.


And I hope they build Rail Baltica, soon and hopefully they'll buy new and fast trains.

What's the background of Finnish gauge being Russian? :sly:

What's the background of Finnish gauge being Russian? :sly:
Emm, Finland was a part of Russia....

Anyways....What i've read from an estonian railway forum is that there are 3 stages in this project: 1)Upradeing existing tracks to 120km/h. This stage should be ready by 2013. 2)Upgradeing existing tracks to 160km/h. This should happen in 2018 or smth??? 3)Building a brand new European gauge line up to Tallinn by the shortest route. This will probably never happen because it has no point.

Emm, Finland was a part of Russia....

Anyways....What i've read from an estonian railway forum is that there are 3 stages in this project: 1)Upradeing existing tracks to 120km/h. This stage should be ready by 2013. 2)Upgradeing existing tracks to 160km/h. This should happen in 2018 or smth??? 3)Building a brand new European gauge line up to Tallinn by the shortest route. This will probably never happen because it has no point.

Now i will say it, as i know it ;)

There are 3 parts of RB.

The 1st one - new European gauge to Kaunas and existing Russian gauge upgraded to 120km/h (atleast in LT, don't know about LT, EE). Should be finished until 2013 (earlier it was said that new gauge to Kaunas should be built until 2010, but know it is said that work from LT/PL border to Marijampolė will start only on 2009 so that's not possible to finish it all until 2010, that means we can add 3 years to earlier dates).

The 2nd one - gauge from Kaunas to Riga. Earlier it was said that this gauge should be built until 2014. Don't know if this date was set for new gauge or for the upgraded one, i think for the new one. If new gauge to Kaunas will be finished just in 2013, then we can add 3 years here and it will be 2017.

The 3rd one - gauge from Riga to Tallinn. Earlier it was said that this gauge should be built until 2016. Don't know if this date was set for new gauge or for the upgraded one, i think for the new one. Same here, 2019 i would say, but just in case of that "if" which i have bolded.

This will probably never happen because it has no point.
In 2009 then new gauge will be started to build i'll give you some photos proving that it is much more realistic than you think ;)

Emm, Finland was a part of Russia....

True, althaugh it was 90 years ago.

True, althaugh it was 90 years ago.
The gauge comes from that time.

True, althaugh it was 90 years ago.
Finland's first rail line was opened in 1862 with a track gauge of 1524 mm. The gauge has been the same ever since.

In 1917-1918 there was some discussion about changing the gauge to the Western European one, but nothing ever happened.

Finland's first rail line was opened in 1862 with a track gauge of 1524 mm. The gauge has been the same ever since.

In 1917-1918 there was some discussion about changing the gauge to the Western European one, but nothing ever happened.

In the end, I think it's for the better. The bulk of both the Finnish population and industry are concentrated in Southern Finland, and the only land connection in the South is with Russia. As Russia and China continue to grow more prosperous and important, so will the rail connection Finland has to the East as well. If Finland plays it's cards right it can establish itself as the beach-head for goods coming from the East to the EU market, and vice versa. Even Korea has been on the table since 2003, when the first train between North and South Korea traveled from South to North Korea.
Not to mention the rail gauge enables easy passenger traffic to St. Petersburg and Moscow as well.

A European gauge track running in a tunnel between the Helsinki-Vantaa airport and Tallinn would compliment this even further, with Finnair being 3rd largest airline operating between Europe and Asia (After Lufthansa and KLM)*. People from Asia could fly to Helsinki and be as far as St. Petersburg, Tallinn and Riga within hours by catching a train directly at the airport.

I think this gateway between Europe and Asia concept will be a pretty important sector in generating wealth in Finland in the future, a concept I believe the Aviapolis project is trying to tap in to.

Atleast that's the conclusion I reached at 02:20 on the graveyard shift putting plastic boxes in a mahcine to get drilled while downing energy drinks, and for some reason they allow me to use a computer. Did you know that you can watch the entire South Park the Movie on youtube divided in to seven 10-minute clips?

Edit:
* I got a bit worried I was completely talking out of my ass so I checked it up and it turns out I was wrong. Finnair is the 3rd largest airline operating between China and Europe, after Lufthansa and Air France. But still, the Asian traffic is substantial.

^There is absolutely no point of making a tunnel. When you want to take a train from Riga to Tampere, for example, you first take a train to Tallinn, then a ferry to Helsinki and a train to Tampere from there. In both Tallinn and Helsinki railway terminals are close to the port. There have been discussions about creating a train-ferry line between Helsinki and Tallinn. That way goods from Finland could go by train down to Kaunas, then load goods to European gauge train and go as far as Portugal.

That is no more right than saying there is no point in building roads, because people can walk. It would/will make Helsinki and Tallinn more attractive places to live, work and invest in, without a doubt, especially if it's combined with a high speed track to Riga and Central Europe. You can see the success Öresunds bridge was for Copenhagen and Malmö. The question is just is it worth the money, is it economically viable.

If you can read Finnish I would like you to read through this post (http://taloforum.fi/viewtopic.php?p=7907#7907) at the talo forum. Incase you don't and for everyone else, basically it's a post made by a person that plans these sorts of stuff for a living arguing that it would infact be profitable by charging people 13,50€ per trip and running trains every hour, and that does not even take in to account the rise of passenger volumes.
Granted that it is based on the preliminary price tag of 2 billion, which could be way off since we don't have more extensive studies yet, but even if it was twice that it would just mean that it would take longer to earn back the initial investment. Maybe I'm just naively taking his word for it since I want it to be true, but I just think it makes sense to drill a hole in the granite rock, gradually pay it off and then yield the benefits for all eternity.

If any of the above should turn out to make me look like a misguided fool in the morning I will deny everything.

^There is no way you can build a 80km tunnel with 2, even 4 billion Euros. It is at least 10 billion euros. For comparison I suggest you look at the price tag the new bridge between Germany and Denmark has. And a fact is that the amount of passengers isn't rising at the moment, but decreasing... But let's deny that and say that there would be 10 million passengers every year in that tunnel, from whose every ticket 30 euros went for the payment of the tunnel. If the tunnel cost 10 billion euros, it would take 33 years to pay the building cost of the tunnel. But then there are the maintainment costs and train costs etc+ nobody would pay 30 euros for one trip unless they're in a hurry.

I believe it's possible to build a tunnel in the gulf of finland, but not now,the main reason is there are too little people in the catchment area say 400 km, north to south, down to riga and into mainland finland. Another reason is that those living in the south probably would't pay 30 euros for a trip, not many people would, holwever those in the north, who are better off just might...if you compare it with london and paris, there are about 20 million people just within south east of england and north east of france, so that made sense to build. Sayin that, Eurostar hasn't really been that profitable in the long run, so i doubt helsinki-tallinn tunnel would. even if it means connecting finland with central europe! However a big advantage of this tunnel could be, is that it will connect city centre to another city centre, rather then takin a plane which will transport u to a countryside, where u will have to pay more money to get into the city centre. There are both + and - and it's a very risky deal.

Eurostar tunnel is called one of the biggest financial fiasco ever...
And while calculating costs for the Rail Baltica and possible tunnel now, the real costs during the construction itself would already be much higher. Riga's Southern Bridge is a darn good example - first they thought it would cost all by all some 200 mln euro, now the 2nd stage of 3 is about to begin and the total costs are said to be tripled!

cant compare eurostar with Tallinn - Helsinki tunnel. Im sure Eurostar would have been IMMENSLY successful if London and paris were EXACTLY at the edges of the tunnel itself.

