Thought I might as well post it here as well since it didn't create much interest in the general infrastructure section :)

http://europa.eu.int/comm/ten/transport/projects/doc/2005_ten_t_en.pdf
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/6383/kartta2de.th.gif (http://img226.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kartta2de.gif)

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/3826/map6sn.th.gif (http://img118.imageshack.us/my.php?image=map6sn.gif)

Concerned administrations of Estonia and Brussels are preparing a mega-project according to which a new railroad Rail Baltica in conformity with European standards is going to run through Estonia in several years time. It would take 6 hours to reach Warsaw.

This express railway line, one of the 30 most important development projects of transportation infrastructure, would cost EEK 65 bln., the amount would be spent on building a new railway in the Baltics and Poland. Most of the finances planned for the construction of railway would come from the European Union.
We would like to start preliminary studies in the fall, Anti Moppel, transportation adviser with the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications, member of the international working group dealing with the project, said. These studies should answer the questions: which should be the junctions this railway line passes through; which would be the shortest as well as the best route taking into account developments in the Baltic region, Moppel said.
In Moppel’s words it should be analysed whether the planned speed would be 160, 200 or even 300 km/h. If it is going to be an express railway in the European sense of the word, then freight traffic and passenger traffic shall evidently be organised on two separate tracks because speeds are different. http://www.evr.ee/?id=1812&langchange=1

I'm really looking forward to this, hopefully they will change the line to go through Pärnu though. Would be great to be able to get to those beaches in a hour or two. Assuming a tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn ever gets built.

You will get to beautiful Jurmala beaches instead ;)
This article rises Estonian officials although all three Baltic states are working at it, according to agreement of three countries signed in 2001. F.e. Latvian side is coordinating cooperation with Poland. In 2004 EU included Rail Baltica in priority project list.

At the end of 2005 there was started feasibility study - Danish company COWI was selected to do the work. Only after the end of this study (end of 2007) it would be possible to judge about the exact route, speeds etc.

I hope that St Petersburg will be connected to this as well - this will increase the potential need for this project. St Petersburg is not included in initial study yet.

"Rail Baltica" project is among the most endangered projects if EU decides to decrease investments in infrastructure. It would be interesting to see the internal rate of return and other economical indicators of this project at the end of 2007. Am afraid that it is not bankable :(

So the perspectives for this project are not that bright. But this project might help a lot to make Baltics more involved in European economical space.

I hope that St Petersburg will be connected to this as well - this will increase the potential need for this project. St Petersburg is not included in initial study yet.
Well, Helsinki will be connected to St.Petersbug with "high speed" rail line. Helsinki - Kerva - Lahti commonly know as the "Oikorata" is the first phase of the project and is expected to be completed this year. I did have a huge map showing the whole project but I lost it.

So, unless we get a tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn(which I doubt), someone is going to have persuade the russians to build some new rail lines. Europe being Russians largest export/import partner, it should happen. I'm 100% sure.

Oikorata project
http://www.rhk.fi/oikorata/Oikorata_en_paivitys.pdf
is impressive !

Oikorata project
http://www.rhk.fi/oikorata/Oikorata_en_paivitys.pdf
is impressive !

Njaa, I think it would be much more impressive if they built a highspeed line along the coast. Through Sipoo, Porvoo, Loviisa, Kotka, Hamina and to Russia. Who knows, maybe in 50 years :)

Satama, why do you think the Helsinki - Tallinn tunnel won't get built?
http://www.rhk.fi/projekti/hankekuvaukset_260304.pdf
(Page 14)

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/8547/tallinn9nq.gif

Njaa, I think it would be much more impressive if they built a highspeed line along the coast. Through Sipoo, Porvoo, Loviisa, Kotka, Hamina and to Russia. Who knows, maybe in 50 years
No it wouldn't be. Helsinki - Tampere is Finland's busiest rail line of which the oikorata serves. Sure, you would get to St.Peterburg faster if the line went straight to the east, but the economical benefits are far better with the oikorata line.

Satama, why do you think the Helsinki - Tallinn tunnel won't get built?
It's f..king costly. And I doubt they could make it profitable, just look at the Eurotunnel.

The sooner they start to build the railway the better for Baltic countries. Economy not always play the major role. In this case very important is political decision to integrate Baltic states rail ways to EU.

The idea is fabulous :)

For those who dont't know but rail way system in Baltic states is russian type, it means wider than those in EU. If you want to go by train from Kaunas to Warsaw your train have to change wheels at the cross border

For those who dont't know but rail way system in Baltic states is russian type, it means wider than those in EU. If you want to go by train from Kaunas to Warsaw your train have to change wheels at the cross border

Well at least gauge is the same in Finland (1524 mm)...

For those who dont't know but rail way system in Baltic states is russian type, it means wider than those in EU. If you want to go by train from Kaunas to Warsaw your train have to change wheels at the cross border

If it's going to be a "highspeed line" in the European sense of the word, new infrastructure would most likely be built. Thus it wouldn't really matter if it was compatible with the rest of the Baltic railways. Plus there are "highspeed" trains with changing axel width eg. Spain's railways aren't compatible with that of rest of Europe's.

Finland is going to use pendolinos which aren't highspeed trains in the European sense of the word.

But
Siemens-Russian Railways Project Trimmed Ten Fold
As it turned out, the management upheaval at Russian Railways has cost dear to Siemens – the agreed number of trains to be made under the Siemens-Russian Railways project has been cut down ten fold from 60 to six high-speed trains overall.
Russian Railways focused yesterday, September 29, 2005, on the high-speed future of trains in Russia. The officials canvassed the plans to increase the speed of the trains running from Moscow to St. Petersburg, from St. Petersburg to Helsinki and backwards. As a result of the heated debates, the high-speed program launched in time of the previous president Gennady Fadeev, was changed materially, said Vladimir Yakunin, who is in charge of the Russian Railways today.

Fadeev and Siemens agreed to jointly design and produce the 300 km/hour electric trains based on Inter City Express (ICE-3) at Haover fair in April. At that time, Siemens costs were estimated at over €150 million, while the Russia party was expected to spend around €2 billion, including €1.5 billion to buy about 60 new trains. President Putin said then the German plants would be busy with Russian orders till 2015. As agreed, Siemens was to make out the exact performance specification by June 30 and draw up the draft project by September 30.
http://www.kommersant.com/tree.asp?rubric=3&node=40&doc_id=613604

http://www.ice-fansite.de/images/stories/ice3uebersicht.jpg
ICE-3 is a high-speed train by European standards. :drool:



Are Russians gonna buy them or not, who knows...

Reality:
http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/800/real5um.jpg

Ideal:
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6062/ideal2gh.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Ideal:
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6062/ideal2gh.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I think it's good that it's planned to go to Warzaw seeing as it will grow more and more important in Europe. Ideal for me would be:

http://img453.imageshack.us/img453/7666/bana0bc.jpg
If they were to build this line at 300km/h before 2020 I would spontaneously combust of joy. :)

@Jape, here I agree. Warsaw and Baltic cities would be a lot more important themselves. And having Vilnius in this line would be clever as well - that would help the city a lot to become regional centre - because with such line going through it it would be a lot more interesting for Minsk too.
But now we are just phantasizing only :(

Latvia need the train not to get to Poland - we need the train to get to the western Europe. Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, Brussel, Paris, London. Not to Warsaw. Who needs to go to Warsaw. The rail through Warsaw to get to Berlin is very rounabout. But of course we are repeating the same mistakes the builders of early railways did - every vilage wanted rail, so now we have rail going through village while big cities remain without effective rail connections.

As Latvian, of course, I think - the more money we get from EU, the better. If they can't find where to spend their money - they are welcome to build a also a tunnel to warsaw and canal for passenger ferries. But as European - I think it is waste of money. billions to connect Tallinn with Warsaw.Maybe later they will build extension to Bucharesti? LOL.

Who needs to go to Warsaw.
Industries etc. Are you seriously short-sighted or something?

Latvia need the train not to get to Poland - we need the train to get to the western Europe. Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, Brussel, Paris, London. Not to Warsaw. Who needs to go to Warsaw. .
I disagree with you. Please think more strategical ! Latvia need more connection with Central Europe (not only railway, but also energy systems should be more connected). And let me remind you, that there is Poland between Latvia and "Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, etc" :) Of course you can use planes(i use it too) :) , but clever people never throw any options .

Latvia need the train not to get to Poland - we need the train to get to the western Europe. Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, Brussel, Paris, London. Not to Warsaw. Who needs to go to Warsaw. The rail through Warsaw to get to Berlin is very rounabout. But of course we are repeating the same mistakes the builders of early railways did - every vilage wanted rail, so now we have rail going through village while big cities remain without effective rail connections.

As Latvian, of course, I think - the more money we get from EU, the better. If they can't find where to spend their money - they are welcome to build a also a tunnel to warsaw and canal for passenger ferries. But as European - I think it is waste of money. billions to connect Tallinn with Warsaw.Maybe later they will build extension to Bucharesti? LOL.


OMG how dumb you are ! I would rather say that Who needs to go from Warsaw to Riga !!?? :hahaha:

Latvia need the train not to get to Poland - we need the train to get to the western Europe. Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, Brussel, Paris, London. Not to Warsaw. Who needs to go to Warsaw. The rail through Warsaw to get to Berlin is very rounabout. But of course we are repeating the same mistakes the builders of early railways did - every vilage wanted rail, so now we have rail going through village while big cities remain without effective rail connections.


In 20-50 years there's not going to be the west-east divison, atleast not as we know it today. My humble, completely out of the hat estimate is that in 50 years Warsaw will be one of the "top 5 cities" in the EU. So plenty of people will "need to go to Warsaw"

Besides, you can't draw the line through Kalingrad, and Kaunas-Warsaw-Berlin is some 120km longer than Kaunas-Berlin. If Berlin is where you want to go. And this is the reality, Warsaw is going to - If this whole thing ever gets built- be the end stop of Rail Baltica. Hopefully Helsinki will be the other end via tunnel :)

http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/3831/map6sn3in.gif

deleted

Industries etc. Are you seriously short-sighted or something?


Industries have to go to Baku and Dnepropetrovsk too, we are not planning to build rail there. Fast speed rail is build for masses, to bring people closer. We need closer links to western europe, and that is as I thought the reason of building this rail link - to link baltics with "heart of Europe" - Are bewteen Cologne - Paris - London. The link thourgh Warsaw is not bringing Riga closer to that area. As it is clearly rounabout way. As I said - that repets the old tradition - build rail so that it goes through each village and not thinking about one region with other.

I am sure Warsaw is a city and why not go there. But inc ase we need to set prioritoies connection with London, Paris, Berlin or connection with Warsaw, I say London, Paris, Berlin. When taht link is build we can think about connecting to Warsaw, Bucharesti or further Istanbul which is no doubt goign to be important too. But of course if we can all I dotn mind rail beeing built also to Warsaw

Industries have to go to Baku and Dnepropetrovsk too, we are not planning to build rail there. Fast speed rail is build for masses, to bring people closer. We need closer links to western europe, and that is as I thought the reason of building this rail link - to link baltics with "heart of Europe" - Are bewteen Cologne - Paris - London. The link thourgh Warsaw is not bringing Riga closer to that area. As it is clearly rounabout way. As I said - that repets the old tradition - build rail so that it goes through each village and not thinking about one region with other.

I am sure Warsaw is a city and why not go there. But inc ase we need to set prioritoies connection with London, Paris, Berlin or connection with Warsaw, I say London, Paris, Berlin. When taht link is build we can think about connecting to Warsaw, Bucharesti or further Istanbul which is no doubt goign to be important too. But of course if we can all I dotn mind rail beeing built also to Warsaw
I think for EU priority is to have fast connection between Paris-Berlin-Warsaw and Moscow, and maybe later some links to villages like Riga. ;)

deleted

I would rather say that Who needs to go from Warsaw to Riga !!??

Exactly so no need to build the rail to Warsaw as we both are not interested in each other.

I think for EU priority is to have connection between Paris-Berlin-Warsaw and Moscow, and maybe later some links to villages like Riga. ;)

Thanks god EU regional developmet is priority and that is good so, otherwise no french or brits would ever be interested in building rail to villages like Warsaw or Riga. If all people were thinking like you in EU, there werent even plans to build rails somewheer east from Berlin, I am also not sure that we would have joined EU.

And let me remind you, that there is Poland between Latvia and "Berlin, Hamburg, Amsterdam, etc" :) Of course you can use planes(i use it too) :) , but clever people never throw any options .

Yes sadly you are right - thats why we should make the route through Poland as short as possible. Wish old good prewar times back - when we had direct connection with Germany without the Poles inbetween. These were good times, except the loads of Polish immigrants we had, that were starving in their own country.

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7195/a1925eu0pq.gif

Poles should actually give back germans their old cities of Danzig, Stettin, Breslau and move back to Belarus wheer is their right place.

Exactly so no need to build the rail to Warsaw as we both are not interested in each other.



Thanks god EU regional developmet is priority and that is good so, otherwise no french or brits would ever be interested in building rail to villages like Warsaw or Riga. If all people were thinking like you in EU, there werent even plans to build rails somewheer east from Berlin, I am also not sure that we would have joined EU.



Yes sadly you are right - thats why we should make the route through Poland as short as possible. Wish old good prewar times back - when we had direct connection with Germany without the Poles inbetween. These were good times, except the loads of Polish immigrants we had, that were starving in their own country.

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7195/a1925eu0pq.gif

Poles should actually give back germans their old cities of Danzig, Stettin, Breslau and move back to Belarus wheer is their right place.

Latvians should actually give back germans their old cities of Riga, Windau, Libau...or regions like Livland and Kurland (German-led states)



http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6062/ideal2gh.jpg

vilnius and warsaw not, but kaliningrad yes..pathetic :bash:

Rail Baltica isn't only latvian :bash:



Ideal:


http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6554/europepoliticalsmall2vi.gif

Berlin-Warsaw-Vilnius-Tallinn

Latvians should actually give back germans their old city of Riga, Windau, Libau...or regions like Livland and Kurland

I dont mind - I am half german myself :) - but dont think germans want to come back.

I dont mind - I am half german myself :) -



Oh ! A Deutschbalten! hehehe....We all know what those German "roots" and "trying to reconnect" in the Baltics are all about: More than 700 years of invasions, wars, killings, robbing, exploitation and oppression.
Germans formed the upper classes while the indigenous population "Undeutsch", composed the peasantry(latvians, estonians,...). That's the kind of "European Union" we certainly don't need again.


but dont think germans want to come back.


why not?

Oh ! A Deutschbalten! hehehe....We all know what those German "roots" and "trying to reconnect" in the Baltics are all about: More than 700 years of invasions, wars, killings, robbing, exploitation and oppression.
Germans formed the upper classes while the indigenous population "Undeutsch", composed the peasantry(latvians, estonians,...)

Well it is all history, all gone - before 1. world war latvians made up big part of the burgoise in the cities. And lived togetehr with germans in peace. For germans Latvia was as much heimat as for latvians, and germans have left big cultural heritage in latvia. Riga without germans is as Rome without romans - people who built it.

Thanks god EU regional developmet is priority and that is good so, otherwise no french or brits would ever be interested in building rail to villages like Warsaw or Riga. If all people were thinking like you in EU, there werent even plans to build rails somewheer east from Berlin, I am also not sure that we would have joined EU.
Thanks god Poland=16 regions, Latvia=1 region and the main EU net distributor are Germans, who actually are very interested in the developement of the infrastructure of their main eastern neighbour - Poland. ;)

Yes sadly you are right - thats why we should make the route through Poland as short as possible. Wish old good prewar times back - when we had direct connection with Germany without the Poles inbetween. These were good times, except the loads of Polish immigrants we had, that were starving in their own country.

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7195/a1925eu0pq.gif
You meant between Latvia and Prussia through Lithuania while Prusia and geman mainland didin't have direct land connection.
Poles should actually give back germans their old cities of Danzig, Stettin, Breslau and move back to Belarus wheer is their right place.
In such a case we should actually rejoin with Reczpospolita most of the Latvia territory. ;)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Rzeczpospolita.png/765px-Rzeczpospolita.png

Thanks god Poland=16 regions, Latvia=1 region and the main EU net distributor are Germans, who actually are very interested in the developement of the infrastructure of their main eastern neighbour - Poland.

Here you are wrong - EU is NOT Germany, EU is made up by many countries and Germany alone could decide on what to buildt and how.



In such a case we should actually rejoin with Reczpospolita most of the Latvia territory. ;)


Sadly there is no Rzechpospolita but we have very good relations of with our neighbours, heir of the Rzechpospolita - Lithuania. So no problem with that.

I dont mind - I am half german myself :)

Ius primae noctis ? :| :| :|

The Baltic lands of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Kurland were conquered by
the crusades of the German Teutonic Knights beginning in 1198 onward. The
descendants of these Teutonic Knights became ruthless barons that held the
common conquered people as serfs in slavery worse than American slavery. The
Barons reserved the right to (ius) primae noctis, the German Baron got to deflower
the virginity of all his female serfs. For over 500 years, these German barons
ruled the locals who they held in utter contempt. Latvian culture survived all
these centuries of oppression simply because the Germans considered the
Latvians to worthless to spend effort bringing them German culture. The
Germans made comments that the Latvians could not be educated.
" 'AMERICA STANDS FOR FREEDOM' " by Fritz Springmeier

delete

Ius primae noctis ? :| :| :|

The Baltic lands of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Kurland were conquered by
the crusades of the German Teutonic Knights beginning in 1198 onward. The
descendants of these Teutonic Knights became ruthless barons that held the
common conquered people as serfs in slavery worse than American slavery. The
Barons reserved the right to (ius) primae noctis, the German Baron got to deflower
the virginity of all his female serfs. For over 500 years, these German barons
ruled the locals who they held in utter contempt. Latvian culture survived all
these centuries of oppression simply because the Germans considered the
Latvians to worthless to spend effort bringing them German culture. The
Germans made comments that the Latvians could not be educated.
" 'AMERICA STANDS FOR FREEDOM' " by Fritz Springmeier


That was the past - the attitude of nobles toward the peasantry everyweher in Europe kin middle ages, was it Britain, Germany, France or Spain. Exception could be Sweden which didnt had any serfdom. But already at the beginning of 19 th century serfdom was abolished in Courland, Livland and Estland. Peasanst were free, some of them become rich, educated their children, which formed later the middle and uper class in cities and lived together with germans. Initially germans didnt want to accept latvians as equalls, but as it was everyweher in Europe where nobles didnt want to accept people with other descent among them, but at that time money was more important than blood.

