What countries have now a High Speed Trains system, or are currently building its first line? i´m curious about that, i mean, I know that Japan, France, Germany, Spain and South Korea already have their own High Speed lines and some of then are also extending their systems, but any other country around the world have something like that?
I don´t really mean just fancy modern trains, i know that some countries own then, but the tracks are just not ready enough to handle high speeds. Let´s just say it like this:

What countries have right now regular service of trains running up to 250 Km/h or at least 220 km/h?

And, what countries are currently building lines with these characteristics?

Right now only that countries have High Speed Lines, since is important to note that is necessary the infrastructure to run a train near 300km/h.

There are many countries running trains with speeds over 200km/h but using normal tracks so i dont consider them having HSL.


btw Taiwan is the only country that will count with this service this october.


many other countries like Russia, China and Mexico have plans, some of them in a very advanced stage but still not under construction.


Is not only to have the HSTrains but to have the High Speed Line or the "Freeway for Trains" to be a true
High Speed Rail System

http://blog.joins.com/usr/c/h/chungsong/5/KTX의%20위용2.jpg

:)

Thanks for the info, that´s exactly what i was asking for. :)

BTW, i see under your nick that you are from México, what´t the situation there? Any date planned already for the beginnig of the works? What cities will be linked?

The United States has one. It's the Amtrak Acela but it runs only in the east coast. There was also a plan for a high speed train that will run from San Francisco to Los Angeles

http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/acela-2004s1-tacony-4-20-00.jpg

In Europe, countries with HST are:

UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden are currently operating HST's.

Also, Croatia is modernizing the railroads and is planning on buying ICE-T trains that operate between 220-250 km/h. Not full HST trains like the TGV or other ICE-3 trains, but high speed nonetheless.

:cheers:

Thanks for the info, that´s exactly what i was asking for. :)

BTW, i see under your nick that you are from México, what´t the situation there? Any date planned already for the beginnig of the works? What cities will be linked?


Here you can read about HST and about mexican plans.

http://www.systra.com/news/news0055.htm

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

http://www.altavelocidad.org/




btw im following very near this project ;) here some news in spanish:



16 de Julio 2005
Notimex

MÉXICO, DF.- Las vías del tren bala empiezan a conformarse. En dos semanas se presentará la propuesta de las bases de la licitación del proyecto al comité técnico que evaluará su viabilidad y “antes de finalizar el año podríamos publicarlas, una vez que hayan sido aprobadas por el comité”, informó Oscar Corzo, director general de Tarifas, Transporte Ferroviario y Multimodal de la Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes (SCT), quien señaló que la empresa consultora Systra ya tiene listo el esquema estratégico sobre el que se asentará el proceso internacional de licitación.

El funcionario reconoció la complejidad que requerirá la ejecución del tren bala, debido a la magnitud de su inversión cifrada en US $5,000 millones de dólares. “Sabemos que se trata de un proyecto ambicioso, que requiere de largos periodos de maduración; no son proyectos fáciles, por ello se necesita un trabajo coordinado con las autoridades federales, estatales y municipales”.

La empresa francesa Systra, encargada de realizar los estudios de viabilidad y las bases para licitar el proyecto, “está a punto de concluir con su análisis, por lo que a más tardar en dos semanas presentaremos las bases ante el comité técnico (integrado por autoridades de la SCT, Hacienda, Banobras y Políticas Públicas) y con ello abriremos el camino para la licitación internacional”, agregó el funcionario, quien señaló que “no existe retraso en el proyecto del tren rápido; vamos a tiempo porque el camino a recorrer no es sencillo”.

El dinero

El esquema de llave en mano y los recursos a fondo perdido se mantienen como la ruta más viable para concretar la habilitación del tren bala, que unirá Guadalajara con la ciudad de México en un recorrido de dos horas y media con una velocidad de 300 kilómetros por hora.

“El esquema financiero es lo más complicado a resolver en un proyecto de esta naturaleza”, comentó el funcionario de la SCT, quien aseguró que se mantiene el esquema para que los recursos requeridos para su ejecución, sean aportados a fondo perdido por el gobierno federal. “El esquema financiero está siendo revisado exhaustivamente, ya que un proyecto de esta naturaleza requiere apoyos a fondo perdido, porque los ingresos que estaría generando en sus primeros años de operación no generarán los recursos requeridos para su ejecución”.

Impacto de uso

De acuerdo con el ejecutivo, aún no se puede calcular el impacto de uso que tendría el tren bala, “ya que aunque en el occidente del país habitan más de 20 millones de personas, no todos serán usuarios de este esquema de transporte. Estamos trabajando en un estudio para saber a cuánta gente le puede servir este ferrocarril y conocer su impacto indirecto en la economía de la región”.