^There is no way you can build a 80km tunnel with 2, even 4 billion Euros. It is at least 10 billion euros.

And you base this on what? The study commissioned by the Finnish rail authority concluded that the tunnel would cost between 1,3 and 2 billion euros. Though the study was based on only rudimentary knowledge of the actual ground below the Gulf of Finland, as far as I know the only factors that could considerably raise this price tag are if labour costs go dramatically up or if the ground should turn out to be less optimal for tunneling than expected, granite is actually relatively cheap to bore through.
As it is right now we're both just guessing (though I have atleast something to back my claims), and it's not really a good idea to base decissions on guesses.
What I'd like to be done, and which will be done at some point, is a more closer examination of the rock and should it turn out to be as solid as expected and the tunnel is found to be doable within a reasonable budget, then I say build it.

^
For comparison I suggest you look at the price tag the new bridge between Germany and Denmark has.

Bridges aren't really comparable to tunnels, but if we're going to take an example from Denmark, take the bridge/tunnel between Copenhagen and Malmö and what a huge success it has been in making both the cities more competitive and attractive.

^
And a fact is that the amount of passengers isn't rising at the moment, but decreasing...

That may be, with boats. Even so it can be just a short term trend. The cities of Tallinn and Helsinki are becoming more and more interlinked by the year, traffic will increase with or without a tunnel. Especially when Estonia adopts the euro.

^
But let's deny that and say that there would be 10 million passengers every year in that tunnel, from whose every ticket 30 euros went for the payment of the tunnel. If the tunnel cost 10 billion euros, it would take 33 years to pay the building cost of the tunnel. But then there are the maintainment costs and train costs etc+ nobody would pay 30 euros for one trip unless they're in a hurry.

If [guess] amount of passengers would pay [guess] amount for ticket, it would take [guess] amount of years to pay for [guess] pricetag. You see where I'm going. This is absolutely pointless before we have more detailed information. In theory this tunnel is a great idea, the only thing that prove it not to be, are facts, facts that we don't have yet.

that the tunnel would cost between 1,3 and 2 billion euros

These people are funny... It can't be cheaper than 20 billions...

50 km long Eurotunnel in 1990ies costed 10 billion GBP = 15 billion EUR. In contemporary costs it would be closer to 25 billion EUR. Finnish Bay may have simpler geology (but NOT that much simpler) but the length of Finnish Bay tunnel would be unprecedented - more than 80 km. This alone will require a bunch new technologies to be developed for some decades and after investing some billions.

And now step back and think a bit. Channel tunnel unites two enormous economies - mainland Western Europe and Great Britain. 10 million city of London - worlds most important city nowadays and pleyade of important cities in other coast - Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam etc. On both sides of Channel live more than hundred millions of people. And importance of this tunnel goes beyond GB and its closer neighbors countries - tunnel is very important also for Germany, Spain etc.

Combined GDP (PPP) of GB, France and Benelux is 4,76 trillion USD. Combined GDP of Finland and Estonia is 0,191 trillion USD.

And... Channel tunnel is not profitable. How on hell Finnish Bay tunnel can avoid being enormous financial disaster?

These people are funny... It can't be cheaper than 20 billions...

50 km long Eurotunnel in 1990ies costed 10 billion GBP = 15 billion EUR. In contemporary costs it would be closer to 25 billion EUR. Finnish Bay may have simpler geology (but NOT that much simpler) but the length of Finnish Bay tunnel would be unprecedented - more than 80 km. This alone will require a bunch new technologies to be developed for some decades and after investing some billions.

And now step back and think a bit. Channel tunnel unites two enormous economies - mainland Western Europe and Great Britain. 10 million city of London - worlds most important city nowadays and pleyade of important cities in other coast - Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam etc. On both sides of Channel live more than hundred millions of people. And importance of this tunnel goes beyond GB and its closer neighbors countries - tunnel is very important also for Germany, Spain etc.

Combined GDP (PPP) of GB, France and Benelux is 4,76 trillion USD. Combined GDP of Finland and Estonia is 0,191 trillion USD.

And... Channel tunnel is not profitable. How on hell Finnish Bay tunnel can avoid being enormous financial disaster?

a fairer comparison would be Copenhagen and Malmö, since the bridge, like the tunnel, would connect two cities directly.
I doubt they are that funny if its the Finnish railway authority, though 2 bio sounds way too fantastically cheap....

Unification of Malmo and Copenhagen was beneficial side effect - the main thing was to unite Sweden+Norway to mainland Europe. Oresund and Great Belt bridges improved transportation among some of the wealthiest countries of the world.

But why am I boiling here!? I would be happy to see this project implemented - it would bring lots of benefits for Latvia as well. Just - it looks impossible.

These people are funny... It can't be cheaper than 20 billions...

50 km long Eurotunnel in 1990ies costed 10 billion GBP = 15 billion EUR. In contemporary costs it would be closer to 25 billion EUR. Finnish Bay may have simpler geology (but NOT that much simpler) but the length of Finnish Bay tunnel would be unprecedented - more than 80 km. This alone will require a bunch new technologies to be developed for some decades and after investing some billions.

And now step back and think a bit. Channel tunnel unites two enormous economies - mainland Western Europe and Great Britain. 10 million city of London - worlds most important city nowadays and pleyade of important cities in other coast - Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam etc. On both sides of Channel live more than hundred millions of people. And importance of this tunnel goes beyond GB and its closer neighbors countries - tunnel is very important also for Germany, Spain etc.

Combined GDP (PPP) of GB, France and Benelux is 4,76 trillion USD. Combined GDP of Finland and Estonia is 0,191 trillion USD.

And... Channel tunnel is not profitable. How on hell Finnish Bay tunnel can avoid being enormous financial disaster?

If Tallinn and Helsinki didn't exist and such a tunnel was planned to accommodate traffic between Tampere and Riga you'd have a point. We're talking about a tunnel from downtown to downtown, you could travel from Helsinki rail-station to Tallinn rail-station in roughly the same time that it takes to ride from one extreme to the other on the Helsinki metro (And the Helsinki metro is really one of the smaller kinds).

€20 billion? Come on, this is exactly the kind of rumors we don't need flying around influencing people's opinions before any facts are even public. Are you saying we shouldn't even have a closer study on what such a tunnel would cost?

PS. I just emailed to the Finnish rail authority asking how the the sum of 1,3-2,1 billion euros was reached. It does state on their site that it is a "very rough estimate" and it was done between 2003 and 2004. Hopefully we'll know a little more in a while.

How awesome would this not be? :cheers:
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/9214/metrolinjacopyzg1.jpg

The roads are much more difficult to build then railways, therefore the price tag for the tunnel could be less then 10 and even perhaps 5 billion of euros. If it was built, I would definetely take a train to helsinki, instead of a plane. THESE days taking a plane is a hassle just to get on, not mentioning travelling with all the security checks and boarding, plus squezzing 100 people thru one door, where as on a train there are a few of them, so it's easy to choose a seat and i am sure the train journey could be smooth.

^Before the Copterline accident there was a helicopter line between Tallinn centre and Helsinki centre and the flight was 18 minutes. Because the copter was small, it didn't have much of a security check so it probably took 25 minutes all together to fly, but maybe someone else knows more about it.