Here you are wrong - EU is NOT Germany, EU is made up by many countries and Germany alone could decide on what to buildt and how.
Fortunately population (Poland, Germany) and economy (Germany) means strength in EU. ;)

Sadly there is no Rzechpospolita but we have very good relations of with our neighbours, heir of the Rzechpospolita - Lithuania. So no problem with that.
From the polish point of view there is only one true heir of Rzeczpospolita - Reczpospolita Polska - the same language, main city and etc. Lithuanians are separatists who occupy Wilno and rather Belarus not Lithuania is the heir of The Great Lithuanian Duchy. But it's not the place to discuss bad feelings over past events.

What the fuck.. . Can you guys break it up, we're talking about a trainline here. Settle your macho shit with PM's. :nono:

Fortunately population (Poland, Germany) and economy (Germany) means strength in EU. ;)

I am afraid even if germany joined with poland to get something through, they werent strong enough to stand against Brits, France, Italy and Spain. But dont think germans will go against France and Britain for the benefit of Poland.


From the polish point of view there is only one true heir of Rzeczpospolita - Reczpospolita Polska - the same language, main city and etc. Lithuanians are separatists who occupy Wilno and rather Belarus not Lithuania is the heir of The Great Lithuanian Duchy. But it's not the place to discuss bad feelings over past events.

I think you Poles better stay in your Estern European forum and discuss how to build rail from Warsaw to Belgrade and Bucharesti. We need much more rail to Berlin and Paris, than Warsaw and Bucharesti and if we dont have the Berlin, Paris train we will survive as Finns has survived until now and dont think they care about prospects of going to Warsaw now either

What the fuck.. . Can you guys break it up, we're talking about a trainline here. Settle your macho shit with PM's. :nono:
I'm sorry but some people here just can't live without mixing history with the european future. I've had to present polish point of view.

In the end I can only say, that's obvious that rail baltica is planned through Warsaw. Simply because it must lead through Poland and it's polish interest to provide it through polish capital and the biggest city in Poland.

That was the past


of course, you are a german..or 1/2 german :)


the attitude of nobles toward the peasantry everyweher in Europe kin middle ages, was it Britain, Germany, France or Spain

British nobles for british serfs, French nobles for french serfs, Spanish nobles for spanihs serfs.....but in Latvia: German nobles for latvian serfs










Poland

GDP: $489.3 billion (2005 est.)
Population: 38,635,144

Latvia

GDP: $29.42 billion (2005 est.)
Population: 2,290,237


Warsaw
Population: 2,760,000
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Wawka2.jpg

Riga
Population: 739,232
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/49/Riga_city_downtown_2005.jpg/800px-Riga_city_downtown_2005.jpg





Really...who needs to go from Berlin (Paris or london) to Riga or Latvia ??

I am afraid even if germany joined with poland to get something through, they werent strong enough to stand against Brits, France, Italy and Spain. But dont think germans will go against France and Britain for the benefit of Poland.
But I still don't understand why UK, France, Italy and Spain would stay against Poland and Germany to support baltic states. ;)

I think you Poles better stay in your Estern European forum and discuss how to build rail from Warsaw to Belgrade and Bucharesti. We need much more rail to Berlin and Paris, than Warsaw and Bucharesti and if we dont have the Berlin, Paris train we will survive as Finns has survived until now and dont think they care about prospects of going to Warsaw now either
We rather prefer to stay on our polish forum but we are also interested in the far eastern european countries like Latvia. ;) Anyway, we still gonna have influence on what and where will be built on our territory. :|

BTW I'm sorry for all of the Latvians who are not as narrow minded as this guy. :)

ok. That's a bullshit you are talking there, that's not a discussion. We should start new - stupid-you-stupid - thread where we can call each other in most dfiferent names until we have no air to breath. But I am not interested. Maybe you have such threads on you polish forum I dont care. Than stay betetr there and call each other there as you please and discuss about all possible rails to Denpropetrovsk, Chisinau, Bucharesti, Belgrade, wherever.

ok. That's a bullshit you are talking there, that's not a discussion. We should start new - stupid-you-stupid - thread where we can call each other in most dfiferent names until we have no air to breath. But I am not interested. Maybe you have such threads on you polish forum I dont care. Than stay betetr there and call each other there as you please and discuss about all possible rails to Denpropetrovsk, Chisinau, Bucharesti, Belgrade, wherever.

pathetic... :ohno:

I discussed about rail and related issues - must be some slavic tradition as soon as you have no arguments to call the opponent stupid. I am finished with this discussion good night

I discussed about rail and related issues - must be some slavic tradition as soon as you have no arguments to call the opponent stupid. I am finished with this discussion good night

Where?






What's your problem with Poland and Slavic Peoples? Is it your 1/2 german blood (Ius primae noctis product) ?

Well, in general, I think one of the main arguments behind Rail Baltica is to connect Finland (5+ m of very mobile Finns) and Northwest Russia (St.Petersburg) with Central Europe (Poland and Germany) via the shortest route through Baltic States + side link to Minsk (just 200 kms away from Vilnius) from Kaunas or Vilnius.

Main strategic argument is to make more links between the Baltic States and Central Europe (first - with Poland and Germany). Poland already is the most important player among ten new EU Member States and Poland`s role in the enlarged EU will continue to grow (it`s much more densely populated than Baltics, especially Latvia and Estonia; it`s economy is significantly bigger; it`s becoming much more attractive than 10 years ago - from experience of my own). I`m 1/8 Pole myself.

Rail Baltica, Via Baltica projects still far beyond the horizon




By Ben Nimmo


RIGA - Two of the EU’s highest-profile projects in the Baltics are the ongoing Via Baltica road upgrade and the proposed Rail Baltica rail link from Warsaw to Tallinn. Both serve one common purpose: to bind the areas’ transport networks firmly into EU structures, thus creating a rapid and effective transport corridor from Scandinavia to Central and Eastern Europe.
It is an impressive vision, and both projects have been given eye-catching titles that imply great changes to come. But the most important question is to what extent they will ever be achieved.

Big name, small scale?

In itself, the idea of improving north-south transport links is a good one. The Baltics now form the most direct land corridor from Finland to central Europe, and in the words of Andulis Zidkovs, director of the investment department at the Latvian Transport Ministry, “the shortest way is always the best.”

Whereas before May 1, 2004, the only way for EU-bound Finnish travellers to avoid half a dozen lengthy border crossings was to take the sea route to Germany’s ports or drive across Sweden and the Oresund bridge, they can now drive directly through the Baltics - EU territory all the way. The same applies in the other direction, and given the new EU members’ rapid increase in living standards, the traffic is unlikely to be one-way.

Furthermore, the Via Baltica project is nowhere near as radical as it seems. While the name may conjure up images of a brand-new ribbon of silken asphalt binding the Baltics together, the reality is limited to a series of local upgrades.

“It’s a question of money,” says Imants Kaupe, head of the road planning division at the Latvian Transport Ministry. “It costs a million lats (1.42 million euros) to reconstruct one kilometer of dual-carriageway road. The Via Baltica plan covers over 200 kilometers of road in Latvia, and our total annual budget from the state is about 50 million lats. That doesn’t even cover our maintenance costs.”

Nor is the EU about to foot such a bill.

“Total funding from EU and Latvian sources since 1996 has amounted to 39 million lats,” says Zidkovs.

Given this slender funding, Via Baltica will never be more than a local road-improvement scheme. As such, it may not merit the grandiose dreams that its name conjures up, but it should certainly improve transit and safety on Latvia’s roads, which can only benefit trade and tourism.

But despite the obvious benefits, there is a paradox. The EU wants to improve road transport in the Baltics, but its environmental rules often point the other way.

“The EU’s priority is to create ‘motorways of the sea,’ connecting ports with the main transit corridors as an alternative to road transport,” says Zidkovs.

Road tolls are becoming increasingly common, and while they have not yet reached the Baltics, the trend seems unlikely to reverse. It would be ironic if the EU’s own rules came to restrict the highway that it built. But as Kaupe says, “this doesn’t depend on the roads, it depends on political decisions.”

Given that dependence, it is probably just as well that Via Baltica is not a larger scheme.

Rail Radicals

Rail Baltica looks far more radical. A joint initiative by transport ministers from Poland and the Baltics, it foresees the creation of a high-speed, European-gauge rail link from Warsaw to Tallinn. At present, Baltic trains run on Soviet-gauge tracks, which are not compatible with the European gauge present in Poland and further west.

Conceived in 2003, the initiative has been included as a priority in the European Commission’s “TEN-T” trans-European transport plan, and the Commission has agreed to fund a preliminary feasibility study, due for completion in late 2006.

If all goes according to plan, the Warsaw-Kaunas secton should be ready in 2010, Kaunas-Riga in 2014 and Riga-Tallinn in 2016. Political clouds are already gathering over the project. As Zidkovs points out, “Everyone wants the project to come to them,” so these dates are only guidelines.

Rail Baltica seems to fit the EU’s aims better than Via Baltica. Rail transport is more environmentally friendly than road transport, improves road safety, and is potentially much faster. If Rail Baltica’s trains followed the French TGV model, they could make the journey from Tallinn to Riga in a little over two hours.

The same economic arguments backing Via Baltica apply to the rail variant. While Zidkovs admits that “at the moment there is effectively no international rail transport in the region,” he firmly believes that this will change.

“There is a clear need for such a line. If you look at a map of Europe, the only land route from the Baltics to the west is through Poland, and the conditions on Polish roads are very well known. If we look even 30 years in the future, of course there will be demand, and don’t forget that a railway line is an investment for a hundred years in the future,” he says.

It is just as well that he takes such a long view, because the cost could be formidable.

“Just to construct the new line on Latvian territory, we expect costs to reach around one billion euros, and we won’t be able to finance it all with EU money, so we will need private-sector involvement,” Zidkovs adds.

The project dwarfs Via Baltica. Biven that no technical details will be discussed until after the presentation of the EC’s study next December, it could last a generation.

“There will be public consultations in Brussels this April for stakeholders to air their views,” says Zidkovs.

And one can expect a lot more talking before the first rail is laid.

In the final analysis, both projects meet valid needs. However, the sheer expense renders their full implementation unlikely. While the Via Baltica is based on an existing road network and can thus be implemented piecemeal, Rail Baltica would require construction from scratch, with all the cost and risk that entails.

Looking at the long term, as Zidkovs recommends, the latter project is unquestionably the more promising. But long-term projects require long-term capital and political will. It may be that, come 2016, the first high-speed train will be cruising between Tallinn and Warsaw - but don’t book your tickets just yet.


http://www.baltictimes.com

Who needs that Rail Blatica? It's better to construct a highway Warsaw - Kaunas - Riga - Tallinn :)

Rail Baltica or Higway.. but most important is safe driving on Polish roads without robbing witch is still popular in Poland. So I think this things is priority and then we can discuss about connection...
But don't be fucking angry to each other, some people would go to Warshaw and mostly to Western Europe.

Ok. Meybee London are unreal, but Berlin is neccessary for sure.

Map of the ten Pan-European transport corridors

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/9851/paneuropetransport9iq.png


I (North-South) Helsinki - Tallinn - Riga - Kaunas and Klaipeda - Warsaw and Gdańsk
Branch A (Via/Rail Hanseatica) - Riga to Kaliningrad to Gdańsk
Via Baltica (E 67) - Helsinki to Warsaw.


II (East-West) Berlin - Poznań - Warsaw - Brest - Minsk - Smolensk - Moscow - Nizhny Novgorod


III Brussels - Aachen - Köln - Dresden - Wrocław - Katowice - Kraków - L'viv - Kyiv


IV Dresden/Nuremberg - Prague - Vienna - Bratislava - Győr - Budapest - Arad - Bucharest - Constanţa / Craiova - Sofia - Thessaloniki / Plovdiv - Istanbul.


V (East-West) Venice - Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana - Maribor - Budapest - Uzhhorod - L'viv - Kyiv. 1600 km long.
Branch A - Bratislava - Žilina - Košice - Uzhhorod
Branch B - Rijeka - Zagreb - Budapest
Branch C - Ploče - Sarajevo - Osijek - Budapest


VI (North-South) Gdańsk - Katowice - Žilina, with a western branch Katowice-Brno.


VII (The Danube River) (Northwest-Southeast) - 2,300 km long.


VIII Durrës - Tirana - - Skopje - Bitola - Sofia - Dimitrovgrad - Burgas - Varna. 1300 km long.


IX Helsinki - Vyborg - St. Petersburg - Pskov - Moscow - Kaliningrad - Kyiv - Ljubashevka/Rozdilna (Ukraine) - Chisinau - Bucharest - Dimitrovgrad - Alexandroupolis. A branch runs from Ljubashevka/Rozdilna to Odesa. 3,400 km long.
Branch A - Helsinki to St. Petersburg to Moscow
Branch B - Kaliningrad to Kyiv
Branch D - Kaliningrad to Vilnius to Minsk


X Salzburg - Ljubljana - Zagreb - Beograd - Niš - Skopje - Veles - Thessaloniki.
Branch A: Graz - Maribor - Zagreb
Branch B: Budapest - Novi Sad - Beograd
Branch C: Niš - Sofia - Dimitrovgrad - Istanbul via Corridor IV
Branch D: Veles - Prilep - Bitola - Florina - Igoumenitsa

Who needs roads to western europe ? You can fly to London for 50 euro.

OK, now I change my mind after reading the comments from these guys. May be better go through Kaliningrad instead of Warsaw. I seems, there are some more hopes to meet pleasant people there :)

Using the approach of @Gummo:
Who needs to go from Riga
http://www.balticsww.com/tourist/estonia/images/Riga_view.jpg
to Warsaw
http://www.viveca.net/travel/poland_pics/WarsawLandscape.jpg
if we can go to Europe?

Better stop. There is a lot more ugly pictures of cities and ugly things to say about nationalities.

Using the approach of @Gummo:
Who needs to go from Riga
http://www.balticsww.com/tourist/estonia/images/Riga_view.jpg
to Warsaw
http://www.viveca.net/travel/poland_pics/WarsawLandscape.jpg
if we can go to Europe?

Better stop. There is a lot more ugly pictures of cities and ugly things to say about nationalities.


??? my riga's picture is in wikipedia

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

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/49/Riga_city_downtown_2005.jpg/290px-Riga_city_downtown_2005.jpg

Riga city downtown in late and cold January evening of 2005 (photo by Laurijs Svirskis)

http://www.viveca.net/travel/poland_pics/WarsawLandscape.jpg
Warsaw,1970

Rail Baltica or Higway.. but most important is safe driving on Polish roads without robbing witch is still popular in Poland.

You have a much higher chance of being killed by a drunk and speeding Latvian TIR driver than being robbed on any Polish road.

OK, now I change my mind after reading the comments from these guys. May be better go through Kaliningrad instead of Warsaw. I seems, there are some more hopes to meet pleasant people there :)

Better look at offensive posts of Janis, and then write smth

Ius primae noctis ? :| :| :|

[I]The Baltic lands of Latvia, Lithuania , Estonia, and Kurland were conquered by
the crusades of the German Teutonic Knights beginning in 1198 onward. The
descendants of these Teutonic Knights became ruthless barons that held the
common conquered people as serfs in slavery worse than American slavery.

Now wtf is that?

These fights and so on are seriously ridiculous!! what is the reason for this ?!?

Anyway I see no other way than going through Warsaw, as you know big city and business center. It is most feasible for Poland to build it like this having current infrastructure in mind and you guys know you have to cross Poland in order to get to Western Europe :yes: Letting it go through Warsaw I even think would be a key since Poland is HUGE market and I would say Polish passengers would be a main reason even to make this whole project feasible. I mean what would you otherwise want? it to go through Olsztyn - Poznan - Berlin ?

Aargh, please stop this business Latvians and Poles! Of course the Baltica projects should go through Warsaw, it's one of the biggest and wealthiest cities in the region!

The Via Baltica project I could give or take, there is no doubt that road safety and quality needs to be improved. And why would anybody drive from Vilnius to Warsaw or Riga to Tallinn etc, when they could take the train - which would be cheaper and far more comfortable. As for cheap flights, despite the fact that I myself have taken advantage of them on numerous occasions, their environmental impact is truly appalling and viable, more environmentally friendly alternatives must be created. I travelled from Vilnius to London recently by train, and found the journey exceedingly pleasant and quite swift. However, to make the same journey entirely with high speed trains would truly be wonderful, and my only regret is that this project will take so long to come into fruition.

Anyway I see no other way than going through Warsaw, as you know big city and business center. It is most feasible for Poland to build it like this having current infrastructure in mind and you guys know you have to cross Poland in order to get to Western Europe Letting it go through Warsaw I even think would be a key since Poland is HUGE market and I would say Polish passengers would be a main reason even to make this whole project feasible. I mean what would you otherwise want? it to go through Olsztyn - Poznan - Berlin ?


If that is a rail link for Poland - I don't mind. Please, you Poles can build what you want. We are talking about Rail Baltica and connecting Baltics to Berlin and "heart of Europe" (as it is called in EU documents) Not to Warsaw, not to central Europe, but with "heart of Europe" If the rail goes through Warschau it will be roundabout and won't be competetive with ferries and especially with airlines. If the Baltic passengers are not important here, that why should we care about this project at all.


