daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old October 8th, 2010, 01:24 PM   #901
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by x-type View Post
aren't British platforms due to height of cars (wagons?) higher?
The European "standard" platform height of 760mm is used on HS1 in the UK. As that is the same as in Germany I don't think it will be a problem. A step will extend when the train calls at a station with a lower platform level as is already the case when a ICE stops in a Swiss station.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 8th, 2010, 10:25 PM   #902
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

New Swiss tunnels have much less restrictive rules. I sincerly don't think they are dangerous for that.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 11:46 AM   #903
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

All the Channel Tunnel rules are being reviewed. The recent fires and Eurostar breakdowns has confirmed that a few of them are ineffective and some are positively terrible.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 01:38 PM   #904
Augusto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PAR THR KL SIN
Posts: 393
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
As Eurostar does not need to justify the contruction of infrastructure to reach Geneva, it does not need to obtain a stranglehold market share on the route and can do perhaps one or two trains per day. I would imagine this is the sort of service they are looking at to begin with. Such a service is looking primarily at the leisure and not-in-a-mad-hurry business markets. I think its sensible to try it.
It could be interesting to note that infrastructure to Geneva is going to improve in december: the newly upgraded "Haut Bugey" line will open, the travel time between Paris and Geneva will be reduced by 22 min and frequencies will increase. Thalys service between Brussels and Geneva may resume as well.
The Haut Bugey line, la Cluse-Bellegarde, used to be a small mountain line with a local traffic only until 2005 but now it will be totally dedicated to the TGV service to Geneva.
Augusto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 10:19 PM   #905
HyperMiler
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 240
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by x-type View Post
there are many articles which say how costs rapidly rise for each km/h above 300.
Indeed, the only way to have a service speed higher than 350 km/hr affordably is to lighten the axle load.

This is why Velaro is a bad choice for China's 380 km/hr service; Shinkansen E2 is perfect for this role.
HyperMiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 11:26 PM   #906
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1865

What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen?
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 11:48 PM   #907
HyperMiler
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 240
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen?
Velaro, TGV, AGV, Zefiro : 17 ton
Shinkansen : There is no official limit. However, Shinkansen axle loads are kept to around 11~12 ton by design. This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.

Shinkansen E2 based CRH380A is in far better position to attain 380 km/hr service speed than CRH380B. But this speed is for China only, as CRH380A cannot meet US/EU railway safety regulations and 3rd world countries that are buying CRH system on credit cannot afford the constant repair and maintenance demand on railway and train sets that the 380 km//hr service speed requires, so the top revenue service speed must be kept lower to a reasonable level.

As of now, only HEMU-400X appears to be capable of sustained 380 km/hr service speed on the US and Euro railways, due to its Shinkansen-like low axle load of 13 tons while still being UIC-crashworthiness regulation compliant thanks to its composite body structure. Zefiro fails on this regards because of its high axle road and is being marketed as a 350 km/hr class train model in the US and Europe.

Last edited by HyperMiler; October 9th, 2010 at 11:56 PM.
HyperMiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2010, 11:48 PM   #908
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Around 17 t versus 11 t.

Edit: posted contemporary to HyperMiler.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 01:22 AM   #909
rheintram
yeah, whatever
 
rheintram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,606
Likes (Received): 926

I doubt we will ever see a direct Eurostar London to Vienna service, especially since Germany is neglecting the Munich to Salzburg line.
rheintram no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 03:09 AM   #910
Gadiri
Registered User
 
Gadiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Paris-Agadir-Guelmim
Posts: 52,723
Likes (Received): 6980

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
What's the max axle load of this vs. shinkansen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMiler View Post
Velaro, TGV, AGV, Zefiro : 17 ton
Shinkansen : There is no official limit
. However, Shinkansen axle loads are kept to around 11~12 ton by design. This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.

Shinkansen E2 based CRH380A is in far better position to attain 380 km/hr service speed than CRH380B. But this speed is for China only, as CRH380A cannot meet US/EU railway safety regulations and 3rd world countries that are buying CRH system on credit cannot afford the constant repair and maintenance demand on railway and train sets that the 380 km//hr service speed requires, so the top revenue service speed must be kept lower to a reasonable level.