La derrama económica que generaría la construcción del tren rápido aún no ha sido calculada; sin embargo “representará un detonante en las regiones donde se desarrolle la obra”.

Esquemas probados

Sobre la ruta que seguirán en cuanto a tecnología, Oscar Corzo indicó que se inclinarán hacia esquemas probados. “Una de las recomendaciones de Systra, es que utilicemos una tecnología moderna y probada, no estamos en condiciones de tener un tren con tecnologías que aún no han tenido largo tiempo de prueba. Consideramos utilizar las experiencias de los trenes rápidos de España y Francia”.

Los constructores de Jalisco consideran al tren rápido como un macroproyecto que cambiaría el rostro de la región; “por ello debemos tener una visión global. Los países de primer mundo lo son porque en su momento fortalecieron su infraestructura”, comentó Héctor Castellanos presidente de la delegación Jalisco de la CMIC.

En opinión de Oscar Corzo, las empresas sujetas a participar en el proceso de licitación del tren rápido de Guadalajara, “deberán ser consorcios, con soporte financiero y con una clara visión de futuro”.

Empresarios de Jalisco, al margen

Los constructores de Jalisco y promotores del proyecto del tren bala, no se han acercado a la SCT, informó Corzo; “estamos trabajando con el gobierno de Jalisco y el resto de las entidades involucradas en el proyecto como Guanajuato y Querétaro. Consideramos que existe el interés de los gobiernos estatales, en lo que se refiere al derecho de vía”.

El proyecto del tren rápido está sobre la mesa de la infraestructura de esta región desde tres años, cuando el gobierno federal anunció la intención de habilitarlo; sin embargo, su desarrollo no ha sido posible, por ello hace una semana se anunció en Jalisco la conformación de un comité de promoción que facilitaría la detonación de la obra de comunicación e infraestructura más ambiciosa en el occidente del país.




As you can see Systra has already made its work, the licitation is ready and we are only waiting the comitee to give green light to the international aid, so if everything goes fine, we could have the winner, contracts and maybe work beginning next year . :)

More on the Amtrak Acela. Yes the United States have high speed trains!

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/11/17/fast.train/link.acela.graphic.ap.jpg

http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/amtrakhhp-663-664-pcy1-11-19-00.jpg

http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/acela2009top1-8-4-00.jpg

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/amtrak/images/amtrak6.jpg

looking the tracks Acela it´s using, i´m not sure if it can be considered a HST stricto sensus. not sure about the other, though. Do they use special high speed tracks or regular old ones as Amtrak seems to be using?

I don't know about tracks but the Amtrak trains run about 150 miles per hour. I don't know the equivalent to km.

But the tracks are not that important. It's how fast the train goes and also the convenience.

Thanks for the info on the Mexican plans and the links High Speed Train, i hope to see a HST running thru Mexico ASAP :)

About the Acela, after checking some of the links above i found out this:

The major passenger carrier in the U.S., Amtrak, has been operating Acela Express trains between Boston and Washington, D.C. since 2001. These trains tilt because of curves along the track, and the top speed is 150 mph (240 km/h). This maximum speed might not be considered fast enough for this train to be designated a high–speed train, though the average speeds suggest that it should be. The average speed from Washington, D.C. to Boston is about 82 mph (132 km/h): 5 hours 30 minutes for the 450 mi (724 km) trip.

Under my point of view this is too slow too be considered as a high speed train, an average speed of 132 km/s is pretty normal, if we consider that trains such as the TGV or the AVE using high speed tracks made about 15 years ago or over, can run as fast as 220km/h (average speed) with top speeds over 300k/s., definitely, the Acela is not a HST.

To most Americans it is. Anyway, I brought up this just to show that the US also has high-speed transit and not just Europe or Asia

HST means 250 km/h at least. This speed can't be reached on classic track even with tilting trains.

Actually, HST operate in Japan, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Italy, UK, Korea (there is only one Korea...), Taiwan.

HSR are under construction or planned in Netherland, China, Portugal, Australia, Morocco, Brasil, Mexico, Austria, Slovenia, Russia.

In Switzerland, there is no HSR project but Swissmetro could be build in a few years.

actually eomer, on railfaneurope, you can see dutch ICE-3 trains already in service ;) but you ARE correct about the switzerland thing.

Yes, Slovenia has a High Speed Railway planned. It will connect Trieste (and with it the Italian HSR network), Ljubljana and Budapest, with a possible link to Graz (Austria) aswell. I wouldn't expect it before 2010 though.