To get to Western Europe overland, we need to go through Poland (as Poles are still sitting on German land) But we don't need to go through Warschau. If Warschau was on our way to Berlin, would ber perfect - we could have it both. but Warschau is not. So we need to choose effective fast connection with either Berlin or Warschau. And I choose Berlin.

If the road to Berlin directly can't be build and we have to accept it roundabout through Warschau, than of course Latvia should accept it, as we dont mind the roads going from here to anywhere - even Warschau is good. And as we are not paying, we dont mind also road to Warschau.Main benefit is that Baltic capitals will be effectively connected with each other - one hour to Tallinn sounds good. But I will call this route anything except effective and fast connecion to Western Europe. If it goes through Warsaw it won't be so and majority will use planes and ferries. Finns never had to go through Warschau to get to Berlin - so don't we.

Here is the ideal rail to Berlin with extensions to Vilnius and Warschau.

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/8481/ideal2gh2ah.jpg

Janis, what you are talking about here seems to be an express link from Riga to Berlin. What the rest of the people want is a Rail Baltica project linking the principle cities of the region to the wider European network. To bypass Warszawa would be absolutely ludicrous, and the project would never have got beyond the planning stage if this were its goal.

edited

deleted

Janis, what you are talking about here seems to be an express link from Riga to Berlin. What the rest of the people want is a Rail Baltica project linking the principle cities of the region to the wider European network. To bypass Warszawa would be absolutely ludicrous, and the project would never have got beyond the planning stage if this were its goal.

don't worry...this janis is sick :) :)

don't worry...this janis is sick :) :)

Are we talking about me or about rail???

Starting again with slavic tradition of offencing person when tehre are no argumenst left?

OK, now I change my mind after reading the comments from these guys. May be better go through Kaliningrad instead of Warsaw. I seems, there are some more hopes to meet pleasant people there :)

Come on Gatis - Poles are very known for their hospitality (unfortunately more and more teenagers are joining the forum :bash: ) - I assume that the people who are comparing Riga to a village have never been to Latvia.

Riga is an amazing and relatively big city - real gem :cheers:

About Polish-Latvian friendship :

Lecture by H.E. Dr. Vaira Vike-Freiberga, President of the Republic of Latvia Warsaw University, 26 February 2003 :

" (...) The people of Poland can be proud of their national traditions and of Poland's glorious past as a great European power. Latvia has been strongly influenced over the period of several centuries by the Polish presence in the Baltic Sea Region. This influence has been manifest in a wide variety of areas extending from architecture to religion.

Sadly, our common geographical location between other large European nations has also brought us tragic periods of subjugation at the hands of foreign powers. Poland was partitioned and erased from the map of Europe, while Latvia fought to consolidate its national identity under Russian rule. By the end of the First World War, however, our shared desire for independence would link our nations once more.

In November of 1918, both Poland and Latvia proclaimed their independence. Immediately thereafter, our countries were forced to defend their newfound freedom on the battlefields of war. In 1920, our armies successfully fought together in the eastern Latvian province of Latgale under the command of General Edward Rydz-Smigly. Poland's contribution to Latvia's War of Liberation will always be remembered with gratitude in Latvia.

This common and successful struggle to consolidate our countries' independence provided a firm basis for the friendly relations that existed between Poland and Latvia during the interwar period in the 1920s and 1930s. The Polish-Latvian border on the shores of the Daugava River served not as a barrier, but as a link between our two nations, which engaged in active commerce and trade. During this time, the Polish minority in Latvia experienced an unprecedented cultural revival.

Following the tragic days of September 1939, when Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia put an end to Polish independence, thousands of Poles found refuge in Latvia. This sense of security would be only temporary, for Latvia's fate had also been sealed by the same, infamous Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that led to the invasion of Poland and to the onset of the Second World War. After the Soviet Union occupied Latvia and her Baltic neighbours in June of 1940, thousands of people, including many Poles, were either killed or deported to the Gulag.

Following the War, Poland and Latvia languished for decades under communist, totalitarian rule. While Poland was allowed to maintain some attributes of statehood, Latvia was completely absorbed into the Soviet Union. The Polish non-violent struggle for true liberty and independence in the early 1980s inspired Latvia's own Singing Revolution a few years later. In 1991, not long after Poland regained the genuine ability to run its own affairs, Latvia returned on the international stage as a sovereign country.

Latvia's Polish minority actively supported the Latvian struggle to end Soviet rule, and has played a significant role in the consolidation of Latvia's renewed independence. One of my country's most ardent patriots was Ita Kozakēviča, a shining intellectual who headed the Polish community in Latvia and served as a parliamentary deputy.

Approximately 60,000 Poles live in Latvia. They make up about 2.5% of the population, are one of the best integrated minority groups in the country. Currently the Latvian government is providing state funding to six Polish schools, as well as the main Latvian Polish community organization, so as to promote the safeguarding of Polish traditions and culture in Latvia. (...) "

:cheers1:

http://www.am.gov.lv/en?id=3515

Are we talking about me or about rail???

Starting again with slavic tradition of offencing person when tehre are no argumenst left?


and you? are you an anti-slavic racist? :ohno: :ohno:


you and your Pan-German Rail


sad..sad

Janis, what you are talking about here seems to be an express link from Riga to Berlin. What the rest of the people want is a Rail Baltica project linking the principle cities of the region to the wider European network. To bypass Warszawa would be absolutely ludicrous, and the project would never have got beyond the planning stage if this were its goal.

Sounds good connect to wider European network - but, if we seriously want to link Baltics with Berlin and further European capitals, route through Warschau is too roundabout. It is simply too much. Moscow is important city in the region too - let's build the Rail Baltica through Moscow? How do you think Tallinn - Riga -Moscow - Vilnius - Warschau - Berlin? To create a NETWORK as you said.

Rail Baltica through Warschau won't connect us to "heart of Europe" It will connect some improtant centers in the region, but won't connect us to the Western Europe. And that's sad - because that's what I expected from that project.

But while we wait for the train - I am flying to Berlin next week - 35 EUR return all included price - EasyJet. After Berlin goigt to Madrid - EasyJet same price. Later to flying to Helsinki 44 EUR return all included price airBaltic. Later flying to Oslo 44 EUR return all included price. at the end of April flying to Hamburg, same price airBaltic. Look that while we talk here O'Leary, Stelios and Flick have connected us without to the West without need to go to Warschau. So we can relax.

Come on Gatis - Poles are very known for their hospitality (unfortunately more and more teenagers are joining the forum :bash: ) - I assume that the people who are comparing Riga to a village have never been to Latvia.

Riga is an amazing and relatively big city - real gem :cheers:

About Polish-Latvian friendship :

Lecture by H.E. Dr. Vaira Vike-Freiberga, President of the Republic of Latvia Warsaw University, 26 February 2003 :

" (...) The people of Poland can be proud of their national traditions and of Poland's glorious past as a great European power. Latvia has been strongly influenced over the period of several centuries by the Polish presence in the Baltic Sea Region. This influence has been manifest in a wide variety of areas extending from architecture to religion.

Sadly, our common geographical location between other large European nations has also brought us tragic periods of subjugation at the hands of foreign powers. Poland was partitioned and erased from the map of Europe, while Latvia fought to consolidate its national identity under Russian rule. By the end of the First World War, however, our shared desire for independence would link our nations once more.

In November of 1918, both Poland and Latvia proclaimed their independence. Immediately thereafter, our countries were forced to defend their newfound freedom on the battlefields of war. In 1920, our armies successfully fought together in the eastern Latvian province of Latgale under the command of General Edward Rydz-Smigly. Poland's contribution to Latvia's War of Liberation will always be remembered with gratitude in Latvia.

This common and successful struggle to consolidate our countries' independence provided a firm basis for the friendly relations that existed between Poland and Latvia during the interwar period in the 1920s and 1930s. The Polish-Latvian border on the shores of the Daugava River served not as a barrier, but as a link between our two nations, which engaged in active commerce and trade. During this time, the Polish minority in Latvia experienced an unprecedented cultural revival.

Following the tragic days of September 1939, when Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia put an end to Polish independence, thousands of Poles found refuge in Latvia. This sense of security would be only temporary, for Latvia's fate had also been sealed by the same, infamous Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that led to the invasion of Poland and to the onset of the Second World War. After the Soviet Union occupied Latvia and her Baltic neighbours in June of 1940, thousands of people, including many Poles, were either killed or deported to the Gulag.

Following the War, Poland and Latvia languished for decades under communist, totalitarian rule. While Poland was allowed to maintain some attributes of statehood, Latvia was completely absorbed into the Soviet Union. The Polish non-violent struggle for true liberty and independence in the early 1980s inspired Latvia's own Singing Revolution a few years later. In 1991, not long after Poland regained the genuine ability to run its own affairs, Latvia returned on the international stage as a sovereign country.

Latvia's Polish minority actively supported the Latvian struggle to end Soviet rule, and has played a significant role in the consolidation of Latvia's renewed independence. One of my country's most ardent patriots was Ita Kozakēviča, a shining intellectual who headed the Polish community in Latvia and served as a parliamentary deputy.

Approximately 60,000 Poles live in Latvia. They make up about 2.5% of the population, are one of the best integrated minority groups in the country. Currently the Latvian government is providing state funding to six Polish schools, as well as the main Latvian Polish community organization, so as to promote the safeguarding of Polish traditions and culture in Latvia. (...) "

:cheers1:

http://www.am.gov.lv/en?id=3515


The first book in Latvian was published by Polish Jesuits in 1585.

http://www.li.lv/en/img/logo.gif
The Latvian Institute
http://www.li.lv/en/?id=22

Sounds good connect to wider European network - but, if we seriously want to link Baltics with Berlin and further European capitals, route through Warschau is too roundabout. It is simply too much. Moscow is important city in the region too - let's build the Rail Baltica through Moscow? How do you think Tallinn - Riga -Moscow - Vilnius - Warschau - Berlin? To create a NETWORK as you said.

Rail Baltica through Warschau won't connect as to "heart of Europe" It will connect some improtant centers in the region, but won't conect as to the Western Europe. And that's sad - because that's what I expected from that project.


Why Warschau?..It's your 1/2 german blood?

But you seem to speak as if Warsaw were somewhere near Mongolia, in reality it is hardly a very big detour at all!

But you seem to speak as if Warsaw were somewhere near Mongolia, in reality it is hardly a very big detour at all!

Well I think it is rounabout - and to big to guarantee effective connection. But taht is of course subjective perception, we can't discuss on it.

you and your Pan-German Rail


spot on ... Janis sometimes you seem to be a dreamer :laugh:


Anyway lets try to be civilized, if you want to discuss the feasibility of the rail baltica bypassing Warsaw we can try :) Look who do you think would pay for the rail baltic rail going through Poland, lets say the portion Vilnius - Olsztyn - Poznan - Berlin ?

spot on ... Janis sometimes you seem to be a dreamer :laugh:


Anyway lets try to be civilized, if you want to discuss the feasibility of the rail baltica bypassing Warsaw we can try :) Look who do you think would pay for the rail baltic rail going through Poland, lets say the portion Vilnius - Olsztyn - Poznan - Berlin ?

I am not a dreamer - I know the rail will be build, if it will, most probably through Warschau as a result of political compromise. But the geografy and nature is independednt from politics and Brussles and who has bigger power there. The road from Riga to Berlin doesn't go through Warschau geographically and all attempts to link Riga with Berlin through Warschau will be like tryint to link Riga with Berlin through Moscow - simply too rounabout and not effective.
Knowing that I think it is sensless to talk about that project as linking Baltics with western Europe, as it is not.

I am not a dreamer - I know the rail will be build, if it will, most probably through Warschau as a result of political compromise. But the geografy and nature is independednt from politics and Brussles and who has bigger power there. The road from Riga to Berlin doesn't go through Warschau geographically and all attempts to link Riga with Berlin through Warschau will be like tryint to link Riga with Berlin through Moscow - simply too rounabout and not effective.
Knowing that I think it is sensless to talk about that project as linking Baltics with western Europe, as it is not.

Why Warschau?

I am not a dreamer - I know the rail will be build, if it will, most probably through Warschau as a result of political compromise. But the geografy and nature is independednt from politics and Brussles and who has bigger power there. The road from Riga to Berlin doesn't go through Warschau geographically and all attempts to link Riga with Berlin through Warschau will be like tryint to link Riga with Berlin through Moscow - simply too rounabout and not effective.
Knowing that I think it is sensless to talk about that project as linking Baltics with western Europe, as it is not.

You can like it, or not - but the rail will go through Warsaw- there is no other possibilty.

It's also the best option from the economic point of view - Warsaw is a fast growing agglomeration of 2,5 mln people (the size of whole Latvia).

okay but you see that Poland would never pay for something that does not go through Warsaw nor would they use EU money for it. We hardly have any high speed rail links - maybe in 2030 when there are effective high speed rail links from Warsaw to 6 biggest Polish cities the rail like you would have it would be built. But additionally, look, the Warsaw Metro area has a higher popuation than Latvia - you guys are not a large market, you will have to cooperate, and making this link go through Warsaw is a win win situation for both sides :cheers:

Who needs that Rail Baltica? It's better to construct a Teletransporter Berlin - Riga for Janis

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/3532/2024825sq.jpg

:cheers:

Why not build something like Dover-Calais underwater connection from Riga to Hamburg? The cost will be around 150 billions euro. Provided that Lieutland saves around 10% of the bugdet on that it will probably be build in 300-350 years. :laugh:

...will be like tryint to link Riga with Berlin through Moscow - simply too rounabout and not effective.

Why not? 43,5% Riga's population is russian :)


Population of Riga by Ethnicity (in percentage):

http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/541/chart1.jpg
http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/542/chart1a.jpg

http://www.riga.lv/EN/Channels/About_Riga/Riga_in_numbers/default.htm

Of course it would be mistake if Warschau wouldnt be one of the stops, but it will be no reason if it will be only to Warschau not to Berlin.

okay but you see that Poland would never pay for something that does not go through Warsaw nor would they use EU money for it. We hardly have any high speed rail links - maybe in 2030 when there are effective high speed rail links from Warsaw to 6 biggest Polish cities the rail like you would have it would be built. But additionally, look, the Warsaw Metro area has a higher popuation than Latvia - you guys are not a large market, you will have to cooperate, and making this link go through Warsaw is a win win situation for both sides :cheers:

A link from Riga trough Moscow or Warschau to Berlin is not a link. Not an effective one. That's gography, no matter how big is Warschau or Moscow and how small is Riga or Latvia. No matter who pays, why payes and how much it costs. Because of many reasons that were just mentioned effective overland link between Riga and Berlin and "heart of Europe" sadly is not possible I tottally agree. And I am not against rail built to Warschau - but it wont link us witth Berlin first and I would prefere much more link to Berlin than Warschau, second. But we have already effective airplane link with wetsren Europe. And there are other options to explore how to link Baltics with Western Europe if effective overland link is not possible. Finnland didnt had any overland links with Western Europe, but I wouldn't say it was badly connected. Iceland has no overland links either - but it is comparativelyt well connected. Of course you can always want more - and tunnel under Baltic see to Hamburg would not be bad either :)

We are where we are and lets try to do best out of it.

Why not? 43,5% Riga's population is russian :)


Population of Riga by Ethnicity (in percentage):

http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/541/chart1.jpg
http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/542/chart1a.jpg

http://www.riga.lv/EN/Channels/About_Riga/Riga_in_numbers/default.htm





So fucking what ?

Shell we must be happy about this ?

Why not? 43,5% Riga's population is russian :)


Population of Riga by Ethnicity (in percentage):

http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/541/chart1.jpg
http://www.riga.lv/NR/rdonlyres/DC494F95-1BEB-420E-86FD-E600B2330213/542/chart1a.jpg

http://www.riga.lv/EN/Channels/About_Riga/Riga_in_numbers/default.htm

pointless...

Of course it would be mistake if Warschau wouldnt be one of the stops, but it will be no reason if it will be only to Warschau not to Berlin.

Warschau? Where is Warschau? Are You German or Austrian?

So fucking what ?

Shell we must be happy about this ?

what is the problem? Latviya always will be a russian province ;)



btw...Riga is interesting...your capital is more SLAVIC (54,3%) than Latvian :) :) :)

Interesting where is this Blue city :D

Well I think it is rounabout - and to big to guarantee effective connection. But taht is of course subjective perception, we can't discuss on it.

First I already told you that Warsaw is a 120km "roundabout", at 300km/h that's about 25min's. If you can't spare that 25 minutes then take a plane.

Simply put, it would be moronic to not build the line through Warsaw.

You know, i can understand Janis, cause the direct way form Riga to Berlin doesn't go through Warszawa. But emotionally i would like a stronger connection between Riga and Warszawa, cause i have polish roots :) (and latvian and german of course ) Please, stop insulting each other! You know, it's easy to destroy a realationship, but it's pretty hard to build anything...
Ita

You know, i can understand Janis, cause the direct way form Riga to Berlin doesn't go through Warszawa. But emotionally i would like a stronger connection between Riga and Warszawa, cause i have polish roots :) (and latvian and german of course ) Please, stop insulting each other! You know, it's easy to destroy a realationship, but it's pretty hard to build anything...
Ita

To exclude over 2.5 million potential customers only to save 120km? That's not reasonable by any standards.

Precisely. If you want to go direct to Berlin to fraternise with your German Brethren, then take a plane, and leave this railway to the sensible people.

Precisely. If you want to go direct to Berlin to fraternise with your German Brethren, then take a plane, and leave this railway to the sensible people.
Actually i'll take a plane on Friday, but "from Berlin", not "to Berlin" :)

To exclude over 2.5 million potential customers only to save 120km? That's not reasonable by any standards.