About the tunnel: Don't think that I don't want a tunnel. I don't work in Tallink so I have no reasons to be against it. Let's say that the decision of building a tunnel is made....Who is going to pay for it? The EU? Finland? Because it's not going to be Estonia... 2 billion Euros is roughly 40% of Estonia's 1 year budget. Estonia can't even maintain it's own infrastructure.

^All of the above mentioned...

2 billion Euros is roughly 40% of Estonia's 1 year budget

Not that bad :D Just 25% of Estonia's current 1 year budget.

Ops, sorry - really 40%. Your budget really is interesting - seems, most of it goes for municipalities, not for central government.

^Before the Copterline accident there was a helicopter line between Tallinn centre and Helsinki centre and the flight was 18 minutes. Because the copter was small, it didn't have much of a security check so it probably took 25 minutes all together to fly, but maybe someone else knows more about it.

It took 18 minutes, it was mostly used by business people.

^
About the tunnel: Don't think that I don't want a tunnel. I don't work in Tallink so I have no reasons to be against it. Let's say that the decision of building a tunnel is made....Who is going to pay for it? The EU? Finland? Because it's not going to be Estonia... 2 billion Euros is roughly 40% of Estonia's 1 year budget. Estonia can't even maintain it's own infrastructure.

It would take over a decade to build such a tunnel, you wouldn't pay for it all in one go.
Couple of billions of euros for a tunnel which would be used centuries to come, divided over 10 years and 3 parties (Finland, Estonia, the EU) isn't that much in the long run. Then there's the European investment bank for projects exactly like this. I don't think it's a question of finding the funds for this tunnel, but rather finding the political will. Few politicians wants to make decissions that are beneficial in the long run if it means he/she will become unpopular in the short run.

Also, I don't think you can't look at a project like this, important infrastructure, only from a monetary perspective. The Chunnel was "unprofitable" and a "fiasco" because it was privately funded, one company was left with the tab for something that multiple countries reaped benefits from. The Chunnel company doesn't get to share the all the fruits that the tunnel creates (eg. increased tourism, increased worker mobility, improved quality of life, enviromental benefits etc.), they just get to charge for the tickets.

In Finnish there's a term called Yhteiskuntataloudellisesti kannattava [societyeconomically profitable], don't know of any english equalent but it's basically a concept where you factor all the benefits an investment has and not just direct financial profitability. In Finland, if railroads were looked at strictly from a financial perspective, I doubt we'd have much railroads at all.
I'm sure if education was left at the responsibility of private companies - only the bright ones would get an education; streetlighting - we wouldn't have any; most of the roads- not profitable.
Ok, my examples are crappy at this time of day, but you get the point. There's more factors to be considered than just the money involved directly in one specific project.

Look what I found (http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/18097/).


Jun 20, 2007
By Joel Alas

Mayors discuss Tallinn-Helsinki tunnel

TALLINN - The mayors of Tallinn and Helsinki want to launch a feasibility study into building an undersea rail tunnel between the two capitals. Edgar Savisaar met with Helsinki Lord Mayor Jussi Pajunen in Finland on June 19 and agreed to launch the feasibility study. However it seems highly unlikely the project would ever to proceed. Such a tunnel would need to stretch over 80km. The longest undersea tunnel in the world is the English Channel Tunnel, which runs for 50km. The operators of the “Chunnel” remain in financial difficulty 13 years after the link was opened. Tallinn and He ...

Everyone's so pessimistic, and always comparing it with the chunnel.:ohno:
But at least there's a feasibility study on the way, if it comes up with positive results it will be hard for people to argue against it! If not, then we'll at least be a little wiser.

PS. Does anyone have The Baltic Times subscription?

but the length of Finnish Bay tunnel would be unprecedented - more than 80 km. This alone will require a bunch new technologies to be developed for some decades and after investing some billions.

Not so unprecedented.
Päijänne Water Tunnel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4ij%C3%A4nne_Water_Tunnel).

The Päijänne Water Tunnel is the world's longest continuous rock tunnel. It is 120 kilometers (74.6 miles) long and runs 30-100 meters under bedrock. The purpose of the tunnel is to provide a fresh water supply for 1 million people in the Southern Finland cities of Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Hyvinkää, Järvenpää, Kerava, Kauniainen, Kirkkonummi, Sipoo, Tuusula and sometimes also for Porvoo.

The building of the tunnel started at 1972 and it was completed in 1982. The cost of building during time was 160 million euros

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/6046/paijanne34zu9.jpg
Could you fit a train there? And this was without modern boaring machines, though probably with cheaper labor.
The pricetag was 530 million Finnish marks at the time which equals about 160-190 million euros today.

^You maybe true about this tunnel being profitable when you look at all the aspects, but as you said, there are few politicians who would take the risk of approving this and when someone does, the next one will probably stop the project to gain popularity, saying it's not profitable and that's it...

The project seems unrealistic. But I guess anything is possible, as long as you want it enough. This summer, there's been a debate over how to build a highspeed train-network in Norway. Some people have argued that the cost will be small compared to previous projects. When the rail-track from Oslo to Bergen was built(finished in 1909), it was an amazing achievement. The cost was as much as 100% of one Norwegian state budget back then.

So I got the reply from the Finnish Rail Administration, or I got it some time ago, just haven't got around to write a post.

Basically, the original estimate was done in 1997, back then the price was estimated at 1,1-1,6 billion euros, the 1,3 to 2,1 sum is adjusted to inflation for 2004. 3 more years of inflation sums up to what?

The not so good news is that the project plan and price estimate the Finnish Rail Administration cites, is done by the Helsinki-Tallinn railroadtunnel association. So not exactly an impartial study.

The map associated with the plan and price estimate.
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3968/tallinn7zf.jpg

The last part states something to the extent that the Rail Baltica project is included in the study for the Helsinki- St.Petersburg line, this study will also include a feasibility study of a Helsinki-Tallinn connection. This study will be published in Spring 2008. I believe the idea is to find out wether people from St. Petersburg would benefit from this line as well.

So, come Spring 2008 and we should know a little bit more. :)


If you can read Finnish:

Kiitän mielenkiinnosta tulevaisuuden rautatieyhteyksiä kohtaan.



Tiedustelemasi hintalappu perustuu Helsinki-Tallinna rautatietunneliyhdistys r.y:n toimesta laadittuun vuoden 1997 hankesuunnitelmaan, jossa kustannusarvioksi on esitetty 1,1-1,6 Mrd€. Visiotyössä se on korjattu indeksillä vastaamaan vuoden 2004 hintatasoa.

Kustannusarvio on laadittu ilman merenpohjan kalliotutkimuksia, joten siihen tulee suhtautua sen mukaisella varauksella. Tiedossani ei ole, että merenpohjaa olisi tutkittu myöhemminkään hankkeen realistisuuden toteamiseksi tai kustannusarvion tarkentamiseksi.

Rail Baltica yhteys tullaan tarkastelemaan juuri käynnistyneessä Pietarin suunnan rautatieyhteystarpeen esiselvityksen yhteydessä. Tästä selvityksestä on tarkoitus julkaista tulokset (myös Tallinnan yhteyden kannattavuuden osalta) vuoden 2008 keväällä.

The project seems unrealistic.

It's not unrealistic, it's sound infrastructure development. I will seriously eat a hat if this does not get built at some point in time. Somewhat vague, I admit, so I'll throw in 50 years just to sound more serious. :)

:) I'll eat half of it if I'll be alive (exactly 80 years old)

The project got support from a pretty high up, Kauppalehti Presso. It has a status comparable to "The Economist" in the UK.