But currently, tilting trains are used in Slovenia (like the Acela in the US) but they do not count as HSR..

Castellano:

Skylandman

Estoy de acuerdo contigo. No tenemos ningun linea de alta velocidad en los EEUU. El ACELA es MIERDA, y tambien, usa ferrocarriles de cercanias por casi todo el viaje entre las ciudades de Boston y Nueva York. El servicio Nueva York-Washington es mejor, pero, en mi opinion, no es alta velocidad.

Es triste, porque el Nordeste de los EEUU es el lugar principal (y despues, California entre SF y LA) en el pais que puede utilizar este tipo de transporte. Bueno, en nuestro pais, el gobierno federal nos da $30.000.000.000 para las carreteras, y solamente $1.000.000.000 para transportes ferrocarriles.

Tambien no tenemos ningun problemas para usar fondos federales para construir carreteras, pero, cuando AMTRAK pide dinero, los ciudadanos(especialmente del centro del pais) dicen NO. :rant:

----------------------------------

English

Skylandman.

I agree with you. We have no high speed line in the US. The ACELA SUCKS, and also uses suburban commuter rail tracks for the majority of the trip between the cities of Boston and New York. The New York-DC service is better, but not high speed either.

This is sad, because the Northeast of the United State is the primary place (and after it, California for the SF-LA corridor) for this type of transit. Well, in our country, we spend $30 billion from federal funds for road-based transport, and only $1 billion on railroads.

Also, we do not have any problems using federal funds to construct highwyas, but citizens, especially from the center of the country, say no public funds to AMTRAK when it asks for it. :rant:

Skylandman

Estoy de acuerdo contigo. No tenemos ningun linea de alta velocidad en los EEUU. El ACELA es MIERDA, y tambien, usa ferrocarriles de cercanias por casi todo el viaje entre las ciudades de Boston y Nueva York. El servicio Nueva York-Washington es mejor, pero, en mi opinion, no es alta velocidad.

Es triste, porque el Nordeste de los EEUU es el lugar principal (y despues, California entre SF y LA) en el pais que puede utilizar este tipo de transporte. Bueno, en nuestro pais, el gobierno federal nos da $30.000.000.000 para las carreteras, y solamente $1.000.000.000 para transportes ferrocarriles.

Tambien no tenemos ningun problemas para usar fondos federales para construir carreteras, pero, cuando AMTRAK pide dinero, los ciudadanos(especialmente del centro del pais) dicen NO. :rant:


very sad the situtation in America, i personally would like to see HST running cross the country. I remember that project in Texas that was finally rejected because of the unions of truck drivers :ohno:


You have the money guys! what are you waiting for?? :(

very sad the situtation in America, i personally would like to see HST running cross the country. I remember that project in Texas that was finally rejected because of the unions of truck drivers :ohno:


You have the money guys! what are you waiting for?? :(

Exactamente amigo mejicano. Una razon: tenemos tres de las companias de coches mas grande del mundo: GM, Chrysler, y Ford. Tambien, tenemos NINGUN compania de trenes. Las companias piden mucho del gobierno federal.

En mi opinion, hay 5 lugares para alta velocidad en mi pais

1) Boston-Hartford-Albany-Nueva York-Philadelphia-Baltimore-Washington DC con ramal a Buffalo

2) Chicago-Detroit-Saint Louis (tambien a Toronto ?)

3) SF a LA

4) las ciudades mas grandes de Tejas

5) las ciudades mas grande de Florida.

Un otro problema: la mayoria de ciudades estadounidenses no tienen ningun sistema de transport publico. Por ejemplo, podemos construir una linea de alta velocidad entre Chicago y Detroit. Si coge la LAV de Chicago a Detroirt, debo conducir despues, porque no hay ningun metro en Detroit. Y, si necesito conducir en Detroit, es mas simple para conducir Chicago a Detroit con un coche sin cogiendo un tren.

In Europe, countries with HST are:

UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden are currently operating HST's.

Switzerland doesn't have a line over 220, Mattstetten Rothrist will be 200 km/h soon. The first 250 km/h line will be the new Gotthard tunnel.

Shanghai has a maglev that goes from the suburbs to the airport. Don't know if this counts - the track is only 30km or so long. It does 430km/h though and is an absolute blast to ride!

There are some lunatic projects of making a HST line between Brasilia and Goiânia over here in Brazil, that would be like 200km long.