I dont know how you estimated your 120 km, but according to my estimations. The shortest way from Riga to Berlin is 967 km. The shortes way from Riga through Warschau to Berlin is 1230 km. The difference is 263 km as minimum. If the train wont go 300 km/h on all route it could be up to 2 hours extra. The flight to Berlin is a little bit more than one hour in total. If a direct rail line could try to compete with planes in the effectivity, than a roudabout line of additional 2 houres to already exsisting 4 houres from village to village, through Moscow an UlanBatar will be anyting but not effective and competetive.

we dont want to exclude anything, but if we want to build effective connection, and thats i thought is the aim, we have to respect geography - Warschau is not between Riga and Berlin.

we dont want to exclude anything, but if we want to build effective connection, and thats i thought is the aim, we have to respect geography - Warschau is not between Riga and Berlin.

:crazy:
look let me say this in a very simple way. It is nearly never the point to respect geography, the point is always to make money. More money can be made when there are more potential customers you can have. The potential customers in Warsaw do justify that the line goes through Warsaw and the extra time. You always have to keep in mind that someone will have to pay for the construction of this rail connection. With only customers from Riga and Berlin you will most probably not be able to run the line profitably.

I dont know how you estimated your 120 km, but according to my estimations. The shortest way from Riga to Berlin is 967 km. The shortes way from Riga through Warschau to Berlin is 1230 km. The difference is 263 km as minimum. If the train wont go 300 km/h on all route it could be up to 2 hours extra. The flight to Berlin is a little bit more than one hour in total. If a direct rail line could try to compete with planes in the effectivity, than a roudabout line of additional 2 houres to already exsisting 4 houres from village to village, through Moscow an UlanBatar will be anyting but not effective and competetive.

we dont want to exclude anything, but if we want to build effective connection, and thats i thought is the aim, we have to respect geography - Warschau is not between Riga and Berlin.

Newsflash: This trainline won't be built for the inhabitants of Riga alone.

I got the 120 km from the difference of Kaunas-Warsaw-Berlin and Kaunas-Berlin.

Also, did you draw your line straight through Kalingrad? I'm sure you know it belongs to Russia and isn't and won't be part of the Schengen area.

Your vision isn't even close to reality.. . Sure I would love to have an absolutely straight, underground vacum tunnel with a maglev train waiting for me starting from outside my house and going to every city in Europe. That's not going to happen though is it.

:crazy:
look let me say this in a very simple way. It is nearly never the point to respect geography, the point is always to make money. More money can be made when there are more potential customers you can have. The potential customers in Warsaw do justify that the line goes through Warsaw and the extra time. You always have to keep in mind that someone will have to pay for the construction of this rail connection. With only customers from Riga and Berlin you will most probably not be able to run the line profitably.

I can only repeat what I wrote earlier - because of many reasons that were just mentioned, for instance, Kaliningrad on the way which most probably wont be part of schengern still for a long time, effective overland link between Riga and Berlin and "heart of Europe" sadly is NOT possible I totally agree. And I am not against rail built to Warschau - but it will NOT link us with Berlin first and I would prefere much more link to Berlin than Warschau, second.

Diversification is the key word,
we need the flights,
we need highways and we need one railroad too.

Hey Janis_LV are you short minded or something? Rail baltica or the TRANS EURO PRIO 27 isnt Riga spesific link to anywhere. It's a rail line to connect this part of Europe more effectively, and also provide links to elsewhere in Europe from Warsaw and Berlin. Rail baltica serves a huge regional area. Latvia is like the lowest priority in the planned line.

I cant believe you dare to suggest anything that you did in this thread. Really. Poland is a much more major country in EU than Latvia is. Poland has one of the highest populations in EU.

The idea of connecting European capitals and important regions with these rail priority projects literally means it. There is no way Poland and Warsaw would be left out of the planned route.

Are you stupid or something? I hope Latvia's payments to EU increases and benefits for Latvia decreases.

Finland just build the Oikorata which is part of Trans Euro prio 12 and 27. It costed more than 330 million euro which was paid by the Finn Gov. EU gave only 20 million euro.

Janis_LV I dont know what u know about EU but there is no extra money to pour to poverty Latvia. Only few of the thousands of decisions made in EU are Latvia specific. Latvia's importance in EU is low and there isn't much population either. If there's some extra money old member states like Germany and France or Italy or GB get's em. Most of the payments members states pay to EU benefits the old members and new members states are getting only so little.

I think Latvia needs Poland to speak for Latvian needs in the EU. So try to forget the past, get a good education and don't play F**ing stupid. I hate narrow minded people.

what is the problem? Latviya always will be a russian province ;)

btw...Riga is interesting...your capital is more SLAVIC (54,3%) than Latvian :) :) :)

Ukrainians and byelorussians more slavs than russians, but they respect with Latvia and do not consider itself as a part of idiotic russian propaganda.

the way you replied, zenfi, doesn't show you're more intelligent, either. Janis_LV has a right to look at things from LV's perspective even if we're small and unimportant, as you said. Connection to Berlin for people in Latvia is way more important than to Warsaw, even if poles and majority of EU residents think that Poland is so important in this region. Of course, we should stay real and understand that projects like Rail Baltica cannot ignore interests of Poland and you should understand that people in forums like this are not the ones who decide what to build where. And officials of LV were among the first to propose extra connection to St.Petersburg to make this project look more strategically important for those who decide on priorities in EU. So before posting rather insulting remarks, please think twice. Have a nice day!

Well I had to go to his/her level in order for the reality of the place of Latvia in EU to come understandable for the poster.

A lot of the problems on the Internet are caused when one person thinks he knows what kind of person the other is, one doesn't. Please don't ruin this thread.

I know the rail will be build, if it will, most probably through Warschau as a result of political compromise.
Where do you see compromise? Merely the Latvian officials didn't even have a chance to say their ideas. And with ideas like Janis_LV they would be laughed out.

Of course you can always want more - and tunnel under Baltic see to Hamburg would not be bad either :)

Seriously. To _see_ Hamburg? Really. Take few pictures and have a coffee. Sure that's the way Europe beats Asian areas that are rapidly growing like India and China. A huge problem EU faces is that jobs and wealth is pouring in to cheap foreign countries, and there is a huge social and living standard refugee flood from Africa. The EU cannot guarantee a over poverty living standard for everyone who would like to come. And certainly not a luxus one for Riga citizens.

Janis_LV, did you knew the purpose and goal of the EU is not to make Latvia the central point of EU?

Big reconstruction works on Valga-Tartu line start in April. One part is done this year and the other part in 2009. So at the end of 2009, Tartu-Valga will be 120km/h in most parts and travel time will be 1 hour. Tallinn-Tapa section will be upgraded to 120km/h in 2010.(Tapa-Tallinn and Tapa-Tartu already is 120km/h drivable) After that the first stage of Rail Baltica is ready in Estonian part. If you consider that Estonian Railways isn't making any profit and a lot of money has to be taken from state budget to improve railways, it's not so bad.

Wow :)

Looks like I have touched some sensitive issues here.

Don't get me wrong. The rail will go to Warsaw and that is the only way where this rail road can go. I am all for it, as long as somebody else pays. I don't mind railway beeing built wherever. But because of many reasons, for instance, Kaliningrad on the way between Riga and Berlin which most probably won't be part of Schengen still for a long time, effective overland link between Riga and Berlin and "heart of Europe" sadly is NOT possible I totally agree. And I am not against rail built to Warschau - but it will NOT link us with Berlin, first, and I would prefere much more link to Berlin than Warschau, second.

This project is clearly a solidarity project as most of the investment projects in New Europe - so the old memberstates give the new ones money, without expecting direct, immediate benefit for themselves from it (because they themselves were once helped by the USA in similar way). This project has not been initiated because of some countries importance,but clearly only to help the neighbours. It was meant first of all for the Baltic states to integrate them into the western European railway network. But Because of our geographical position - iron curtain in the east, sea on the west, we will remain as isolated from the west as finnland was thoughout the cold war. This railway link won't change it.

This project is economical fake that's it. I would suggest upgrading existing one to 160 km/h with some small new parts build and that's it. And connection with S-Peterburg could improve ecenomical situation a bit. Really how many trains would go from Tallin to Berlin day? If 1 flight + 1 bus can already take all the people. The only chance for this projects is freight rail. And Baltic States have really small population. The only normal part will be Warsaw-Berlin btw :D Anyway I would be happy if there would be sleeper train from Riga to Berlin with reasonable price. But it will be more expensive than EasyJet anyway. So they would better spend this money for fighting poverty in Latgale.

The economical benefits of Rail Baltica are not clear to anyone yet. Rail Baltica might create more favorable conditions for businesses and travelers that we can not predict. Did you know about fierce resistance pedestrian area movement faced in 20th century in Western Europe - the argument was that they will be deserted because of inconveniences related to walking and not driving:) Do you know what I mean?

Warsaw is cool place and Poland is beautiful country but very underdeveloped. If there would be no Poland Baltic states would move on more quickly - it is holding us back:D:D:D

Warsaw is cool place and Poland is beautiful country but very underdeveloped. If there would be no Poland Baltic states would move on more quickly - it is holding us back:D:D:D


WOW...and Latvia is very rich and important:lol::lol::lol:
Poland grows two latvias per year ;)

Respect my country...




Wow :)

Looks like I have touched some sensitive issues here.

Don't get me wrong. The rail will go to Warsaw and that is the only way where this rail road can go. I am all for it, as long as somebody else pays. I don't mind railway beeing built wherever. But because of many reasons, for instance, Kaliningrad on the way between Riga and Berlin which most probably won't be part of Schengen still for a long time, effective overland link between Riga and Berlin and "heart of Europe" sadly is NOT possible I totally agree. And I am not against rail built to Warschau - but it will NOT link us with Berlin, first, and I would prefere much more link to Berlin than Warschau, second.
.

Warschau, Mr hitler? :lol::lol::lol:I would prefer much more to link to Berlin than Riga as well...
Rail Baltica is useless for poland...

Respect my country...


Give me three reasons:) Ok, at least one good reason.

If you think it should be only because you are many and Poland is big...and you grow something...noo:D I don't think so?

Give me three reasons:)


three??

well...3 contributions to humanity, ok?: Marie Curie, Copernicus and Chopin...
and Latvia?




Give me one reason for latvia

three??

well...3 contributions to humanity, ok?: Marie Curie, Copernicus and Chopin...
and Latvia?




Give me one reason for latvia

go away please. now

three??

well...3 contributions to humanity, ok?: Marie Curie, Copernicus and Chopin...
and Latvia?
Give me one reason for latvia

Who cares about humanity nowadays?:cheers::cheers::cheers:

Big reconstruction works on Valga-Tartu line start in April. One part is done this year and the other part in 2009. So at the end of 2009, Tartu-Valga will be 120km/h in most parts and travel time will be 1 hour. Tallinn-Tapa section will be upgraded to 120km/h in 2010.(Tapa-Tallinn and Tapa-Tartu already is 120km/h drivable) After that the first stage of Rail Baltica is ready in Estonian part. If you consider that Estonian Railways isn't making any profit and a lot of money has to be taken from state budget to improve railways, it's not so bad.
Sorry -- I am a bit late in this thread, but is there a reason why these are being built at such slow speeds?

The distances between all the Baltic capitals and such aren't that huge. And I would have thought that the EU would have loved to pump lots of money into such as a project to begin with, as not only do they like to give money to such projects in the newer EU countries, they would do it even more willingly than normal because they love it when it crosses a border, thus bringing countries even closer. With EU money surely 200 km/h should have been reachable?

Sorry -- I am a bit late in this thread, but is there a reason why these are being built at such slow speeds?

The distances between all the Baltic capitals and such aren't that huge. And I would have thought that the EU would have loved to pump lots of money into such as a project to begin with, as not only do they like to give money to such projects in the newer EU countries, they would do it even more willingly than normal because they love it when it crosses a border, thus bringing countries even closer. With EU money surely 200 km/h should have been reachable?

bringing it up to over 160km/h would need totally new infrastructure.
this means new tracks, new foundations, new signalling systems, new depos, hell - new trainsstations! Were talking billions and billions and billions and billions of €€€€€€€€€

€€€€€€€€€ Good emphasis

Sorry -- I am a bit late in this thread, but is there a reason why these are being built at such slow speeds?

The distances between all the Baltic capitals and such aren't that huge. And I would have thought that the EU would have loved to pump lots of money into such as a project to begin with, as not only do they like to give money to such projects in the newer EU countries, they would do it even more willingly than normal because they love it when it crosses a border, thus bringing countries even closer. With EU money surely 200 km/h should have been reachable?
I'd like to bring an example from Finland, of how much these things cost. Lahden oikorata in Finland, finished in 2006, is 76km long and cost 331 million Euros. Allowed speed is 220km/h. Considering that Tallinn-Pärnu-Riga is around 300km, it would cost 1,3 billion Euros for that section alone. And that's with 2006 building prices. EU is giving only 124million Euros to the whole project from 2008-2013, not just Tallinn-Riga. And since the Baltics aren't particulary rich, we can only dream about these speeds.

The economical benefits of Rail Baltica are not clear to anyone yet. Rail Baltica might create more favorable conditions for businesses and travelers that we can not predict. Did you know about fierce resistance pedestrian area movement faced in 20th century in Western Europe - the argument was that they will be deserted because of inconveniences related to walking and not driving:) Do you know what I mean?

Warsaw is cool place and Poland is beautiful country but very underdeveloped. If there would be no Poland Baltic states would move on more quickly - it is holding us back:D:D:D

But business travellers will use plane anyway. This railway will be moderate speed and distance is too big even for real high speed. We have too small population and we don't need such system. For example how many trains per hour it would be on such railway? 0,3? Maybe really just upgrade track to 120km/h and let trains go on this speed, not like 80km/h on 120km/h track as usually happens here.

Rail Baltics as the name indicates is a "Baltic" project, not designed for Poland. A line Warschau-Berlin will be build independent from Rail Baltica. And as I already told - given that this rail going all the way around to Warschau and only than to Berlin and therefore won't link us with Berlin but only Warschau - what's the point to build it? I don't want to go to Warschau, you don't want to come to Riga. Perfect - what's the point to build it?

The project has lost all its ambitions and will be simply imroved rail line, mostly used for freight - nothing interesting and I totally agree I can't imagine it will have any passenger trains on it, I can't imagine why people in 21th century would take overnight train to Berlin (through Warschau and UlanBatar) if they can take plane for 20 lats and be there in 2 hour. Unless something happens that throws back the civilisation for 50 years.

^^So what you are saying is that if this railway line doesn't go to Berlin, it's pointless, but if it does go, it's still pointless! For me the most important line isn't Tallinn-Berlin or Tallinn-Warsaw, but Tallinn-Riga. I think it's absurd that there isn't a railway connection between these cities - 2 capitals just 300km apart which have pretty strong economical ties.
I think you have misunderstood the idea of rail baltica. The idea of this project has never been to connect Warsaw with Helsinki, but to connect the cities on this axle.

^^So what you are saying is that if this railway line doesn't go to Berlin, it's pointless, but if it does go, it's still pointless! For me the most important line isn't Tallinn-Berlin or Tallinn-Warsaw, but Tallinn-Riga. I think it's absurd that there isn't a railway connection between these cities - 2 capitals just 300km apart which have pretty strong economical ties.
I think you have misunderstood the idea of rail baltica. The idea of this project has never been to connect Warsaw with Helsinki, but to connect the cities on this axle.

yes, Tallin-Vilnius could be great. If I go to Tallin I don't fly because bus is still cheaper and there are not very big distance. Train could be perfect. There are 7-8 buses per day already. If train would go fo 100Km/h average speed it still could reach Tallin in 3-4 hours, faster than a bus wit comfort and reasonable price I hope.

Where is Warschau?

^^So what you are saying is that if this railway line doesn't go to Berlin, it's pointless, but if it does go, it's still pointless! For me the most important line isn't Tallinn-Berlin or Tallinn-Warsaw, but Tallinn-Riga. I think it's absurd that there isn't a railway connection between these cities - 2 capitals just 300km apart which have pretty strong economical ties.
I think you have misunderstood the idea of rail baltica. The idea of this project has never been to connect Warsaw with Helsinki, but to connect the cities on this axle.

Absolutely agree. what I meant was if the line is not designed to connect us with western Europe (and I though initiall that that was the objective) than part of it in Poland is sensless - because, a we just agreed, we are not very interested in each other :) But for us the most important would be Tallinn - Riga - Vilnius axle. And the line should definitely go to Vilnius, instead of Kaunas in that case.

^^
I agree


What the economic importance of the Baltic States to Poland?...nothing!
Ukraine (or Slovakia, Czech Republic,...) are more important than Lettland, Lithuania or Estonia
and Rail Baltica / Via Baltica will destroy valuable wildlife and habitats protected under European law


Rail Baltica? no thanks...Don't Waste My Money!!!

Where is Warschau?

I doo noo to be honest

^^
I agree


What the economic importance of the Baltic States to Poland?...nothing!
Ukraine (or Slovakia, Czech Republic,...) are more important than Lettland, Lithuania or Estonia
and Rail Baltica / Via Baltica will destroy valuable wildlife and habitats protected under European law


Rail Baltica? no thanks...Don't Waste My Money!!!

Please. you and you complexes. What are you doing on Baltic forum if you sooo don't care about us :)

Please. you and you complexes.

I do not have complexes ;)... I told the truth...Rail Baltica is economically useless (for Poland)
It is a consensus between the government and polish population.



What are you doing on Baltic forum if you sooo don't care about us :)

Just for Fun :)


Lettland is a beautiful country

... Lettland is a beautiful country

WTF is Lettland? Isn't english main language on this forum?
I am calling Poland, not Polen ;)

^^
Please. you and your complexes :ohno:

Seriously Poles, you have no connections with this part of the forum. You have your part of the forum, is it not enough for you to discuss? Go back to your regional part and stay there, if you're not making any constructive ciriticism, what good are you to us? (Rhetorical question) We do not come over and thrash poland in polish forums, so don't do the same here...PLEASE!!!