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/3777/tallinn11ds8.gif

http://img475.imageshack.us/img475/7500/tallinn2jn3.gif

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/1994/tallinn3ug1.jpg
Lord Mayor of Helsinki, Jussi Pajunen "The project has already changed from utopia to a vision and after the study* we will know whether it can be realism as well."

Some of the main points in the article.

- On the Finnish side of the gulf the rock is right below the sediment, but on the Estonian side it's below 100 meters of clay. Getting through that clay would probably be the lengthiest part of the tunnel. All in all it's estimated at 10 years.

- In order to get the excavated rock out easily during construction, and to have emergency exists for the tunnel, two artificial islands would be needed. (as you can see on the image above) Presso suggests that the land of the artificial islands would be sold to hotels, casinos, spas, apartments among other things and the revenues to be used to pay for a part of the tunnel.
(This sounds pretty Dubaish)

- Calculating the price based on the 14km Vuosaari harbor tunnel, it would cost about 1.8 billion euros. But building under the sea would at least double the price says the chief of development of Lemcon, a company specialized in tunnel building. 4 billion is mentioned.

- Traffic between Berlin and St. Petersburg plays a key part on the feasibility of the tunnel.

Probably something I left out, but that will do for now.

*I'm assuming he's referring to the study that is supposed to be ready in Spring 2008.

im interested in those Islands... i mean, the sea is pretty deep there, and to make such an artificial island?

Are people supposed to live on that island?

Are people supposed to live on that island?

Probably yes, but look at that render, pixelart lol.

Lord Mayor of Helsinki, Jussi Pajunen

What the heck is a "lord mayor" anyway? Sounds like something out of LOTR. I bet he likes his title, though. ;)

^I'm guessing they're translating to the equivalent Brittish title. Kinda silly to me. :)

While that tunnel looks damn sweet, I gotta wonder at the profitability of it. Building it as the last stage of Rail Baltica... I dunno, might make sense since the economies will have grown quite a bit and having a 20-30min ride between the cities could make sense even with the high construction cost by then.

im interested in those Islands... i mean, the sea is pretty deep there, and to make such an artificial island?
Apparently there's something called the "Helsinki shallow" and the sea is below 10m deep there. The Island would be built of the excavated rock from the tunnel which is estimated at 20 million cubic meters, if you were to raise the island 5m above water-level you would get an island approximately the size of 2 sqkm. Then they propose to build 2 million sqm of floor-space and sell it for 1000€/sqm*, gathering a total of 2 billion, paying for a large part of the tunnel.
*considering the travel-time to both downtown Helsinki and Tallinn, it would be a bargain. A quick google puts the average price/sqm in Helsinki at 2800€.

The excavated rock would have to be dumped somewhere regardless, and without the artificial island the construction work would take much longer, and you would be without an emergency exit, so it sort of makes sense.

Are people supposed to live on that island?
Presso envisions the island to have offices, apartments, spa, hotels, sea rescue center, cruise-line harbor and restaurants in skyscrapers. I'm having a hard time imagining who would want to live on a pile of excavated rock in the middle of the sea though. I suppose it depends largely on how much people and thus activity you could get there, if it would be a city of it's own it might work. Some sort of casino-entertainment Island accessible by high-speed train, boat and helicopter would be pretty unique and might actually attract people. I sort of doubt this island will happen but it's good that they dare to dream, it's not like Helsinki is bursting with too many bold ideas. :)

What the heck is a "lord mayor" anyway? Sounds like something out of LOTR. I bet he likes his title, though. ;)

Official title, don't shoot the messenger. :)
His title isn't just Mayor (Pormestari) in Finnish either, but [Overmayor] (Ylipormestari)

That island can be the the new Venice of the North(without the canals)!

Another Venice-wannabe? nah. Neo-Helsinki is the name to go with. With Neo-Tokyo density of course.

Another Venice-wannabe? nah. Neo-Helsinki is the name to go with. With Neo-Tokyo density of course.

Talsinki mby? I got the impression they plan two islands, at both ends, the one nearer to Tallinn should be called Hellinn.

Talsinki mby?

Or: Sankt Talsinkigaholm (Hki, Tln, StP, Rga, Sthlm)? Hmm? How's that for a name?

Talsinki mby? I got the impression they plan two islands, at both ends, the one nearer to Tallinn should be called Hellinn.
Talinki and Helsinn could work too. But I still NeoTokyo-like density, damnit! :banana:

And the mid-tunnel station for a Stockohlm-Åbo/Helsingfors tunnel already has a name: Mariehamn.

Just some interesting information: The railway track from Tallinn would first go to Viimsi peninsula, before entering the tunnel, as you can see from the map, so even today the land for that railway is kept free of buildings.



Even though it would be so incredibly cool to have a 30 min railway connection between the cities, with decreasing amount of passengers between Helsinki and Tallinn(Tallinn is not so cheap any more), I believe a 2h boat ride will do the job.

Talinki and Helsinn could work too. But I still NeoTokyo-like density, damnit! :banana:

And the mid-tunnel station for a Stockohlm-Åbo/Helsingfors tunnel already has a name: Mariehamn.
It's still Talsinki: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP7dnAQAWbI :D

[...]with decreasing amount of passengers between Helsinki and Tallinn(Tallinn is not so cheap any more), I believe a 2h boat ride will do the job.

The fast train connection should bring the cooperation between two cities to the completely different level. Students, businessmen, commuters(!), transit passengers to/and from central Europe, etc.

Right now there is probably still much more economic cooperation between Stockholm and Helsinki, yet Tallinn is so close and is like a gate to an entire region.

The tunnel link is a must! There simply don't exist any plausible arguments against it.

^^Yeah, I bet there are a lot of people ready to pay 40€ to go to work and come back home every day.

^^Yeah, I bet there are a lot of people ready to pay 40€ to go to work and come back home every day.

if it really was only 40€ i can see tens of thousands of finns moving to Tallinn and working in Helisnki.

if it really was only 40€ i can see tens of thousands of finns moving to Tallinn and working in Helisnki.

I like this tunnel and the project in general. Yes, something similar would happen to what happened in Scania when they opened the Öresund Bridge. Many Danes moved to Scania, for similar reasons.

if it really was only 40€ i can see tens of thousands of finns moving to Tallinn and working in Helisnki.
Am I missing something here? Why should finns want to live in Tallinn?

Am I missing something here? Why should finns want to live in Tallinn?

Because it has a nice medieval downtown?
Because the girls are gorgeous?
Because the real estate is several times cheaper than in Helsinki?
Because many people are just sick of living in Helsinki, but can't move to live faraway since they work in the capital region?
Because given an opportunity people will use it?

And 40€ is not that much for middle-management types.

Talsinki regional train map I recently made with Photoshop:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a118/jasperk/hulluttelut/talsinki_valmisraakile.jpg

Won't be reality very soon (if ever) though. While doing that scheme I noticed that Keila - Haapsalu railway seems to be almost entirely abandonded. Also, Estonian railways would need some major improvements to enable decent and frequent commuter train system.

Talsinki regional train map I recently made with Photoshop:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a118/jasperk/hulluttelut/talsinki_valmisraakile.jpg

Won't be reality very soon (if ever) though. While doing that scheme I noticed that Keila - Haapsalu railway seems to be almost entirely abandonded. Also, Estonian railways would need some major improvements to enable decent and frequent commuter train system.

our commuter rail also extends to Aegviidu to the east. Commuter rail service is getting more frequent and more comfortable by the year, as are the passenger numbers.