The closest thing Brazil will eventually get to a HST system is a "High performance train" line between Sao Paulo and Campinas (90km and ~160-180km/h)

I don't know about tracks but the Amtrak trains run about 150 miles per hour. I don't know the equivalent to km.

But the tracks are not that important. It's how fast the train goes and also the convenience.

The track is crucial to HST operation. In the UK, swathes of track were replaced to accommodate HSTs, in particular for the tilting trains. In the USA, they have been replacing sections of old track with track with the necessary tension consistency to deal with HST travel. Much of the track the Acela uses is engineered for speeds up to 110 and 125mph, with two sections allowing 150mph speeds. In addition, not all the states the train passes through have passed legislation allowing the train to tilt.

To translate from miles to kilometres, multiply the figure by 8 and divide by 5.

To most Americans it is. Anyway, I brought up this just to show that the US also has high-speed transit and not just Europe or Asia

Americans - they hate to be outdone. Sorry mate, it's just the way it is. Passenger train services (and public transport in general, for that matter) is far more extensive in Europe than it is in the US, where car is king. Bus and rail networks are not privately deregulated in the US as they are in much of Europe which also accounts for the increased availability.

very sad the situtation in America, i personally would like to see HST running cross the country. I remember that project in Texas that was finally rejected because of the unions of truck drivers :ohno:


You have the money guys! what are you waiting for?? :(

For it to be commercially viable. Remember, the costs are huge and Amtrak rents the track it uses. Until you prise people from their 4 litre SUVs and into trains as a method of travelling long distance, it won't happen.

^ It is commercially viable on the northeast corridor, it's the only line on the Amtrak system that's profitable, yet it gets very little investment.
Currently the rest of the US generally don't have electrification and the tracks are owned by freight companies, so the trains are extremely slow (they're far slower than even the regional trains on the NE corridor), and wouldn't allow for HSR unless they bought the tracks from the freight companies and electrified them. But with a budget of $1 billion, Amtrak barley has enough money to keep operating the service it already has.

they should build a high speed train in the golden horseshoe in ontario all the way to montreal

I hope California gets the high speed train system, if they pass the ballot vote in 2006. Who knows, I don't know if it's feasible for their economy since most people depend on cars and planes in California. San Francisco to LA for $6 billion is a lot of money, hopefully worth the money, sigh.

The track is crucial to HST operation. In the UK, swathes of track were replaced to accommodate HSTs, in particular for the tilting trains. In the USA, they have been replacing sections of old track with track with the necessary tension consistency to deal with HST travel. Much of the track the Acela uses is engineered for speeds up to 110 and 125mph, with two sections allowing 150mph speeds. In addition, not all the states the train passes through have passed legislation allowing the train to tilt.

Track supporting speeds of 110 and 125mph would hardly be high-speed in my opinion - there was a project here to fix tracks up for that kind of speed. Too bad the fastest trains in Victoria only travel at 160km/h. Tilt trains in Queensland are capable of 220km/h though.

Track supporting speeds of 110 and 125mph would hardly be high-speed in my opinion - there was a project here to fix tracks up for that kind of speed. .

I agree - read the thread I was responding to.

The UK has Pendolino High Spped trains Running From London to Manchester at 140 mph (225kmph)
http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/Press/gallery/hst/Class390VWC01-Large.jpg
and the Eurostars running through Kent to the Channle tunnel and on to France and Belgium at 209mph (334.7kmph)
http://www.lri.fr/~aze/Site/Trains/Eurostar/sv5785789.jpg

The pendolinos run to Glasgow actually, not at full speed yet, but track work finishes in December!

Then the track on the whole WCML will finally have been replaced.
:cheers:

Spain is constructing a new HS net. In some 15 years, it´ll have 10.000 km...nowadays only around 1200.

Many projects are under way just as we speak.

Here (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=252897) is an example. It connects my 2 cities.

Greetings,

Alberto

Check the Pendolino website out its got an on train tour Pretty cool.

www.virgintrains.co.uk/travelling_with_us/our_trains/pendolino_tour/default.aspx (http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/travelling_with_us/our_trains/pendolino_tour/default.aspx)

Where does the arbitrary minimum 250km/hr come from?

Where does the arbitrary minimum 250km/hr come from?

people like round numbers

200 km/h (i.e., 125 mph) are common on many normal services in the developed world where rail is invested in properly. The same goes for 225 km/h

However, to get trains to run at a speed of 250 km/h (155 mph), you need to make special adjustments, so it makes sense to brand trains at this speed as "high speed" to emphasize the premium nature of the services.

To translate from miles to kilometres, multiply the figure by 8 and divide by 5.

Wouldn't be easier just to multiply by 1.6?