Absolutely agree. what I meant was if the line is not designed to connect us with western Europe (and I though initiall that that was the objective) than part of it in Poland is sensless - because, a we just agreed, we are not very interested in each other :) But for us the most important would be Tallinn - Riga - Vilnius axle. And the line should definitely go to Vilnius, instead of Kaunas in that case.

Yeah, let's plan and divert rail lines out of differences on an Internet forum. :nuts:

This is exactly why Trans-European transport projects should be the sole responsibility of the EU instead of a patchwork of national lines. Projects get bogged down in local disputes and politics, and we end up with some sort of messed up compromise that isn't good for anyone.

PS. I for one welcome Poles to post here.

Absolutely agree. what I meant was if the line is not designed to connect us with western Europe (and I though initiall that that was the objective) than part of it in Poland is sensless - because, a we just agreed, we are not very interested in each other :) But for us the most important would be Tallinn - Riga - Vilnius axle. And the line should definitely go to Vilnius, instead of Kaunas in that case.

For who? For you? Maybe, as you are general tourist, but this line has quite logic economical agenda - not touristical. The whole line should provide ecnomical - the main logistic's part of Lithuania (hope it would go through Panevezys). Kaunas has the biggest logistics centres in Baltic states, one of the biggest cargo transported airport in Baltics (steadily growing passengers numbers, as well), Kaunas free/liberal ecnomical zone (Kaunas LEZ), quite big producing industry in Baltics (as count Jonava, Kedainiai and Kaunas as the whole region, it has the biggest producing industry hub in Lithuania), the line will surpass strategically in the centre of Lithuania and there are still living over 400 000 inhabitants in the Kaunas region. And there is the reasons that's why it is not Tallin - Riga- Vilnius. As I said, the whole logic is economical reasonable grounded. There will be upgraded line Kaunas - Vilnius, so, as tourist there won't be lot of disadvantages for you.

And for guy from Poland I can just say, if there won't be economical logic, threre won't be any line until it reaches Lithuania. The line would even help effectivelly to cargo the goods from Poland to Baltics. So if u don't know anything about economical logic, at least intelectually (if u still have some) shut up. And I have some friends from Olecko and Suwalki, for who this line is desperate to reach the rest Poland; and it (the line) would even economically integrate Poland A to Poland B.

WTF is Lettland? Isn't english main language on

He is beeing funny - he thinks I will be annoyed by him calling Latvia Lettland. I actually like that name.

And for guy from Poland I can just say, if there won't be economical logic, threre won't be any line until it reaches Lithuania. The line would even help effectivelly to cargo the goods from Poland to Baltics. So if u don't know anything about economical logic, at least intelectually (if u still have some) shut up. And I have some friends from Olecko and Suwalki, for who this line is desperate to reach the rest Poland; and it (the line) would even economically integrate Poland A to Poland B.

OMG you are so smart :ohno:

A simple rail will not improve the situation of Mazuria...that shit will destroy the mazurian/podlachian nature

http://zalaczniki.ops.pl/foto/rospuda_2.jpghttp://zalaczniki.ops.pl/foto/Rospuda_Valley_P_Malczewski_1.jpg





I actually like that name.


remembers the german times...(no offense, ok) ;)

edit

OMG you are so smart :ohno:

A simple rail will not improve the situation of Mazuria...that shit will destroy the mazurian/podlachian nature

Maybe, but if there would be line just Warszaw-Berlin, "the outside Poland" (Mazuria) would remain even more isolated economically and disintegrated in nation transport and communication sphere. Besides, do you really believe that this line will destroy the whole Mazuria ecosistema even more than big chemical industry developing in this region?
I think you are shouting from Warszaw (or Poland B) belfry, so your's understanding is very engaged :nuts:

Maybe, but if there would be line just Warszaw-Berlin, "the outside Poland" (Mazuria) would remain even more isolated economically and disintegrated in nation transport and communication sphere.
I think you are shouting from Warszaw (or Poland B) belfry, so your's understanding is very engaged :nuts:

The vocation of Warmian-Masurian and Podlachian Voivodeships is tourism...its undeniable. And I do not want industries, cars, trucks, trains,... in Mazuria like Silesia or Mazovia

The vocation of Warmian-Masurian and Podlachian Voivodeships is tourism...its undeniable. And I do not want industries, cars, trucks, trains,... in Mazuria like Silesia or Mazovia

Tourists need industry more than anybody else. hotels, roads services, at least tourism, that would bring money and employment (at least some benefit) to the local population.

The vocation of Warmian-Masurian and Podlachian Voivodeships is tourism...its undeniable. And I do not want industries, cars, trucks, trains,... in Mazuria like Silesia or Mazovia

How is one train track going to spoil the entire region? That's just ridiculous. Just grow some bushes and trees on both sides of the tracks, so that they are invisible.

I sometimes wonder if the so called "environmental activists" are on drugs most of the time...

Rail Baltica? no thanks...Don't Waste My Money!!!

I thought you were a Pole.

Rail Baltica justifies itself for several reasons and also ecological (one train takes several trucks out of the road. But it must be well studied to be economically and ecologically sustainable. Tallin - Riga - Kaunas - Warsaw seems the most logical line. Line is not made only for tourists, tourists don't need necessarily high speed, but for business and goods!!!

But I would see also another high-speed rail line along the Baltic Sea from North Germany (Berlin?) - Gdansk - Kaliningrad - Vilnius - Moscow. this line is for me very strategic for Russia, as well as for Eastern Europe to export goods to Russia and would be in Eastern standard. It would revamp also Gdansk and Kaliningrad ports...

I believe also that the gauge problem should be solved technically. I believe we can adapt the very few centimeters difference on each car through a simple and cheap mechanical system working with screw or pneumatics. Nothing crazy.

Rail Baltica justifies itself for several reasons and also ecological (one train takes several trucks out of the road. But it must be well studied to be economically and ecologically sustainable. Tallin - Riga - Kaunas - Warsaw seems the most logical line. Line is not made only for tourists, tourists don't need necessarily high speed, but for business and goods!!!

But I would see also another high-speed rail line along the Baltic Sea from North Germany (Berlin?) - Gdansk - Kaliningrad - Vilnius - Moscow. this line is for me very strategic for Russia, as well as for Eastern Europe to export goods to Russia and would be in Eastern standard. It would revamp also Gdansk and Kaliningrad ports...

I believe also that the gauge problem should be solved technically. I believe we can adapt the very few centimeters difference on each car through a simple and cheap mechanical system working with screw or pneumatics. Nothing crazy.

But it wouldn't be very good for us! Such line probably would fill Gdansk and kalinigrad ports. And what about Klaipeda and Ventspils? S-Peterburg-Helsinki-Tallin-Riga-Kaunas-Warsaw-Berlin freight line makes sense for me.

I thought you were a Pole.

why?

How is one train track going to spoil the entire region? That's just ridiculous. Just grow some bushes and trees on both sides of the tracks, so that they are invisible.

I sometimes wonder if the so called "environmental activists" are on drugs most of the time...

GOD! I have patience :ohno:

Given the special natural values of Podlaskie and Warmian-Mazurian provinces, more than 60% of the surface area of which is covered by different forms of protection, including Natura 2000, and through which a substantial part of the Rail/Via Baltica runs, very serious conflicts emerge.




btw studies (about Via/Rail Baltica) see few economic benefits to Poland

why?

Because your posts are Poland-related :dunno:

^Much of the enviormental impact of the finnished line can be negated by simply putting the trains on a viaduct across the reservations. The construction will have an impact even so, tho. There is also the question of weather it is better to have the transport go by rail or by car/truck.

^^ But a proper motorway has much more impact on the environment than a railway line.

Very, very true. That was kinda my point ;) the goods-capacity of a railwayline versus the same capacity on a motorway... which has the most enviormental impact? :)

GOD! I have patience :ohno:

Given the special natural values of Podlaskie and Warmian-Mazurian provinces, more than 60% of the surface area of which is covered by different forms of protection, including Natura 2000, and through which a substantial part of the Rail/Via Baltica runs, very serious conflicts emerge.

btw studies (about Via/Rail Baltica) see few economic benefits to Poland

It's not a priority in Poland because the money could be spent elsewhere in Poland on modernizing tracks linking large cities and regions.

Sorry but people in Poznan, Wroclaw, Katowice or Krakow don't care much about spending their tax money on making people in Riga feel "closer to Europe". People care about getting to and from other large cities, the same goes for businesses relying on just in time inventory for their production.

Rail Baltica is a political project just like the power link between Poland and Lithuania. It has very little to do with economics (at least from Poland's perespective).

I believe also that the gauge problem should be solved technically. I believe we can adapt the very few centimeters difference on each car through a simple and cheap mechanical system working with screw or pneumatics. Nothing crazy.

There are several commercial solutions for variable-gauge train axles, they are used between Spain and France on high-speed trains for example.

--------------
Other than that, I would like to give a short answer to our Polish friends -

As mentioned by others, a decent electrified cargo link would
1) improve the environment by reducing the harm to environment done by the thousands of trucks passing all the affected regions
2) make the entire region more closely integrated, meaning more profit to everyone including Poles - this is a basic international trade axiom
3) create a possibility for a future implementation of passenger rail link, when the market will be ripe to sustain it.

Also, I would like to thank our trolling guests for reviving this very important thread, the more it is publicly discussed, the bigger the chance that something good will come out of it!

But it wouldn't be very good for us! Such line probably would fill Gdansk and kalinigrad ports. And what about Klaipeda and Ventspils? S-Peterburg-Helsinki-Tallin-Riga-Kaunas-Warsaw-Berlin freight line makes sense for me.

That's a non-sequitur. There is so much demand for a land link between Europe and Asia emanating from China's booming manufacturing sector, that any and all reliable rail links are more than likely to be utilized to the full. Ventspils, Klaipeda & Co will get more than they can chew (in the positive sense).

The basic theory of networking says*, that even if you are not in a network the fact that there is a network nearby gives you profit, and contributes to the growth of your own network. Thus, an actively used train line between Moscow and Berlin through the Baltic soil is bound to have huuuuuge positive spillovers for Baltic logistics industry and infrastructure.

Selfishness doesn't work in the globalized, interconnected world. You have to help your neighbour, so that you can benefit yourself.

* Of course you have to have some link to the network, which is not a problem, since the proposed line _does_ pass nearby, so it's easy to plug in.

Some readers of that thread could possibly make a few conclusions about the level of the European integration and mutual understanding, could'n they? After these conversations a kind of estimation could be attempted - if the measure based on that were right, one should be very scared. Something is going wrong here. Is the reshaping European Union just filled with the nationalism? It would be a very poor prognosis for the future of Europe, very pessimistic one.

It's a Rail Baltica thread, at least it should be. And it's full of trash. Couldn't you just close it and start a new thread from the very beginning?

^^ It seems to me that Poles are the only ones who are talking about "it does no good to us, let's spend this money elsewhere" shit.

^^ It seems to me that Poles are the only ones who are talking about "it does no good to us, let's spend this money elsewhere" shit.

of course, poles have other important priorities, for example:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b7/Uefa2012polandukrainelogo.png/175px-Uefa2012polandukrainelogo.png


or


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/PL_motorways_2006.09.01.svg/250px-PL_motorways_2006.09.01.svg.png
Polish motorway network as of September, 2006. Existing sections are marked in red, those under construction in blue, those being planned in black (2010-2012)



or


http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/9047/rrdx7dv9.jpg
warsaw 2012

^^ It seems to me that Poles are the only ones who are talking about "it does no good to us, let's spend this money elsewhere" shit.


Why is it shit ? Ever heard of opportunity cost ? They money pit is not infinite and there are many areas in desperate need for upgrades. Existing tracks in Poland are falling apart because they haven't been maintained for 30years. It's a killer for productivity and competitiveness. In many areas trains are slower today than they were before WWII.

Eventually Rail Baltica will be built, no doubt about it. There are however more pressing developments that must take place in Poland.

It's not a priority in Poland because the money could be spent elsewhere in Poland on modernizing tracks linking large cities and regions.

Sorry but people in Poznan, Wroclaw, Katowice or Krakow don't care much about spending their tax money on making people in Riga feel "closer to Europe". People care about getting to and from other large cities, the same goes for businesses relying on just in time inventory for their production.

Rail Baltica is a political project just like the power link between Poland and Lithuania. It has very little to do with economics (at least from Poland's perespective).


Jeez. You talk like you are the ones paying for Rail Baltica. Don't forget - we all are currently on the receiving end in the EU. Poland alone can't decide where to invest money given by the EU. You have to build what you are told to build after all. Of course for your own money you can build rail to Bucharest too. Nobody asks you to build rail to Riga or Tallinn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQXdiH1oJVc

Interesting news! Tallinn's and Helsinki's majors officially agreed to study the feastibility of Tallinn-Helsinki railway tunnel. The studies will cost 500-800 thousand €. Though it's a small step towards building the tunnel, it's still a step.(Though I believe it's not profitable)

Nice :)

Planning work is to start for a railway tunnel beneath the Gulf of Finland linking Helsinki and the Estonian capital Tallinn.

The mayors of Helsinki and Tallinn, Jussi Pajunen and Edgar Savisaar signed a letter of intent on a rail tunnel project on Friday.

The two agreed that in May both cities will apply for EU funding for preliminary studies of the scheme. Costs of an initial study are estimated at 500,000 to 800,000 euros. Each city itself will provide 100,000 euros.

A working group made up of deputy mayors and specialists is being established that will hold its first meeting in Helsinki at the start of April.

Pajunen: Depends on EU funding

Helsinki's Mayor Jussi Pajunen was not ready on Friday to speculate on a timetable for a rail tunnel construction project.

However, he did tell YLE that in such cases initial studies usually take about a year to complete. He said that he expects that a report will be finished no later than at the end of next year.

Pajunen added that a lot depends on how the EU responds to the application for funding.
Sweeeeeet! (http://www.yle.fi/news/id86525.html) :banana:

Finally we will get facts on which to base an opinion.

Sweeeeeet! (http://www.yle.fi/news/id86525.html) :banana:

Finally we will get facts on which to base an opinion.

Hmm, question too Finnish people - how do you travel to western Europe currently? Ship to Stockholm and than train or just flying or ship directly to germany? Or ferry to tallin and than car through Poland? Did you feel isolated from the rest of Europe during the Cold War?

And, second, what is the attitudes of the finnish public to such possible tunnel or bridge to Tallinn. Are they happy, or they don't care or they don't support it? And why. And if such bridge or tunnel would be build what is the maximum a Finn would pay for one time using the crossing?

Hmm, question too Finnish people - how do you travel to western Europe currently? Ship to Stockholm and than train or just flying or ship directly to germany? Or ferry to tallin and than car through Poland? Did you feel isolated from the rest of Europe during the Cold War?

I suppose that depends on where one is going, I'd guess plane is the most common these days. Via Baltica is becoming more popular though. Finland has often been called an Island with Russia to the east, sea to the south and west and Wildland to the north. Having a train connection to Central Europe would definitely make Finland less isolated. An emerging and affluent Russia would also achieve the same with St. Petersburg right around the corner.


And, second, what is the attitudes of the finnish public to such possible tunnel or bridge to Tallinn. Are they happy, or they don't care or they don't support it? And why. And if such bridge or tunnel would be build what is the maximum a Finn would pay for one time using the crossing?

I think most people still don't think of this tunnel as reality or aren't even aware of such plans to have formulated an opinion. The polls I've seen have been slightly against a tunnel. I'd chalk it up to knee jerk reactions of a perceived money hole and lack of a big picture, ie. Tallinn and Helsinki becoming more intertwined, Rail Baltica and a train connection to Central Europe.

But I think once the plan is discussed more and there are numbers you can point at and say "This is why it would make sense" (if it will make sense) people will come to favour it.

Sorry, but it's too hard to believe that this project will be realised. For now lets stick to the serious question:
So which way it's gonna be: Helsinki will become the suburb of Tallinn or Tallinn will become the suburb of Helsinki? :|

Neither of them, an entirely new city will be formed - Talsinki! :nuts:

Hmm, question too Finnish people - how do you travel to western Europe currently? Ship to Stockholm and than train or just flying or ship directly to germany? Or ferry to tallin and than car through Poland?
I suppose that depends on where one is going, I'd guess plane is the most common these days. Via Baltica is becoming more popular though.

Driving in (or trough) the Baltic states and Poland with a car is still extremely rare. But now that all these countries are in the EU, the option is getting more interesting for many. The biggest marketing obstacle is that these counties still aren't viewed as "family destinations". What I mean by this is that the most likely group of people who'd travel with their cars are families with small children. They are more interested in camping around the countryside or having fun with the family in places like legoland than they are at seeing old historic cities.



And if such bridge or tunnel would be build what is the maximum a Finn would pay for one time using the crossing?

Very little. As of now, a railway simply can't compete with the low cost airlines in price .

Sorry, but it's too hard to believe that this project will be realised. For now lets stick to the serious question:
So which way it's gonna be: Helsinki will become the suburb of Tallinn or Tallinn will become the suburb of Helsinki? :|
Of course this project is unrealistic. Ships are already quite fast and don't need billions of Euros for infrastructure. People who need to cross the gulf fast, can use a helicopter that takes them from Tallinn to Helsinki in 17 minutes, a time that would be unreachable even for a train. Lets say the cost of the tunnel is 10 bn €. You could buy 60 new top-notch ships with that money.

Of course this project is unrealistic. Ships are already quite fast and don't need billions of Euros for infrastructure. People who need to cross the gulf fast, can use a helicopter that takes them from Tallinn to Helsinki in 17 minutes, a time that would be unreachable even for a train. Lets say the cost of the tunnel is 10 bn €. You could buy 60 new top-notch ships with that money.