Am I missing something here? Why should finns want to live in Tallinn?

real estate, ofcourse (you shouldnt believe the press pushing stories that the real estate is more expensive here then in Helsinki, idiots, the lot of them!)

Won't be reality very soon (if ever) though. While doing that scheme I noticed that Keila - Haapsalu railway seems to be almost entirely abandonded. Also, Estonian railways would need some major improvements to enable decent and frequent commuter train system.
Riisipere-Haapsalu railway was taken up years ago.

our commuter rail also extends to Aegviidu to the east.

I was aware of that, but it's a tricky direction if the trains should drive via Tallinn.

Riisipere-Haapsalu railway was taken up years ago.

Then Google maps has not been updated for a while. Thanks for correcting.

The decision about European Commission's proposed fundings on TEN-T projects will be announced at the beginning of next year. The total money needed for all projects is ~11.5bil EUR, though there are only 5.1bil EUR allocated. We are interested if these numbers below for our EU friends will be good enough to kick start the project
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/1543/37178961vl3.png

Tartu-Valga reconstruction to 120km/h starts next year and finishes in 2009. In 2010 Tallinn-Tapa will also be fully upgraded to 120km/h, which all together will enable Tallinn-Valga in 3 hours.

Tartu-Valga reconstruction to 120km/h starts next year and finishes in 2009. In 2010 Tallinn-Tapa will also be fully upgraded to 120km/h, which all together will enable Tallinn-Valga in 3 hours.

So which one from three proposals is it gonna be - 120km/h, 160km/h or 200km/h? Are you saying 120km/h???
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1493/34157221mw7.png

Dear Lithuanian friends, could someone tell us what its about please

Rail Baltica“ vis pakeliui

Arūnas Milašius
2007.11.14 07:13

Europos Komisija linksta skirti lėšų „Rail Baltica“ projektui įgyvendinti, tačiau mūsų šalirs verslininkai būsimą geležinkelį vertina nevienareikšmiškai.

„Nors oficialiai ši žinia dar nėra patvirtinta, tačiau europarlamentarai jau linksta prie nuomonės, kad projektas gyvybingas ir reikalingas. Prieštaravimų daug mažiau nei prieš pora metų, kai buvo pradėta kalbėti apie jo įgyvendinimą. "Manau, kad iki Naujųjų metų sprendimas bus patvirtintas. Lietuvai skiriama suma bus artima jos poreikiams ir pavasariop prasidės realūs projektavimo darbai“, – tikina EK paskirtas projekto „Rail Baltica“ (R koordinatorius Pavelas Telička. Jis neslepia, kad bus patenkintos ir kitų šiame projekte dalyvaujančių Baltijos valstybių paraiškos. Dėl paramos nesikreipė tik ketvirtoji RB dalyvė – Lenkija, ji ieškos kitų finansavimo šaltinių.
Projektui finansuoti vien Lietuva 2007–2013 m. siekia gauti apie 267,5 mln. Lt paramą iš ES. „Rail Baltica“ projekto pirmam etapui įgyvendinti mūsų šalis numačiusi skirti iš viso 500 mln. Lt.

Pagaliau susitarė
„Džiaugiuosi, kad pagaliau pavyko susitarti, nes prieštaravimų buvo ne tik tarp projekto dalyvių, bet ir pačių šalių viduje“, – pripažino p. Telička.
Koordinatoriaus duomenimis, valstybes pakeisti poziciją privertė statistika – įstojus į ES didžiausi krovinių srautai keliavo į Rytus, tad gabenimas geležinkeliu nuo iš Šiaurės į Pietus nebuvo aktualus. Šiandien mažėja krovinių į Rusiją ir daugėja pačioje ES.
Susisiekimo ministerija paskelbė, kad jau artimiausiu metu bus skelbiamas „Rail Baltica“ projektavimo darbų konkursas. Jau nuspręsta ir kurioje vietoje susijungs Lenkijos bei Lietuvos trasos.
Laikomasi nuomonės, kad šis projektas ekonomiškai bus gyvybingas“, – teigia p. Telička.

Nuomonės skirtingos

„Mūsų verslui tai bus naudinga, nes iki šiol iš Europos viską gabenome vilkikais ir traukiniais. Galėtume gabenti ir geležinkeliu. Aišku, įmonė, norėdama naudotis europinės vėžės teikiamais pranašumais, turės investuoti“, – tikino Inga Balsytė, UAB „Autoverslas“ rinkodaros ir pardavimo direktorė.
Bendrovė Vievyje valdo lengvųjų automobilių gabenimo terminalą. RB planuojama tiesti per Kauną ir tektų galvoti, kaip krovinius gabenti iki ten ir atgal. Tuo labiau kad šiandien dar neaišku, kur bus šia linija važiuojančių traukinių stotelės.
„Valstybė turi daug aktualesnių darbų nei naujo geležinkelio tiesimas. Lietuvai ši vėžė reikalinga tik iki Marijampolės ar Kauno regionams, kur turės būti didžiulis logistikos centras. Žinant, kad valstybė nesugebėjo nutiesti Vilniaus aplinkkelio, nes neišsprendė žemės problemų, neaišku, kaip reikės supirkti sklypus geležinkeliui“, – teigia Algimantas Kondrusevičius, vežėjų automobiliais asociacijos „Linava“ prezidentas. Jis tikina, kad galima rasti verslui naudingesnių sričių, į kurias verta investuoti šimtus milijonų litų.

And also this one, please

„Rail Baltica” startas: be greitųjų traukinių
Ištrauka:

Tarptautinėje konferencijoje „Rail Baltica – nuo vizijos iki realybės“, vykusioje spalio 4 d. Vilniuje, daugelį metų planuotam europinės vėžės projektui buvo duotas tikrasis startas įtvirtintas konferencijos komunikate. Tai ne tik aukščiausių Europos Sąjungos ir jos šalių politikų pritarimas, bet ir paskelbti pirmieji konkursai projektavimo darbams ir tikslesni techninai duomenys, rodantys, jog šiuo geležinkeliu greitieji traukiniai nevažiuos.
Skirtingai nei daug Lietuvoje puoselėtų vilčių sudaužęs, spalio 10 – 11 d. Vilniuje vykęs, tarptautinis Energetikos saugumo forumas, Prezidentūroje spalio 4 d.organizuota konferencija „Rail Baltica – nuo vizijos iki realybės“, davė gerų žinių mūsų šaliai.
Komunikate, kuris buvo pristatytas atvykusiems į Vilnių Europos Komisijos bei devynių Europos šalių atstovams buvo įtvirtintos esminės “Rail Baltica” vystymosi gairės.
Jame pažymima, kad būtina atgaivinti ES geležinkelių rinką ir didinti jos efektyvumą nacionaliniu, europiniu lygiu, tiek ir bendrai viso geležinkelių transporto sektoriaus mastu. Tam pasitarnausiantis naujasis Europinės vėžės geležinkelis “Rail Baltica”, kurio bendruomenė – visos projektą remiančios šalys nutarė, kad šis geležinkelis ne tik “taps Europos krovinių gabenimo tinkoo dalimi”, bet ir atitiks bendrą krovinių gabenimo greičio standartą - ne mažesnį kaip 120 km/val. greitį visuose ruožuose iki 2013m.
Komunikate taip pat pažymima, kad bus kuriamos sąlygos ne vien krovinimas, bet ir keleiviams gabenti.
Galiausiai patvirtinta, kad sienų kirtimo taškai tarp pirmųjų projekte dalyvaujančių valstybių – Lietuvos ir Lenkijos suderinti ir finansavimo planavimas 2007-2013 m. finansinėje ES paramos perspektyvoje atliktas.