The price is nowhere near €10 bn, and there is, naturally, more to this vision than just a hyper-cool under-sea connection to TLN, namely railroad to Central- and Southern Europe. Fast trains are the future of long-distance travel, and without the tunnel under Finnish Gulf we don't have a plausible alternative to airplanes. Like Mayor Pajula said: it's up to EU, and their willingness to back their stated anti-climate change ambitions with hard cash.

The price is nowhere near €10 bn, and there is, naturally, more to this vision than just a hyper-cool under-sea connection to TLN, namely railroad to Central- and Southern Europe. Fast trains are the future of long-distance travel, and without the tunnel under Finnish Gulf we don't have a plausible alternative to airplanes. Like Mayor Pajula said: it's up to EU, and their willingness to back their stated anti-climate change ambitions with hard cash.

Respect man, Phinland will help us to push it through

^^ The channel tunnel cost 6,2 billion Euros. Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel will cost more because it is 60% longer and it would have to go through granite. As much as I know, you can't make tunnels in granite with a boring machine, so they could only use blasting.

Yes, you don't have an alternative to aircrafts and you won't have at least in the next 20 years. Fast trains are the future of long-distance travel between BIG CITIES, that's why Rail Baltica will never be high speed rail. There just ain't enough people.

The price is nowhere near €10 bn

Comparative costs of some lately built tunnels:

- Lötschberg Base Tunnel in Switzerland - 35 km, most of it - one tube = 3 billion EUR.
- Gothard Base Tunnel in Switzerland - 57 km (u/c) - expected costs 4,85 billion EUR.

Please add up to this the unknown sum for pushing the engineering science behind the horizons - no one has built 80 km long undersea tunnel so far - there are needed "some" things yet to be discovered.
Btw. contrary to Switzerland in our region there is less experience and competition on large scale tunnel engineering - this will rise the price as well. One can say that large projects are global... but entering a new region also for global giants costs something.
Thus - 10 billion EUR for sure if not more. Would be interesting to see economical justification for this :)

^^ The channel tunnel cost 6,2 billion Euros. Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel will cost more because it is 60% longer and it would have to go through granite. As much as I know, you can't make tunnels in granite with a boring machine, so they could only use blasting.

A coule of years ago the price was estimated at €2 bn. That estimate was probably somewhat in the optimistic side, and since then there has been inflation (though economical growth, too), but even so the price is not going to be quintuply higher than the estimate. Also, I doubt the granite is a problem; I understand such strong minerals are considered an advantage rather than a hindrance by engineers. Not that I'm an engineer, but that's the impression I have.

Comparative costs of some lately built tunnels:

- Lötschberg Base Tunnel in Switzerland - 35 km, most of it - one tube = 3 billion EUR.
- Gothard Base Tunnel in Switzerland - 57 km (u/c) - expected costs 4,85 billion EUR.

Let's compare then.

The Päijänne Water Tunnel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4ij%C3%A4nne_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

I think we've had this discussion already, we can speculate on the price all day but it won't lead anywhere. After this study we should finally have hard numbers.

^^ I hope you do understand that this example is quite funny and unsuitable. :)

^^ I hope you do understand that this example is quite funny and unsuitable. :)

Care to elaborate?

^^ I hope you do understand that this example is quite funny and unsuitable. :)

If you can make a 120km tunnel suitable for trucks for 160 million euros with 70's technology, is it then unreasonable to assume that you can make a shorter tunnel for trains within a 20 fold budget in 2008? Unless of course the tracks are made out of solid gold.

Mind you that this Tallinn-Helsinki tunnel would be made in the same rock as the Päijänne tunnel, unlike the Alpine tunnels cited here.

Care to elaborate?
* "The tunnel is wide enough for a truck" and this tunnel will have to be wide enough for two trains at least + all additional communications. Maybe even few parallel tunnels will be needed.
* There will be trains with cargo, passengers using this tunnel, this is not just watter tunnel. This means completely different requirements, security measures... People will need to breathe at least. :)
* Today (2008 year) the situation is quite different than it was in 1972 year. Today even much shorter simple overground tracks cost much more.

"portions of the tunnel required repair due to rock falls". This is funny and hard to believe that you guys can seriously compare such things.

You need to look at existing examples which are very similar: undersea tunnels for passenger, cargo trains which were built recently and then make your conclusions. Or better wait for studies which will answer all questions.

IMHO you guys can dream on, but this project today is unreal. But who knows, maybe in further future it'll be realized.

So you are saying the cost of a train tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn would be around 62 times the price of a longer tunnel wide enough for trucks?

I don't know how much it could cost. I can only guess. I think that it should certainly cost more than 5 billion EUR. For me, 10 billion EUR looks quite realistic too. :) Of course these are only my guesses.

Minimum price for 40 km tunnel from Europe to Africa is 5 billion EUR (estimated construction time is 15 years), Channel Tunnel cost £10billion. Source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/20/spain.travelnews

Of course, we can't make any conclusions out of these examples. This project can be very different from given examples. Maybe we should just wait for real information.

Of course, we can't make any conclusions out of these examples. This project can be very different from given examples. Maybe we should just wait for real information.

Let's do that. :)

Just one thing, machines that drilled tunnels under english channel and elsewhere are still existing and working elsewhere, technology exists too, so the rest is a question of money and political will...

Construction of Railway Rail Baltica will cost almost twice as expensive than previously planned: not 2.65 billion euros but 4.33 billion euro.
Recently, the Committee on Transport and Tourism of the European Parliament ordered the company 'PricewaterhouseCoopers' study, which was to answer the question: How much Rail Baltica now? It turned out that it costs now more than 4 billion euro. Increasing of the amount nearly doubled due to the fact that earlier in the total estimate there was not included highway segment in Poland.

It doubled because they started to look more seriously at the whole length of it, Polish part is not that expensive. Still too little. Crossing the Riga city alone will cost at least 1 - 2 billions EUR.

One more thing - There will be a railway tunnel under the Gulf of Finland!!! All of the necessary papers etc. were signed recently and the construction begun!! :cheers:

One more thing - There will be a railway tunnel under the Gulf of Finland!!! All of the necessary papers etc. were signed recently and the construction begun!! :cheers:

How long it is gonna be?

One more thing - There will be a railway tunnel under the Gulf of Finland!!! All of the necessary papers etc. were signed recently and the construction begun!! :cheers:

No way, it was only reported that the mayors of Helsinki and Tallinn are to launch a study into the feasibility of a tunnel like that. So nothing sexy and exciting yet.

It doubled because they started to look more seriously at the whole length of it, Polish part is not that expensive. Still too little. Crossing the Riga city alone will cost at least 1 - 2 billions EUR.

1-2 billions? Are U serious? Seems imposible, or a lot of money falls from the table into pockets... How is it possible? One bridge on Daugava and what else? A few lands? Material... I hope you wrote this the 1 April...

I would redesign the line into Riga to work together with existing lines in and around. Room exists. Not crazy, just realistic...

1-2 billions? Are U serious? Seems imposible, or a lot of money falls from the table into pockets... How is it possible? One bridge on Daugava and what else? A few lands? Material... I hope you wrote this the 1 April...

I would redesign the line into Riga to work together with existing lines. Not crazy, just realistic...

You are cool man. I'll help you, I'm a designer as well:cheers:

You are cool man. I'll help you, I'm a designer as well:cheers:

:cheers:
Why not?

Properties alone in Riga will cost around 350 - 400 mio EUR. I know what I am saying when mentioning such sum.

Properties alone in Riga will cost around 350 - 400 mio EUR. I know what I am saying when mentioning such sum.

Therefore, use existing lines and adapt them for high speed, it is normal. Look Brussels, Paris, London, etc. The high speed lines only start away from the cities.

- We can make junction from Railway coming from Sigulda without big problem and using extra 3rd rail system.

- To go to Lithuania and cross Daugava, use the actual bridge that is a bit overloaded but has been more overladed than today...

If there is need to build a new bridge, then yes, it can cost something, but it would then be great to combine it with new road too (two levels bridge over Daugava, like bridge in NewYork that has two super highways inside or in Denmark, where trains drive in the middle if I remember well. Then those 2 billions would be used for extra service for all city...

This proposal below is ONLY proposal without thinking a lot about all consequences, it is made to think!!!
- Idea 1: The orange path follow existing way with 3 rail system. Then another system is to be found to connect airport to center. A new path for airport could be like this, I believe there is way to make a path that can fit trams, trains and follow more or less the path I show on the map...
- Idea 2: The yellow path goes to center and airport by other side of the city, requires bridge on Daugava, new stations, a lot of investments and land buying back probably...

http://www.balticsdesign.com/images/Proposal_transport_train_Riga1.jpg

Oops, my picture does not work, where can I post it to appear on this website?

Oops, my picture does not work, where can I post it to appear on this website?

Try photobucket or imageshack!

Oops, my picture does not work, where can I post it to appear on this website?

Upload it first in any of addresses below, copy url, click on advance butoon, then click insert image and paste url in it. done

http://www.imageshack.us/
http://www.fasterupload.com/index.php

I read on "Baltic Times" website that the tunnel idea under sea (200 m below surface) between Helsinki and Tallinn is still alive.

But to be economically sustainable, it should be rail to handle mainly goods who could pay only for the huge cost of it.

Lets follow the story. Lets hope it will not be crazy like the tunnel under channel between France and England (because of bad business plan). At least, we can learn from it. :)

Link me!

"Finno-Ugric tunnel dreams persist
May 28, 2008
By TBT staff

TALLINN - Civil leaders in Helsinki and Tallinn continue to mull over the extraordinarily ambitious idea of building a tunnel between their cities some 200 meters beneath the Gulf of Finland. Suvi Rihtiniemi, chairman of the executive board of the Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council, was quoted as saying that any tunnel would have to be a rail connection since only freight handling could make the structure economically feasible, the Helsingin Sanomat reported."

I cannot read the rest of the article.

CEO of Latvian railway Mr Magonis in interview admits that to make Latvian infrastructure comparable to Western European countries 3.5mil LVL or 5mil EUR are needed. Such investments would pose a risk of rising costs for those who would be using services - cargo and passengers. He said that Latvia has to realise what other European countries has done long time ago - 50% of Cohesian funding must be invested in railway infrastructure - "park&ride" and link to airport from centre are first steps.

He also suggests that railway link from centre of Riga to airport will provide check-in service before getting into train and hassle free boarding in airport - time frame realistically 2012-2013.

He is sceptic in regard to Skanstes Station and Rail Baltica. Nevertheless, Rail Baltica is going ahead as a political project. Line will be upgraded for higher speeds, but the width will stay the same - 120km/h - European minimum standard to Tallinn will be launched by 2013. Investment 100mil Eur - 23milEur will come from Europe.

I'm not tired of saying that with 120km/h and old trains, Rail Baltica is pointless. Especially when it's going through Tartu and Valga. It's 130 km longer than a straight line would be.(440km/310km). Considering that the average speed will probably be around 90km/h, it will take nearly 5 hours to get from Tallinn to Riga. That's the same as the bus does. And buses are new. I don't see new trains coming any time soon.

But then again, a 220km/h electrified double track line wouldn't be profitable. The price of building a railway like that is some 70 million EEK /km or 4,5 million €/km
So what I propose is a 160km/h, mostly single track, non-electrified railway that goes straight through Pärnu. That would enable Tallinn-Riga under 3 hours.

it really seems a bit silly - to invest so much work and money and get only 120 km/h. Of course, it's better than current ~80km/h speed, but.. is 40km/h improvance worth it? I think, if we do, then do it properly - ultrafast line 400 km/h and it's done! :) OK, joke. But agree with Rebasepoiss, that 160 km/h should be the minimum.

it really seems a bit silly - to invest so much work and money and get only 120 km/h. Of course, it's better than current ~80km/h speed, but.. is 40km/h improvance worth it? I think, if we do, then do it properly - ultrafast line 400 km/h and it's done! :) OK, joke. But agree with Rebasepoiss, that 160 km/h should be the minimum.

The project is financially unprofitable - political project. So they will do it not for sake of better communications, but for the sake of doing it and thats it. Its like "Eu wants us to do it, se we will pretend that we are doing it" attitude.

Still better than nothing. New trains are comming with them - I am sure.

But as for the investment it looks kind of massive number - EUR 5 billion, but 20 years in the future it will be nothing and people will say - we should have invested then, becasue now it will cost 20 bil (for instance) :D

I say to any projet - invest now, it will be more expensive later (apart from real estate:D)

well, Rail Baltica was not initially something that EU told us to do. It was lobbied by local politicians right from the start. We can speak about bad planning here, because the project looks more like an image building event for some people, I do not see myself going to Tallinn by train, if I can choose bus, which goes faster. In Western Europe they promote using trains instead of airplanes, because it is approximately the same time-wise and is environmentally more friendly. Thalys line Brussels-Paris shows that trains can be very competitive, because as far as I know, Air France canceled service of such line by air. What is the point to build a slow line in Baltics? I see only political reasons, at least here in LV, because the minister of transport is promoting airline business thru Riga Airport, and fast train-line from Riga to Tallinn and Vilnius will most probably kill (or substantially damage) at least AirBaltic's business on these routes. But to have train connections to neighbor capitals just for the sake of having them - waste of time and money, imho.

Im different. I would visit Riga much more often if I had the possibility to take the train. 5h in a train is much much much much much more comfortable then 5h in a bus, nomatter HOW comfortable and new that bus is. (well mby the business class buss...). but you get my point.

Im different. I would visit Riga much more often if I had the possibility to take the train. 5h in a train is much much much much much more comfortable then 5h in a bus, nomatter HOW comfortable and new that bus is. (well mby the business class buss...). but you get my point.

Definitely i would visit Tallinn on regular basis if train would be in place - I hate buses

Don't forget that it can take up to 1 hour to board all the passengers on the plane and then get them off the plane, plus that uneccesary waiting time before checking in. On the train you just get to the station and board the train, no time wasted. I travelled to Paris from London this spring, it took me a mere 3 and a half hours from my house in London to my Paris hotel. Considering, when I travelled in 2006 by plane: I left my house by car at about 5, just to be sure I am not late, left the airport at about 9 and got to me hotel at 12 30 or sOmething like that. 7 and a half hours. BIG DIFFERENCE! About the same price, including the train tickets from the airport.

woopsy...

I don't see much trouble for AirBaltic when Rail Baltica is finished, even for flights inside Baltics. Train will still be slower - baltic airports are all pretty close to city centres and usually people who travel from one Baltic capital to another don't check in luggage, allowing them to be at the airport usually 30-45 min. before plain departure. Furthermore, Rail Baltica will still be 140 km/h max, thus by far no french TGV.
Also it's pretty clear that most of the future Rail Baltica passengers will be those who now travel by bus. Bus travel will die much sooner than some imagine - think of oil prices and current state of (especially latvian) main roads.

I don't see much trouble for AirBaltic when Rail Baltica is finished, even for flights inside Baltics. Train will still be slower - baltic airports are all pretty close to city centres and usually people who travel from one Baltic capital to another don't check in luggage, allowing them to be at the airport usually 30-45 min. before plain departure. Furthermore, Rail Baltica will still be 140 km/h max, thus by far no french TGV.
Also it's pretty clear that most of the future Rail Baltica passengers will be those who now travel by bus. Bus travel will die much sooner than some imagine - think of oil prices and current state of (especially latvian) main roads.

If I follow the idea of TGV (Thalys) between Amsterdam-Brussels-Paris and Between Koln-Brussels-Paris. If there is a tunnel under sea, then it would be great connection between Helsinki-Tallinn-Riga-Kaunas-Warsaw. If it would be around 300km/h (still 300km/h seems slow when you are inside. Today, I believe that they could at least use pendolino trains (trains who inclinate themselves in curves on traditional rails to earn speed (about 200km/h). But the only reason of pendolinos (or pendular) is when there is an old track and/or a lot of curves. In the Baltics, the land is quite flat... it could easy be build quite straight.

Ril Baltica is such a joke. I mean, 140 km/h, that's not even the old European standard (160 km/h). I don't want my taxes to go to such totally unnecessary projects.

/or

Ril Baltica is such a joke. I mean, 140 km/h, that's not even the old European standard (160 km/h). I don't want my taxes to go to such totally unnecessary projects.

/or

Lets keep hope, I would be ready to build a solar powered train if it could solve the problem, but I would need extra power under tunnel of Finland Gulf :)

@stockholm79
You're too right! I don't want either! If they want to build such unique project for the region than they should understand that it must have a speed throughput of at least 180 km/h; otherwise it will be not worthwile for each country's government where this rail will go through.

@stockholm79
You're too right! I don't want either! If they want to build such unique project for the region than they should understand that it must have a speed throughput of at least 180 km/h; otherwise it will be not worthwile for each country's government where this rail will go through.

really guys? GET SERIOUS 180km/h? ONE STEP AT A TIME OKAY? Ill be glad we have a rail connection, no matter if its 120km/h or 160km/h or 180km/h, ofcourse id prefer the faster variant, BUT it will still be supergreat even if its just 120kmh!

Seriously, 140km/h?? Ongoing rail projects(Nyland-Umeå, Göteborg-Öxnered etc) in Sweden has 250km/h as standard but there's plans for lines with 320km/h. You can still run freight on a 250km/h line.

Seriously, 140km/h?? Ongoing rail projects(Nyland-Umeå, Göteborg-Öxnered etc) in Sweden has 250km/h as standard but there's plans for lines with 320km/h. You can still run freight on a 250km/h line.

Actually I also don't understand - if this is project where we had to build it almost from zero (I mean, change rails to fit European standard), why we couldn't to make it more serious than just those 140 km/h? Is it really cost so much more, if the infrastructure had to be completely new anyway?

Actually I also don't understand - if this is project where we had to build it almost from zero (I mean, change rails to fit European standard), why we couldn't to make it more serious than just those 140 km/h? Is it really cost so much more, if the infrastructure had to be completely new anyway?

NO no no no - they are keeping the Soviet standard of the rail width and it will be on same old tracks - no new rails:)

Sorry, currently in Latvian only

Magonis: Eiropas līmeņa dzelzceļam Latvijā nepieciešami pieci miljardi eiro
Lai Latvijā būtu tikpat kvalitatīvi dzelzceļa pakalpojumi, kādi ir daudzviet Rietumeiropā, dzelzceļa infrastruktūrā un ritošajā sastāvā būtu jāiegulda vismaz pieci miljardi eiro (3,5 miljardi latu), intervijā žurnālam "Kapitāls" atzīst VAS "Latvijas dzelzceļš" (LDz) valdes priekšsēdētājs Uģis Magonis.

Dzelzceļa elektrifikācija, kas būtu "gan civilizētāk un ekoloģiskāk, gan arī efektīvāk jaudas ziņā", prasītu no 600 miljoniem (421 miljonam latu) līdz vienam miljardam eiro (700 miljoniem latu). Turklāt tas būtu tikai Rīgas-Ventspils virzienam - bez Liepājas, skaidroja Magonis.

Pat pēc vispiesardzīgākajiem aprēķiniem, jauni vagoni un ar to saistītās investīcijas prasītu vēl vienu miljardu eiro. Aptuveni viens miljards eiro nepieciešams uzlabojumiem infrastruktūrā. Investīcijas servisa lietās, peronos, staciju atjaunošanā un vēl citām vajadzībām aizņemtu vēl pāris miljardus eiro.

Magonis piebilda, ka pie tik lieliem ieguldījumiem infrastruktūrā arī nāktos domāt, kā nepaaugstināt kravu pārvadājumu tarifu, jo tad no dzelzceļa pakalpojumiem vienkārši atteiktos. "Par kādiem pieciem miljardiem eiro Latvijā varētu kursēt Holandes līmeņa dzelzceļš," sacīja Magonis.

Kopš neatkarības atjaunošanas visu šo laiku dzelzceļa sistēma ir ekspluatējusi veco padomju mantojumu. Šajā mantojumā ir gan pasažieru, gan kravas vagoni, lokomotīves, dzelzceļa infrastruktūra. Tikai pēdējo gadu laikā LDz sācis radīt kaut ko jaunu. Pirmais etaps bija ieguldījumi Austrumu-Rietumu dzelzceļa tranzīta koridora attīstībā un modernizētie dzelzceļa vagoni. Tāpat modernizētas divas pirmās kravu lokomotīves.

Magonis atzīst, ka dzelzceļa vagonu parks ir nepietiekams. Kravu vagonu nepietiek visiem bijušajiem PSRS dzelzceļiem. Sabrūkot PSRS, Latvijai mantojumā tika ap 170 lokomotīvēm un 5000 dažādu kravu vagonu. Klāt nākušas 100 platformas, jo no Latvijas ostām uz Austrumiem jāved konteineri - sadzīves tehnika un citas preces uz Centrālāziju, uz Krieviju.

LDz vadītājs arī norāda, ka vagonu parks ir novecojis. Šobrīd ir sperti tikai pirmie soļi vagonu parka atjaunošanā, vilkmes un pasažieru sastāva atjaunošanā. Pirms diviem gadiem pirmo reizi kopš neatkarības atjaunošanas bija nopietns valsts pasūtījums pasažieru vilcieniem.

Kritiskais punkts, kad tika slēgti daudzi pasažieru pārvadājumu maršrutu, ir beidzies, uzskata Magonis. Patlaban tiek atjaunotas vecās līnijas starp Rīga un Rēzekni, Rīgu un Liepāju, nesen atjaunota dzelzceļa satiksme arī starp Rīgu un Valgu. No 1.septembra būs līnija Rīga-Ventspils.

"Visa Eiropa ir sapratusi to, ko Latvija vēl līdz galam nesaprot, - Kohēzijas fondi vismaz 50% apjomā jāiegulda dzelzceļā. Eiropā ir tāds uzstādījums, jo autoceļi ir pārpildīti, autotransports piesārņo dabu, tādēļ tiek atbalstīti visi projekti, kas ir saistībā ar dzelzceļu. Mēs tiešām esam videi visdraudzīgākie un visefektīvākie kravas un pasažieru pārvadātāji. Agri vai vēlu arī Latvijā mēs pie tā nonāksim. Tāpēc jau tagad kopā ar Rīgas domi esam sākuši strādāt pie "park&ride" projektiem," sacīja Magonis.

Satiksmes ministrija ir pasūtījusi pētījumu par iespējamo dzelzceļa satiksmi starp Rīgas centru un lidostu "Rīga". Taču, kā atzīst Magonis, šis pārvadājumu veids atšķiras no tradicionālajiem pasažieru pārvadājumiem, jo pasažieri lielāko tiesu pārvietojas ar bagāžu.

"Tas būtu normāli, un es atbalstu, ka cilvēki varētu reģistrēties lidojumam jau Rīgas centrā, nodot bagāžu un mierīgi doties uz lidostu. Pasažieru, protams, pietiktu, bet tas jebkurā gadījumā nevar būt valsts dotēts pasākums, tam jābūt biznesa projektam, un es nezinu, cik maksās biļetes, - mēs to tagad pētām. Domāju, ka reāli šis projekts varētu īstenoties 2012. vai 2013.gadā, bet tomēr vēl nepieciešama izpēte," uzsver LDz vadītājs.

Viņš arī uzskata, ka projekts par Rīgas apveddzelzceļu nav reāls. Pilsēta šobrīd ir iecerējusi Skanstes ielā būvēt dzelzceļa staciju, taču LDz uz to raugās ar piesardzību un uzskata, ka vērtīgāk būtu uzlabot jau pašreiz pieejamo infrastruktūru.

Tāpat Magonis skeptiski raugās uz dzelzceļa projektu "Rail Baltica". Projekta aptuvenās izmaksas sasniedz 25 miljardus eiro (17,5 miljardus latu), un Latvijas daļa tajā varētu būt aptuveni trīs miljardi eiro (2,1 miljards latu). Pēc Magoņa teiktā, "Rail Baltica" bija veidots kā politisks projekts, taču ekonomiskie aprēķini liecina, tas nav izdevīgs.

Problēmas rada arī tas, ka visā Eiropā ir šaursliežu dzelzceļš, kas ļauj attīstīt lielu ātrumu un būtībā orientēts uz pasažieru pārvadājumiem. Savukārt Latvijā situācija ir pretēja, un šeit dzelzceļš ir orientēts uz kravu pārvadājumiem.

Magonis pastāstīja, ka Latvijā ar tās nedaudz virs 2000 kilometru sliežu ceļu gadā tiek pārvadāti 50 miljoni tonnu kravu, savukārt nelielajā Baltijas reģionā ar 7000 kilometru sliežu ceļu tiek pārvadāti 150 miljoni tonnu. Salīdzinoši tas ir 30%-40% no visām kravām, kas Eiropā tiek pārvadātas ar dzelzceļu.

Neskatoties uz izmaksām, "Rail Baltica" projektu nedrīkst ignorēt, jo tas pieder pie Eiropas Savienības apstiprinātajiem stratēģiskajiem projektiem. Jauna šaursliežu dzelzceļa līnijas izbūve līdz Rīgai un Tallinai būtu pārāk dārgi, tādēļ projekta komisijā tika pieņemts lēmums uzlabot esošo sliežu bāzi, lai var palielināt vilcienu kustības ātrumu, sacīja Magonis.

Viņš piebilda, ka arī turpmāk šī līnija būs vairāk virzīta kravu pārvadājumiem, jo pasažieru šajā maršrutā daudz nebūs. "Tā kā mēs saņemsim Eiropas finansējumu, tad mums jāiekļaujas Eiropas dzelzceļa standartā - ātrumam jābūt 120 kilometri stundā, bet tas prasīs 100 miljonus eiro (70 miljonus latu). Eiropa mums dod 23 miljonus eiro (16 miljonus latu), tātad pašiem jāiegulda 75 miljoni (52,7 miljoni latu)," atzina Magonis.

Vilciens uz Tallinu ar ātrumu 120 kilometri stundā varētu sākt kursēt 2013.gadā. Pēc Magoņa sacītā, galvenais šķērslis šobrīd ir igauņu ārkārtīgi nolaistās dzelzceļa līnijas. Latvijā visā valsts teritorijā vilcieni var braukt ar ātrumu 80-90 kilometri stundā, bet Igaunijā ir vietas, kur drošības apsvērumu dēļ vilcienam jāsamazina ātrums līdz 30 kilometriem stundā

Hopaa! Now they talk about 120 km/h not even those 140km/h anymore! Planned speed reduces with every new article. And the old rails mean that we will had to change trains in Lithuania-Poland border when travel by train to Europe? Ehh, this whole project has lost value in my eyes...

Such situation is so typical not just for Latvia, but for all Baltic states, that I'm not even a bit surprised. I think this is not worth paying any interest any more.

Oy, those are low speeds. The fastest commuter trains in Stockholm hit 160... I can't imagine going at 120 or even 140 in long distances. Seems like they should go for 250 or something if they're going to go for such a project. Such low speeds make it seem really pointless.

first, you swedish guys, go away, and think, yes, do both.


secondly, you latvian guys, GET SERIOUS, stop being so pessimistic. FFS youll still be able to take a train to Europe. Thats a HUGE HUGEHUGEHUGEHUGEHUGE leap forward. 250km/h .. pff!!!!!

FFS youll still be able to take a train to Europe. Thats a HUGE HUGEHUGEHUGEHUGEHUGE leap forward.

Not so "huge leap" considering that we had train Riga-Berlin even in soviet times....:ohno:

Oy, those are low speeds. The fastest commuter trains in Stockholm hit 160... I can't imagine going at 120 or even 140 in long distances. Seems like they should go for 250 or something if they're going to go for such a project. Such low speeds make it seem really pointless.
It's not like they're building a new railway with a 120km/h speed. "Rail Baltica" at the moment is just repairworks of the existing railroads. You suggest 250km/h. That would cost around 2 billion € on Tallinn-Riga. That's clearly not profitable. And you have to consider the difference between wages in the Baltics and in Sweden. I'm personally not ready to pay more than 35 Euros for a train trip to Riga.(Bus ticket costs 20 Euros) The number of passengers just isn't big enough.

Properties alone in Riga will cost around 350 - 400 mio EUR. I know what I am saying when mentioning such sum.
-50% of that now. :)

What a lack of vision from local politicians. If Rail Baltica worth it, it is for the goods. Then for passengers. Do they know that now, goods are also travelling by special TGVs. Meaning, that instead of running at 80 km/h like in the Baltics they travel close to 250 km/h. There are special stations build for them. It is much more ecological and environmentally friendly than the same amount of cargo by plane I believe (depending from wich source electricity is produced). So I could easily imagine a high speed line between Helsinki, Tallin, Riga, Kaunas, Warsaw, Berlin. And even connections from Moscow and St-Petersburg. Don't forget that our big neighbour will have to develop its underdevellopped economy too. Meaning, Russia as a huge potential of developpement, much bigger than ours.. And they will want a first class way for their goods to the other side of Europe (at least if Medviedev does not think like Putin that we are all living in a James Bond movie...).

I really think that we must set the path for our big neighbour to come trough us too. You collect all benefit from it. So lets hope that Russia will think differently than yesterday... I hope I am not dreaming... Lets be optimistic

Since some of you might be eager to find out what was written here in Latvian few posts before - here is a quick translation of it.

Interview with the chairman of LDZ (Latvian Railway) board Ugis Magonis:

For Latvia to have European Standard railway, 5bil EUR investment would be needed in infrastructure and trains. To install efficient (currently there are many diesel trains), environmentally sound and more civilised infrastructure for electric trains 600mil Eur would be needed for Riga Ventspils only. Even with most cautious calculations new trains and related investments - 1bil EUR. Investment in platforms, refurbishment of stations on other upgrades in service quality 2bil EUR.

If such a massive investment would happen Latvia would risk having increased fees for using rail related services which would potentially cause a loss of customers. Nevertheless for 5bil EUR there could be a railway in Latvia similar to one in Holland.

Since the independence Latvia has exploited Soviet infrastructure and Soviet trains. Only recently LDZ had started to add more to it - East-West corridor and refurbishment of trains.

There is a shortage of carriages on all EX-Soviet rail tracks. After the collapse Latvia was left with 170 locomotives and 5000 carriages. There has been 100 platforms added to all this to enable transportation of goods to Russia and Central Asia.

Currently the whole fleet is worn out and first steps are made to renew it. Two years ago was first serious order from Latvian government for the renewal of passenger carriages.

The critical moment of closing many lines is at the end. Old lines are maintained between Riga and Rezekne, Liepaja and recently Valka/Valga. From 1st September Riga - Ventspils will be launched.

All Europe has understood something Latvia is not getting yet - 50% of Cohesion Funds needs to be put in railways industry. In Europe (Latvia for MR Magonis, obviously, is not part of it:D - my note) it looked at from following perspective - cars are polluting and roads are congested therefore all projects related to railways are supported because railway is a most efficient type of transport. Sooner or later Latvia will understand it. First thing in Riga together with Riga Dome now is development of Park&Ride projects.

Ministry of Transport has ordered a survey of Riga centre and Riga Airport - it will differ from traditional passenger service because most of the passenger will be with luggage. It would be good service if we could provide airport check-in and leave the luggage in Riga City centre and then get to airport. There would be enough passengers and will not be subsidised project - plain business. I have no idea, how much tickets will cost - we are looking at it now. We are looking at dates 2012 - 2013.

The Riga roundabout project in not feasible. City is planning to build a new train station in Skanstes area, but LDZ is looking at very cautiously and thinks it would be more viable to use existing infrastructure.

Rail Baltica is another project Mr Magonis is sceptical about. The cost of the project is 25bil EUR and the share of Latvia is 3bil EUR. Mr Magonis thinks that it is a political project and is financially not feasible. There are problems with the fact that the width of rails differ in Eastern and Western Europe. Western narrow rails enables for high speeds while Latvian tracks are more suitable for cargo.

Mr Magoinis said that in Latvia with its 2000km long rails 50mil tons are carried yearly and in Baltics with its 7000km - 150mil tons all together. It is 30-40% of all cargo in Europe.

Nevertheless Rail Baltica can not be ignored because EU has marked it as priority project. A new narrow line railway till Tallinn would be too expensive and it was decided to upgrade existing lines to increase the speed of travel. The line will be used mostly for cargo, because not many passengers are expected to travel there. Because we acquired European funding we will have upgrade it to European Standard - 120km/h - the cost 100mil LVL (140mil EUR). Europe will give 23mil LVL the rest will be financed from Latvian budget.

The train to Tallinn at a speed 120km/h will commence in 2013. The biggest issue is at the Estonian side - the rail tracks are worn out. In Latvia allowed speed everywhere is 80-90km/h but in Estonia in places it can down to 30km/h because of the safety reasons.

Micrav. I think the guy is absolutely aware of what can be done in reality. We've already talked about a highway to Moscow or St.Petersburg here, but knowing how things are done in Russia, it is absolutely unrealistic at the moment. I am traveling to Russia each year - if you go to Moscow by car, in Tver oblast' the road is total mess, it is ~200km long disaster. Some Western truck drivers even ask locals if they are still on the right road. What would be a reason to build 250km/h line to let's say Rezekne, where they have this big sorting station, if the remaining 700km to Moscow will be a slow speed line? Money thrown in the wind. And you have to understand history to bring in here the political side of the question. The guy said that the biggest share of cargo transported by railway in EU is for Baltic states, and all this cargo goes to East, so Rail Baltica means almost nothing for local railway companies. There are simply not enough goods to transport from Finland to the SouthWest to make it profitable. On the other hand, all these goods now are transported by sea or air, so it becomes a very complex issue, because a lot of stakeholders are interested in too many different scenarios for both cargo routes and means of transporting them. All the rest is just wishful thinking. You have to understand that Baltic states due to small economies and small population is not a priority to Brussels, so all infrastructure built in Soviet times and thus connected to Russia, will dominate this region for a LONG time.

The train to Tallinn at a speed 120km/h will commence in 2013. The biggest issue is at the Estonian side - the rail tracks are worn out. In Latvia allowed speed everywhere is 80-90km/h but in Estonia in places it can down to 30km/h because of the safety reasons.
This is pretty BS. The only section on Riga-Valga-Tallinn line that has 30km/h(in some places) is between Valga and Tartu. Construction works on that line are already going and will continue till the end of next year. After that almost all of Tartu-Valga will be 120km/h. Railway between Tartu and Tallinn is already 120km/h if you exclude one side of Tapa-Tallinn, which is 90km/h now and will be upgraded to 120km/h in 2011. So by the end of 2011, all of Tallinn-Tartu-Valga will be 120km/h. I really can't see where's the "biggest issue"...

There are problems with the fact that the width of rails differ in Eastern and Western Europe. Western narrow rails enables for high speeds while Latvian tracks are more suitable for cargo.




So he is claiming that we can't get high speed rail because of our wider "russian" rail gauge? He is probraly not aware that russia is planing to upgrade some of their lines to 300 km/h speeds. So wide gauge is definitely not an issue.
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=445514

So he is claiming that we can't get high speed rail because of our wider "russian" rail gauge? He is probraly not aware that russia is planing to upgrade some of their lines to 300 km/h speeds. So wide gauge is definitely not an issue.
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=445514


I believe also that gauge is not a problem for speed. I just wan people to believe that technology (not the most expensive) can really improve things, not up to 300 km/h maybe but 200 km/h. Building 1000 km of highway or high speed train line is nothing. Spain is building currently more than 2000 km of high speed lines in addition of their actual network. And you can travel on "magistrale" from Portugal until the border of Poland, meaning more than 2500 km without leaving a magistrale.