Kaimynai pritaria

Latvijos, Estijos, Lenkijos ir Suomijos atstovai konferencijoje taip pat pažymėjo, kad „Rail Baltica“ yra labai svarbi tolesnei šių šalių plėtrai bei sėkmingai integracijai į ES.
Pasak Latvijos transporto ministro Ainars Šlesers, tarptautine konferencija „Rail Baltica“ – nuo vizijos iki realybės“ siekiama akumuliuoti Europos transporto ir logistikos sektoriaus susidomėjimą europinio modernaus geležinkelio „Rail Baltica“ projektu ir visu Rytinės Baltijos regionu. “Manau, kad pirmuoju etapu tik padėsime pagrindą tolimesniam projekto vystymui Latvijoje ir Estijoje”, - tvirtina jis.
Tai, kad nuo kalbų perinama prie darbų patvirtino Susisiekimo minsiterijos sekretorė L. Zumerienė, “Keliui” teigusi, kad jau paskelbtas pirmasis konkursas projektų rengimo darbams.
Pasak jos, šiuo metu paskelbtas tarptautinis konkursas dėl "Rail Baltica" techninio projekto, ir tikimasi, kad jis bus parengtas iki 2009 m. vidurio, o vėliau bus skelbiamas tarptautinis konkursas statybos darbams. Planuojama, kad iki 2013 metų nuo Lenkijos pusės iki Kauno jau bus nutiesta europinė vėžė, o geležinkelyje nuo Lenkijos sienos iki Talino bus galima pasiekti iki 160 km/val. greitį.

Abejonės dėl greičio

Pagaliau traukinys pajudėjo” – lengviau atsiduso kai kurie specialistai, nors ginčytinų aspektų liko. Vilniaus Gedimino Technikos Universiteto docentas A. Šakalys, konferencijos dalyviams siūlė pakeisti formuluotę komunikate dėl būsimojo greičio. Pasak jo, 120 km/val. greitis – XIX a. techninis geležinkelių standartas, todėl ne itin racionalu jį įtvirtinti mūsų amžiuje. „Galbūt verta komunikate kalbėti apie 160-200 km/val. ar dar didesnius greičius”, - klausė jis.
Susisiekimo minsiterijos sekretorius A. Mačiulis, teigė, jog realiai trasoje greičiai bus didesni, ypač keleivinių traukinių, tačiau Europoje kroviniai paprastai važiuoja 120-140 km/val. greičiu. „Pagrindas yra projektuojamas 200 km/val. greičiui, o realus bus apie 160 km/val. Kroviniai važiuos lėčiau, - dėsto specialsitas. – Jei kalbėtume apie greičius virš 200 km/val. projekto įgyvendinimo sąnaudos ir techninis projektas pasikeistų kardinaliai, bent jau taip matyti iš keletą alternatyvų pasiūlytų studiją rengusios Danijos bendrovės „COWI“ variantų“.
Visgi apie projekto partnerių skirtingas vizijas bylojo Lenkijos susisiekimo ministerijos valstybės sekretoriaus B. Kowalski pranešime minėti šios šalies siekiai turėti greitąjį geležinkelį, kuriame traukinaii skrietų ne mažesniu kaip 240-250 km/val. greičiu.
Anot jo, tai būtų atieties vizija, kuri priimtina Lenkijai.

Infrastruktūros klausimas

Kad norai turėti greitojo geležinkelio liniją „Rail Baltica“ ruože nėra realūs konferencijoje bandė užsiminti ir A.Butkevičius, sakydamas, jog tokiems užmojams reikalingos visiškai kitos investicijos ir techniniai sprendimai, nei numatyta pirmajame „COWI“ studijos variante. „Kai greičiai perkopia 200 km/val. tenka iš esmės atsisakyti pervažų, jas perkelti į du lygius, visiškai kitaip projektuojama ir geležinkelio infrastruktūra“, - teigia ministras.
Ekspertai sako, jg buvo pasirinktas pigiausias projekto vystymo kelias, tačiau tai nereiškia, kad jis yra pats geriausias.
A. Šeduikis, buvęs „Lietuvos geležinkelių“ Technikos tarnybos vyriausiasis inžinierius, Europos greitųjų geležinkelių „EurailSpeed 95” programos narys, teigia, kad planuoti didesnius greičius visgi reikia dabar. “Numatydami mažesnius greičius automatiškai užkertame kelią didesniems. Juk greitojo geležinkelio žemės sankasos ir posūkių spindulys yra visiškai kitokie nei tradicinių. Jei sakoma, kad bus tik atnaujintos senosios geležinkelio atkarpos Lenkijoje, tampa aišku, kad tai nebus greitasis geležinkelis ir netolimoje ateityje jo mes neturėsime“, - sako specialistas.
Anot jo, jei tradiciniame geležinkelyje posūkio spindulys gali būti vos pora kilometrų, tai greitajame – ne mažiau 7 km. Tai reiškia, kad senoji vėžė iš esmės neatitiks techninių reikalavimų ir norint greitojo geležinkelio ateityje reikėtų jį iš naujo nutiesti. „Siūlyčiau projektuoti greitojo geležinkelio pagrindus, ir tinkamus parametrus, nors atrodytų, kad šiandien tai brangiau atsieina. Ateityje visi tik padėkos, kad buvome įžvalgūs, nes transportas nestovi vietoje, ir matome, kaip Europoje vis daugiau traukinių rieda 300 km/val. greičiu. Greičio rekordai viršyjantys 500 km/val. atrodo fantastiškai, tačiau tėra laiko klausimas, kuomet jie bus pritaikyti kasdienėms reikmėms. Tam reikia ruoštis, ypač jei finansuoja ES, kad vėliau negaudami lėšų neliktume Europs užkampiu.“, - mano A. Šeduikis.

Kroviniams - prioritetas

Šiandien Lietuvoje mažai tikima, kad keleivinis transportas bus perspektyvus ir konkurencingas lyginant su oro ar kelių transportu. Konferencijoje tuo garsiai abejojo Susisiekimo ministerijso atstovai ir kai kurie Europos šalių geležinkelių specialistai.
Panašu, kad siekiant „Rail Baltica“ projektą pajudinti iš mirties taško priimtas pragmatiškas sprendimas – vystyti europinę vėžę link Kauno, kur ilgainiui įsikurs logistikos centras. Ar projektavimo darbai bus toliaregiški – kitas klausimas, tačiau krovinių gabenimui, tokio geležinkelio turėtų pakakti.
Tarptautiniai ekspertai teigia, jog vėžių skirtumas nebus kliūtimi nuo Kauno toliau per Latviją ir Estiją kroviniams keliauti, tad „Rail Baltica“ funkcionuos kai tik pirmasis etapas bus baigtas.
“COWI” ekspertai studijoje pabrėžia, kad įgyvendinus pirmąjį investicijų paketą, prognozuojama, kad “Rail Baltica” geležinkelių transportas perims apie 1,5 mln. t krovinių iš kelių transporto. Vėliau, modernizuojant geležinkelį esą būtų galima perimti dar daugiau. Ar tai daug, atsako statistika. Šiuo metu absoliuti Lietuvos transportininkų pervežtų krovinių dalis tenka kelių ir geležinkelio sektorių atstovams – atitinkamai 30 mln.t ir 26 mln.t. Preliminariais Susisiekimo ministerijos duomenimis, per pirmąjį šių metų pusmetį krovinių gabenimas kelių transportu lgyinant su atitinkamu 2006 m. laikotarpiu padidėjo maždaug 15 proc. Tuo tarpu bendrovė „Lietuvos geležinkeliai“ per pirmąjį šių metų pusmetį vežė 3,3 proc. daugiau nei per tą patį 2006 m. laikotarpį.
Net ir atėmus iš kelių transporto 0,5 proc. krovinių pusės metų apyvartos, kažin ar iš esmės krovinių srautai persiskirstys.

Kodėl geležinkelis neveikia šiandien?

Klausimas kodėl geležinkelio jungtis su Lenkija neveikia ar bent jau nesivysto dabar kai Šeštokuose turime terminalą, galintį perkrauti krovinius iš vieno standarto vėžės vagonų į kito? Politikai tikina, kad greičiai per maži Lenkijoje, kur atskirose atkarpose jie sumažėja iki 60 km/val., o ir tradicijos krovinius iš Europos gabenti geležinkeliu dar nėra.
Ekspertai sako, kad pirmiausia sistema stringa dėl mažų greičių ir labai nelanksčios geležinkelių įmonių veiklos. „Nereikia nei europinės vėžės aptarinėti. Pabandykite šiandien nugabenti porą ar trejetą vagonų į Latviją iš Lietuvos. Turėsite nueiti kryžiaus kelius ir visvien jų nenugabensite, nes tokios paslaugos neapsimoka „Lietuvos geležinkeliams“, - „Keliui“ tvirtino vienos didžiausių šalies logistikos bendrovių vadovas.
G. Hafer, „Deutsche Bahn International GmbH“ Vidurio ir Rytų Europos bei NVS šalių Logistikos direktorius, kuris atkreipė dėmesį į tai, jog pirmiausia ko reikia naujiems krovinių srautams – tinkamų sąlygų veikti logistikos operatoriams. „Mes jau dirbame Lenkijoje, tad būtų logiška pratęsti mūsų veiklą ir Baltijos šalyse. Kita vertus dar neaiškus ir operatoriaus klausimas „Rail Baltica“ projekte“, - teigia jis.
Šveicarijos geležinkleių operatoriaus bendrovės „Hupac Intermodal S.A.“ verslo vystymo vadovas A. Grisone, „Keliui“ teigė, jog jų bendrovės tinklas – vienas labiausiai išvystytų intermodalinių gabenimų Europoje, ypač Italijoje ir Vokietijoje. Ji dirba ir Lenkijoje, tad noras dirbti Lietuvos ir Rytų kryptimis yra nemažas. „Visgi dar nėra taip lengva šiandien pasiekti susitarimą su visais rinkos dalyvaiis, ypač vyriausybėmis. Čia išskirtinis verslas“, - sako jis.
Ekspertas patvirtino, jog kol kas daugiau girdi kalbų, nors Vilniuje teigė pamatęs ir pirmųjų darbų užuomazgas.

Statybų belaukiant

2007 m pradžioje AB „Lietuvos geležinkeliai“ buvo įkurtas „Rail Baltica“ projekto centras, kuris turi organizuoti naujo geležinkelio projektavimo ir statybos darbus. Buvo suformuota valstybės biudžeto specialioji programa, kurioje kaupiamos nacionalinio biudžeto lėšos bei ES finansinės paramos investicijos.
Lietuva sulaukė kaimyninių šalių - Lenkijos, Latvijos ir Estijos paramos, šalys-partneriai susitarė dėl bendros „Rail Baltica“ projekto įgyvendinimo vizijos, pasirašė tarpusavio supratimo memorandumus dėl valstybių sienų kirtimo taškų bei valstybių sienų kirtimo atkarpos. „Europos Komisijai priėmus sprendimą dėl šių paraiškų patenkinimo, galėsime greičiau įgyvendinti numatytus darbus. Tikimės EK paramos šiam projektui, kuris realiai leis pašalinti kliūtis Baltijos šalių valstybėms de facto įsilieti į bendrą bendrijos geležinkelių rinką“,- tvirtina A.Butkevičius.

Check this one out - TNT actually allocated 23,43mil for Latvia to build Rail Baltica.
http://www.financenet.lv/zinas/latvija/article.php?id=170526

As far as i know - this money has been "given" - although the last decisions still to be made.

Dear Lithuanian friends, could someone tell us what its about please

Rail Baltica“ vis pakeliui...


Rail Baltica is still on it's way

Arūnas Milašius
2007.11.14 07:13

European Comission is tempting to provide funds for the implementation of the "Rail Baltica" project, but our local business people evaluate the upcoming railway differently.

"Although this news are not yet confirmed, but the members of Euro parliament are more and more tempted to think that this project is alive and necessary. The are way less arguments than there were two years ago, when we began talking about the implementation of this project. I think that the decision will be confirmed until the New Years. The amount granted to Lithuania will be close to our needs and the actual planning will start in spring." - assures the EC assigned coordinator of the "Rail Baltica" project Pavelas Telička. He also reveals that the applications of the other Baltic participants for the funding of this project will be satisfied as well. The only participant country that did not apply for the financial support is Poland, it will search for other funding sources.
Lithuania alone is seeking to receive 267,5 mln Lt funding for this project from EU. Our country has planned to spend a total of 500 mln Lt for the implementation of the first stage of "Rail Baltica" project.

Finally agreed
"I'm glad that we finally agreed, because there were arguments not only between the participants of the project, but also inside the countries themselves." - acknowledged mr. Telička.
According to the coordinator, countries were forced to change position because of the statistics - when they were accepted to the EU, the biggest streams of goods went East, so that the railway transportation from North to South was no longer so important. Nowadays the amount of goods transported to Russia is decreasing and increases in the EU itself.
The ministry of communications announced, that the competition for the planning of the "Rail Baltica" project will be announced soon. It's already decided where the Polish and Lithuanian routes are going to connect. We're sticking to the opinion that this project will be alive economically.", - says mr. Telička.

The opinions are different
"This will be useful for our business, because up until now we were transporting everything from Europe by trucks and trains (auth. probably meant autotrains). We could transport using railways as well. Of course the company who would want to exploit the advantages of the European railway, will have to invest.", - Inga Basytė assured, JSC "Autoverslas" director of the marketing and sales.
The company manages the car transport terminal in Vievis. "Rail Baltica" is planned to go through Kaunas and we would have to figure out a way to transport the goods to there and back. And what's more - it's not yet known where the stops of the trains going through this line will be."
"The country has more important tasks than building the new railway. Lithuania needs it only to Marijampolė or Kaunas region, where a big logistics center is planned. Knowing that the country was not able to build the transport road around the Vilnius city, because of the land ownership problems, it's yet unknown, how the railway land lots will be acquired.", - said Algimantas Kondrusevičius, the president of the auto transport association "Linava". He assures that more useful areas can be found where it would be useful to invest hundreds of millions litas.