With some portions to finish in Poland, new portions to build in Lithuania and when finally, there will be no more border control between Russia and EU, we will have a wonderful road Berlin-Poznan-Gdansk-Kaliningrad-Riga-St-Petersburg. And when Belarussia will change its dictatorship to a nice democracy, there will also be a super way for people to travel from Warsaw to Minsk to Moscow without limit (in mind). And you will see easily people travelling 1000 km on a head change like people do n Belgium or Germany and decide to spend the week-end in Spain or Italy, driving overnight on safe highways. Don't misunderstand me, I know the situation in which we are, but we are far from poverty even if it is hard right now. Key investment is a must. And infrastructure is vital for economy.

Make bigger highways for more goods and safety. Give RVR some cars to build and economy will restart. I really know what I am talking about when they build a magistrale in my provnce in Belgium. The whole world changed for us, now people living in coutryside are as confortable(economically) as people living in cities. The thing is that we have to think wide and not small, (it costs a lit of money, pfiou, never I will earn 1000€/month. Bullsh... would say somebody I know...) In the Baltics, we are able to make it if we work together and smartly... :) And I am not utopist... :nuts:

I believe that all what you speak about could be realized here (with time) if we could get rid of the polit-mafia system in Latvia. The question is: how can we do it?

Some good news for Estonian railways. Estonian finance- and communication minister Juhan Parts presented an action plan about railway infrastructure to the government today. It suggests buying 36 new trainsets with a total cost around 180 million €. It also says that in the next 5 years more than 40 million € is needed to improve railway infrastructure between Tallinn-Rapla-Pärnu/Viljandi for speeds 110-120km/h. That's great, considering that at the moment, speeds are 60-80km/h max on these lines. And new trains, yay!

And for a finish, some pics from Nõo, where the repair works for Rail Baltica are going on:
http://hannot.planet.ee/albums/userpics/P6220164.JPG
http://hannot.planet.ee/albums/userpics/P6220163.JPG
http://hannot.planet.ee/albums/userpics/P6210039.JPG
http://hannot.planet.ee/albums/userpics/P1010001%7E0.JPG
http://hannot.planet.ee/albums/userpics/P1010004%7E1.JPG

Why can't Latvia make trains run at 200km/h on regular tracks when Sweden can??
We have only one candidate for a real high speed line - Tallinn-Rīga-Vilnius-w/Europe. The other lines don't need any more than 200km/h, as they are meant for intercity trains at most, but rather regional trains with many close stops.
In the Swedish case they had to move some signals and rebuild some crossings.
In the Latvian case it is necessary to rebuild all tracks anyway, no matter which speed, so an upgrade to 200km/h wouldn't be much extra.
What they still don't get into their thick skulls is that a train that runs at most 120km/h is no competition to cars, buses or airplanes, but one that runs at 200km/h would be the first choice for most people, so this extra cost would pay off much better.
It's simply an issue of imagining it and then having the will power to realize it.

/or

^^ So you think that the number of passengers would be enough to cover the price of a 200km/h railway?

There are lots of people on the flights between the Baltic capitals, no? Given the overhaul necessary anyway, it doesn't seem like it'd be much more to go for something better already now.

Yep. With a speed of only 120km/h it would have about as many passengers as today (not much), but with a speed of 200km/h it would be the main means of transportation. If you have to rebuild the tracks anyway, you should definitely choose the alternative that is only a bit more expensive but will at least double revenue.
One must also keep in mind that the Swedish rail roads have a whole lot more curves and grades, the Latvian run very straight without much difference in altitude. So Latvia wouldn't need any special tilting trains as in Sweden to make traveling at 200km/h comfortable.
There are many trains nowadays that make it easily to 200km/h, eg regional(!) trains in Sweden (afaik they don't tilt, but they can't go at max speed everywhere), which would only need to be specially ordered for the wide gauge in Latvia (just a detail in the order, one model can be fitted to several different gauges).
Some maths:
If the max speed is 120km/h, an Intercity train would have an average speed of some 70-80km/h, a regional train 50-70km/h. Rīga-Liepāja (223km) would take at least 2:45 (now the "express" needs 3:07). If you increase the speed to 200km/h, you will have an average of 150-170km/h or 90-120km/h for regional trains, which will give bring you to Liepāja in at most 2:15, or at best some 1:20.
The bus needs some 3 hours today but runs every hour, so it is no competition, especially when LDz only runs one train a day at times that only suits people with homes near the stops, as there are no bus connections at that time.
In Sweden you can take the regional train (200km/h) from Stockholm to Eskilstuna (114km) in 1:05 or the Intercity from Stockholm to Gothenburg (478km) in 3:12 on a route with many curves.
I don't need to say that the train since long is the preferred means of transportation between Swedens two largest cities despite the high prices of the Swedish rail roads.
So why not Latvia? We have much shorter distances than Sweden, so there it would be even more evident that the train is the winner, especially compared to aviation.

/or

Because of our "clever" government and a lack of money.

I think latvians fail to understand how small our populations are?

If the max speed is 120km/h, an Intercity train would have an average speed of some 70-80km/h, a regional train 50-70km/h. Rīga-Liepāja (223km) would take at least 2:45 (now the "express" needs 3:07). If you increase the speed to 200km/h, you will have an average of 150-170km/h or 90-120km/h for regional trains, which will give bring you to Liepāja in at most 2:15, or at best some 1:20.

Tallinn-Tartu train has an average speed of 90 km/h with a maximum speed of 120km/h, for example. I agree, that 160km/h would be a lot better, but that's probably the maximum, because the cities are just too small. Tallinn has 400 000 people and Tartu 100 000.
You always talk about Sweden and it's railways. C'mon, Sweden is one of the richest countries in the world, while the Baltics are still well below the EU average(And both Latvia and Estonia are struggeling to cut down their budgets due to economy cooldown) And you mustn't forget that Swedish train tickets are far more expensive than we've used to pay. And train is payable only when you're travelling alone. At least in Western Europe, it's often cheaper to rent a car and drive than to take the train when you're not travelling alone. But that means a lot of people will still use their cars, even though there's a good train connection available.

ch1le, Baltic states together have population about the same as in Sweden. If Sweden can afford high speed trains, why not us at least on one line?

I think latvians fail to understand how small our populations are?
The Vilnius-Kaunas line is being upgraded to 160km/h, why international line can't be at least of such speed?

^^ Why? Because Vilnius-Kaunas is only around 100km and they're the most important cities in Lithuania. Traffic between cities in a country is always bigger than traffic between cities in different countries. Traffic density on Via Baltica at Estonia-Latvia border is just 3100 cars per day on average.(For comparison, traffic between Tallinn and Tartu is around 5000 cars a day and Tartu is a city of 100 000 people) That means practically all of Tallinn-Riga traffic is inside that 3100 cars and that's it.


And...Vilnius-Kaunas is already electrified, double-track railway. Between Tallinn and Riga there is nothing(I don't count the route through Tartu as something worth upgrading to 160km/h) But to build a double-track electrified railway to Riga is very expensive and risky.

^^ Why? Because Vilnius-Kaunas is only around 100km and they're the most important cities in Lithuania.

103km between the central train stations.
Less than 70km between the borders of the cities on A1 highway.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7849/57308081pr9.jpg

Though i agree with those saying that it's just a little too soon for high-speed trains as clearly our countries alone do not have such resources and wount have them for a very long time. Not to forget that due to small population (few passengers), the line would hardly be abble to sustain itself, so would either be completely state subsidiesed or the tickets would cost more than flying.
It's a project dedicated to cargo transfer, not passenger. Live with it...
......................................................................................

As for Vilnius-Kaunas beeing high-speed, i'm sure it's just a matter of time and money. It's stupid to compare it to anythig else in Baltics as the region directly involved with Vilnius-Kaunas rail line has a population of 1,2mln - almost that of Estonia in less than 8000 km^2

As for Vilnius-Kaunas beeing high-speed, i'm sure it's just a matter of time and money. It's stupid to compare it to anythig else in Baltics as the region directly involved with Vilnius-Kaunas rail line has a population of 1,2mln - almost that of Estonia in less than 8000 km^2

Almost half of the Latvia population - ~1mln lives in Riga & Jelgava districts - the area of 4600 km2. Comfortable and fast train connections between Riga and suburb-towns could help release traffic intensity on roads and reduce traffic jams - f.e., if today the train from Jelgava to Riga (50 km) takes one hour journey, then high-speed line with 250 km/h could reduce it to no more than 15 minutes. Imo, the car driver should be retarded if he would still choose his car over such train. Besides the rational side, new and fast trains will change also the image of train traveling - it would be much "cooler" than sit in traffic jams with personal car. So, I think that at least Riga-Jelgava high-speed line would be quite profitable and, as it is part of Rail Baltica project, it should be built no less than 200 km/h, optimal - 250 km/h. Btw, the traffic intensity going out of Riga in Jelgava direction in 2006 was 19 415 cars a day, now it should be more than 20 000.

^^ There is "Dipolis" project or more like a vision in Lithuania and there were talks (dreams) about fast trains between Vilnius and Kaunas. Though 160km/h will be quite enough for now. Some data about Dipolis: population 1.6 mio, car taffic between Vilnius and Kaunas in 2005 year reached 30000 a day.
But Rail Baltica is international project with support of EU and it'll connect not some local cities but Baltic states to the rest of Europe. It would be weird to have only 120km/h speed on this line.

Just checked that last year made proposals for urban development of Vilnius-Kaunas region, include a new track for 250+km/h speed trains. This is, imho the most reasonable proposal.

Red line - Existing A1 highway
Black interupted line - existing railroad
Thin grey line - planned high speed train line

Brown - Urbanised teritory.
Yellow - Teritory beeing urbanised or allowed to be such by local municipalities.
Dark yellow - Priority teritory to be urbanised.

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/3601/7021vwg1.jpg

Click here, if the picture doesnt open. (http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/3601/7021vwg1.jpg)

Current population in this region is ~1,3mln people

To be honest, I think it's more likely to have a tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn than a high speed line from Tallinn to Riga.

Well, for me as the citizen of Tartu, Rail Baltica is needed only to get myself to RIX and not farther than that, because travelling more than 300 km in train, which is not at speed at least 300 kp/h as TGV and ICE do, is not desirable thing to do. So it'd be good if we had a 160 kp/h connection from tartu to Riga in order to reach RIX in 2 or 2,5 hours. So, this project is for me more of local importance than international, considering passenger transport.

So he is claiming that we can't get high speed rail because of our wider "russian" rail gauge? He is probraly not aware that russia is planing to upgrade some of their lines to 300 km/h speeds. So wide gauge is definitely not an issue.
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=445514

In Poland situation is a little better. For exmple for Inter City train Warszawa - Berlin (over 600 km):
the departure from Central Warsaw time is 16:25 and it reaches Berlin at 22:27, the whole journey takes 6 houres and 2 minutes. But soon the journey will be shorter about 20 minutes when the modernisation of Poznań junction station is being finished (SSC link: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=189267&page=3 ), it costed already over 100 mil Euro.

Modernisation of Wroclaw - Poznan route (165 km) has just begun. It will cost 700 mil Euro and will finish by 2014 (first part, about 100 km will be finished by 2012).

Modernisation of Warszawa - Gdansk railway track is happening now, the cost is hugue too.

From Warsaw one can go by train to Vienna in about 7 houres and 30 minutes, it`s not bad.
Also other routes are being modernised nowdays.

But nothing happens in eastern Poland.:ohno: By 2015 the line from Suwalki to state border (LT - PL) will be rebuilt and trains could reach 160 km /h. But what with the rest ?

But nothing happens in eastern Poland.:ohno: By 2015 the line from Suwalki to state border (LT - PL) will be rebuilt and trains could reach 160 km /h. But what with the rest ?

Poland is the missing link between the idea of Rail Baltica and its imminent success. Once the high-speed line/s between large Polish cities and Germany are operational, that network can be linked to Kaunas, Vilnius and later the rest of the Baltics.

Almost half of the Latvia population - ~1mln lives in Riga & Jelgava districts - the area of 4600 km2. Comfortable and fast train connections between Riga and suburb-towns could help release traffic intensity on roads and reduce traffic jams - f.e., if today the train from Jelgava to Riga (50 km) takes one hour journey, then high-speed line with 250 km/h could reduce it to no more than 15 minutes. Imo, the car driver should be retarded if he would still choose his car over such train. Besides the rational side, new and fast trains will change also the image of train traveling - it would be much "cooler" than sit in traffic jams with personal car. So, I think that at least Riga-Jelgava high-speed line would be quite profitable and, as it is part of Rail Baltica project, it should be built no less than 200 km/h, optimal - 250 km/h. Btw, the traffic intensity going out of Riga in Jelgava direction in 2006 was 19 415 cars a day, now it should be more than 20 000.

Well this is a fairy tail. 200km/h between Riga and Jelgava, This is impossible because too big parts of railway will be inside Riga and Jelgava and it takes time to accelerate. Even 160km/h with modern trains could bring time down to 30min and drivers would be still retarded (because of traffic jams which take more than 30min itself). How expensive could be ticket from Riga to Jelgava on 200km/h train? 20 lats? Most people take train now because tickets are cheaper on them.

I really don't understand why cant' they use something like pendolino on upgraded line. On eastern corridor it is already almost 120km/h everywhere with brand new tracks and upgrades to bridges etc. I think 140-160 km/h is real on existing repaired tracks. It could be fantastic if train could take us in 80 min to Daugavpils or Rezekne for example. And Riga - Tallinn on 120km/h would be great imho. Of course there are no need to build a new track (it just doesn't make sense). Send an express through Tartu with stops in Tartu, Valga, Valmiera, Cesis and Sigulda could be fantastic.

Well this is a fairy tail. 200km/h between Riga and Jelgava, This is impossible because too big parts of railway will be inside Riga and Jelgava and it takes time to accelerate. Even 160km/h with modern trains could bring time down to 30min and drivers would be still retarded (because of traffic jams which take more than 30min itself). How expensive could be ticket from Riga to Jelgava on 200km/h train? 20 lats? Most people take train now because tickets are cheaper on them.

160 km/h would be good although it is on risk border - it could not convince most of the car drivers to change to train, because if they drive on Riga-Jelgava highway with 110km/h (and when breaking rules - even faster) they can reach about the same result in time (if not very large traffic jam in Riga). But, of course, 160 km/h, that's still worth it, if we want to upgrade something at all, but 120 km/h as a maximum... pointless.
20 Ls about the train ticket to Jelgava even on 200km/h line - it's just exaggeration. When I took France's TGV (that's 300km/h train) in 2 times longer route (~90km), it costed me some 15 Ls. 15 Ls in 2 times richer country (comparing GDP per capita), in 2 times longer route and with 1,5 times greater speed. And see what's happening with bus transportation? Fuel prices rises-bus tickets prices rises and many bus operators talks about bankruptcy already now, so the railway is the future's cheapest way to travel. We just had to make it somewhat solid and modern - at least those 160km/h (not a km/h less!) with new and modern trains, and it will be the first choice of people to get around (as in all old EU countries). I think, the priority is the lines around the Greater Riga region (Jelgava, Jūrmala, Cēsis, Saulkrasti, Ogre) where many people lives and many goes to Riga and back every day. I think, the potential of the railway on these routes is really great, and for now it is unused. I would say - the reconstruction of these railway routes to at least 160km/h could bring no less benefits than Southern Bridge. Less cars = less traffic jams, less road accidents, less damaged roads, less pollution etc.

I really don't understand why cant' they use something like pendolino on upgraded line. On eastern corridor it is already almost 120km/h everywhere with brand new tracks and upgrades to bridges etc. I think 140-160 km/h is real on existing repaired tracks. It could be fantastic if train could take us in 80 min to Daugavpils or Rezekne for example. And Riga - Tallinn on 120km/h would be great imho. Of course there are no need to build a new track (it just doesn't make sense). Send an express through Tartu with stops in Tartu, Valga, Valmiera, Cesis and Sigulda could be fantastic.

With 160 km/h you can't get to Daugavpils in 80 min (if the train isn't absolute express), there is some 250 km and with stops it's no less than 2 hours. But the best way for connecting Riga with distal largest towns Daugavpils, Ventspils and Liepaja could be the inland air traffic as it works already in Liepaja's case (just those taxes of RIX too raises the price).

With 160 km/h you can't get to Daugavpils in 80 min (if the train isn't absolute express), there is some 250 km and with stops it's no less than 2 hours. But the best way for connecting Riga with distal largest towns Daugavpils, Ventspils and Liepaja could be the inland air traffic as it works already in Liepaja's case (just those taxes of RIX too raises the price).

There are million subsidies by transportation ministry to bring price down. And suc short flights are super environment hostile. Environmentalist in me says that such flights must be closed as a waste of money :) Just imagine 6 Fokkers 50 against one diesel 3 car train set.

And of course France has great train connections. But UK for example doesn't. I paid 12Lats for shitty train which is as bad as ours for 40km distance :D And it was sure below 120km/h.
At holidays when many parking zones are free and there are no traffic jams people will choose car even if train is 10000km/h :) But even at such speed for me for example electrical train from Kegums to Riga was reasonable choice. With less than an hour ride (47Km) with super cheap ticket. Also you don't care about traffic and are able to drink some alcohol :) And safety. First train from Riga at 5 o'clock. It's still faster than car because of traffic. If they would raise speed till max 160km/h with fast accelerating trains and no big raise in price could bring an end to the buses and reduce traffic. But buses are quiet unpopular on that direction already.

Riga-Valmiera section has great potentional but without electrification I don't think there are possibility for normal connection. There are quiet few stations at this route with bigger gaps between stations but our diesel trains are extremely slowly accelerating :(

Poland is the missing link between the idea of Rail Baltica and its imminent success. Once the high-speed line/s between large Polish cities and Germany are operational, that network can be linked to Kaunas, Vilnius and later the rest of the Baltics.

I THINK POLAND ISN`T MISSING LINK, BECAUSE NOTHING IS HAPPENING ON LITHUANIAN SIDE :) EITHER, WITH RAIL BALTICA OF COURSE.