HA, thanks a lot Felar, and I welcome you to the SSC S&B. That is hell of a good and enthusiastic start:hi:

Welcome felar:):wave:

So which one from three proposals is it gonna be - 120km/h, 160km/h or 200km/h? Are you saying 120km/h???
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1493/34157221mw7.png
It's going to be the first proposal, 120km/h, at least in the near future.
200km/h has never even been planned if you exclude a small section from Kaunas to the Polish border. Even the European-gauge proposal would be 160km/h.

It's going to be the first proposal, 120km/h, at least in the near future.
200km/h has never even been planned if you exclude a small section from Kaunas to the Polish border. Even the European-gauge proposal would be 160km/h.

Is Rail Baltica going through Tartu and not Parnu for sure?

Is Rail Baltica going through Tartu and not Parnu for sure?
Yes. Unfortunately the train won't be much faster than a bus.

As far as I know, then Estonian government has decided to complete the project in three steps:

step one: An existing russian gauge railway line Tallinn, Tapa, Tartu, Valga will be upgraded fully to 120 km/h.
step two: Railway line through Tartu and Valga will be upgraded to 160 km/h
step three: An European gauge ralway line Riga, Pärnu Tallinn is going to be built.

But reading those plans left me in confusion in one thing- will the planned railway lines be with the electrification or not. This issue remained unclear for me.

^^^They will be non-electrified, at least the first 2 stages, because electrifying would almost double the cost of the project.

As far as I know, then Estonian government has decided to complete the project in three steps:

step one: An existing russian gauge railway line Tallinn, Tapa, Tartu, Valga will be upgraded fully to 120 km/h.
step two: Railway line through Tartu and Valga will be upgraded to 160 km/h
step three: An European gauge ralway line Riga, Pärnu Tallinn is going to be built.

But reading those plans left me in confusion in one thing- will the planned railway lines be with the electrification or not. This issue remained unclear for me.

This is very interesting, thanks for sharing the info

As I read from the newspaper today, the estimated Riga-Tallinn travel time after the completion of first stage will be 5,5 hours - Tallinn-Tartu 2 hours, Tartu-Valga 1 hour and Valga-Riga 2,5 hours.

^^ Heh... The bus going from Tallinn to Riga via Pärnu takes the same time...

latvians could do better - Riga - Valga rail distance is 160km, Valga - Tartu 80km

^^ Heh... The bus going from Tallinn to Riga via Pärnu takes the same time...
For me Rail Baltica will only have point when it's faster than a car. You can get to Riga by car in 4,5-5 hours....that's an hour faster than the first stage of Rail Baltica is going to be.

For me Rail Baltica will only have point when it's faster than a car. You can get to Riga by car in 4,5-5 hours....that's an hour faster than the first stage of Rail Baltica is going to be.

weird... do you know how tiresome it is to drive 4-4.5 hours? Compare that to sitting in a bar in the train.

^^Yes, it's tiring. But you can already relax in Hansabuss Business line: http://www.businessline.ee/index.php?page=88& or Eurolines Lux Express http://www.eurolines.ee/?id=1657 . Don't get me wrong. I love travelling by train, but it has to be fast as well. And I don't understand the point of reconstructing a line to 120km/h and then after less than 10 years upgrading it to 160km/h. Wouldn't it be cheaper and more effective to reconstruct it to 160km/h in the first place?

^^Yes, it's tiring. But you can already relax in Hansabuss Business line: http://www.businessline.ee/index.php?page=88& or Eurolines Lux Express http://www.eurolines.ee/?id=1657 . Don't get me wrong. I love travelling by train, but it has to be fast as well. And I don't understand the point of reconstructing a line to 120km/h and then after less than 10 years upgrading it to 160km/h. Wouldn't it be cheaper and more effective to reconstruct it to 160km/h in the first place?

agree - 120 is pointless upgrade:ohno:

I don't understand something here. Riga-Valga distance is 160 km, so, with speed 160 km/h it is = 1 hour, not 2,5 hours. Same about Tallinn - Tartu - Valga. OK, some time for stops at stations (by the way, how many stops at stations is planned?), but 5,5 hours for Riga-Tartu-Tallinn doesn't make sense.. London - Paris is 495 km, and Eurostar time is 2 h 15 min. Why build such a grand project, if result is so pityfully slow... Who will want to travel with so slow Rail Baltica?

I don't understand something here. Riga-Valga distance is 160 km, so, with speed 160 km/h it is = 1 hour, not 2,5 hours. Same about Tallinn - Tartu - Valga. OK, some time for stops at stations (by the way, how many stops at stations is planned?), but 5,5 hours for Riga-Tartu-Tallinn doesn't make sense.. London - Paris is 495 km, and Eurostar time is 2 h 15 min. Why build such a grand project, if result is so pityfully slow... Who will want to travel with so slow Rail Baltica?
Riga-Valga 2,5hours is with a top speed of 120km/h. Average speed is always a lot smaller than top speed. The fastest average speed in Finland is on Helsinki-Tampere line with 135km/h, though trains can go up to 220km/h there. And I'd like to remind you that real HSR projects don't cost 1 or 2 billion euros like Rail Baltica, but tens of billions of euros.

agree - 120 is pointless upgrade:ohno:
I thought this was funded quite a bit by the EU? I totally agree with 120 being pointless. Maybe if it's for goods-trains. But for people? nah. I'd say build it for at least 180km/h to start with. Most modern trains on the market can top that afaik, so it'd be easy to find suitable trains to run on it and it would attract a whole new demographic to trains in the Baltics.

HA, thanks a lot Felar, and I welcome you to the SSC S&B. That is hell of a good and enthusiastic start:hi:Just wanted to, as a mod, agree ALOT with that. First post being a translation so the rest of us can read a text that long... :cheers1:

nah lets first hope the 120km/h trains are successful.

Upgrading to 120 km/h is an easy shortcut to Estonia and just putting the label of Rail Baltica on the only 80 km long Tartu Valga line which will be 120 km/h, but it is serious progress comparing our today conditions with max speed 40 km/h in many places between Tartu and Valga. These are shameful railway conditions in 21st century Europe. Thus it is Silly to label such a tiny amount of reconstruction with such a grand name as Rail Baltica. Rail Baltica blah, blah- In Estonias part, the first step is only 80 km upgrade from Tartu to Valga plus reconstructing one line between Tallinn and Tapa. But these works don't even deserve the name rail Baltica coz we would even make it on our own if we had enough political will. For me personally, Rail Baltica begins from the speed 160 km/h and not a single km/h less than that :ohno:.
And the second thing is that this project deserves mainly freight transport issues rather than passengers transport. Focus of this project is manly on business.

Passenger travel alone wouldn't make even the first step of Rail Baltica profitable. It's transportation of goods that brings money for the project.
For me, Rail Baltica will born when a much shorter Tallinn-Pärnu-Riga connection is built with a top speed at least 160km/h. I figured out that this would enable Tallinn-Riga in 3 hours.


But in my dreams the speeds are around this:
22Or8xHFJyI

For me, Rail Baltica will born when a much shorter Tallinn-Pärnu-Riga connection is built with a top speed at least 160km/h. I figured out that this would enable Tallinn-Riga in 3 hours.

That's what I'm hoping for as well. So the 120km/h line decision is now final?

That's what I'm hoping for as well. So the 120km/h line decision is now final?

120kmph is phase I, Phase II is same line to 160kmph, and Phase III is new line Riga - Pärnu - Tallinn at 160kmph

Those videos were great. It'd be something If Rail baltica had such pendolinos in project.