As of now, only HEMU-400X appears to be capable of sustained 380 km/hr service speed on the US and Euro railways, due to its Shinkansen-like low axle load of 13 tons while still being UIC-crashworthiness regulation compliant thanks to its composite body structure. Zefiro fails on this regards because of its high axle road and is being marketed as a 350 km/hr class train model in the US and Europe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
Around 17 t versus 11 t.

Edit: posted contemporary to HyperMiler.
All questions have an answer on moroccan forum thread : High-Speed Railway Networks around The World .

Some comparaison :
Quote:






This Chinese HST will not be able to run in Europe. Max is 17 T. And here is 19,5 T !

__________________


FBI Says 94% of Terrorist Attacks in the US Since 1980 Are by Non-Muslims


Gadiri no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 03:29 AM   #911
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1865

Quote:
This is possible because Shinkansen car body construction is flimsy.
No offense but that's kind of stupid to build a flimsy train, I know Shinkansen has a great accident record but still. Bad call. Structural integrity is important.
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 04:47 AM   #912
HyperMiler
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 240
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
No offense but that's kind of stupid to build a flimsy train
You can construct a flimsy train if you can guarantee that there would be no possibility of collision with either another train or an automobile at level crossing, which Japanese have.

But this policy of 100% dedicated track is not economically viable in other countries including the US and Europe, and this is why Shinkansen(and presumably CRH trains) is such a tough sell outside of its native country.
HyperMiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 07:41 AM   #913
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1865

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMiler View Post
You can construct a flimsy train if you can guarantee that there would be no possibility of collision with either another train or an automobile at level crossing, which Japanese have.

But this policy of 100% dedicated track is not economically viable in other countries including the US and Europe, and this is why Shinkansen(and presumably CRH trains) is such a tough sell outside of its native country.
CRH trains are built pretty hefty I'm pretty sure.

It's just that you can't ever guarantee that there won't be a collision so better safe then sorry. Structual integrity is important for anything that travels at 300 kph.

Here in North America at least and in most other places I assume, Trains are HUGE machines that could crush any automobile, truck, bus, bulldozer whatever without a problem. I understand that weights must go down in order to have high speeds, but there are many high speed single level trains that weigh more than 60 tons per car, Italian ETR, Sapsan, Zefiro are just a few examples. Shinkansen cars just make me nervous because of their design. 45 tons is still a lot of weight and with 8-16 cars I'm sure a Shinkansen train would have the upperhand in a collision with another huge vehicle but I believe there has to be some sort of balance. 40 tons a car is too light and 70 or so tons is obviously too heavy, in order to be fast and durable I'd say the 50 to 60 ton range is the safest and most efficient.
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 10:21 AM   #914
hans280
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Here in North America at least and in most other places I assume, Trains are HUGE machines that could crush any automobile, truck, bus, bulldozer whatever without a problem.
Yeah, but that's rather the problem, isn't it? As you yourself hint, current safety rules makes it virtually impossible to introduce proper HS technology in the US. The Acela Express, for example, is extremely heavy by international comparison and consequently accelerates and brakes very slowly.

This kind of rules makes sence if and only if you expect that the train will be running mostly in mixed traffic, at slow speeds and/or with level crossings to the roads. In that case, as you say, passengers are offered a better safety by very solid trains. However, if you build a dedicated highspeed line where trains run at more than 250 km/h - or don't run at all - then using strong trains is an oximoron: if you have a collision at that speed then everbody inside will die instantly, regardless of how strong the engine car and wagons are.

Summa summarum, the Japanese with their 100% separate HS tracks are well adviced to make the trains as featherlight as they can. In Europe... the pixture is a bit more... mixed.
hans280 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 05:50 PM   #915
HyperMiler
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 240
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
CRH trains are built pretty hefty I'm pretty sure.
Zefiro V300 for Europe has an axle load of 17 tons.
Zefiro 380 for China packing a much bigger body and a heavier electrical system for higher speed also has an axle load limit of 17 tons. How? Bombardier cut corners somewhere. Where? Think about it.

Quote:
It's just that you can't ever guarantee that there won't be a collision so better safe then sorry.
Shinkansen system is pretty close to guaranteeing that. Unfortunately, Shinkansen system also cost more to build because of this guarantee.

Quote:
Structual integrity is important for anything that travels at 300 kph.
Shinkansen trains are designed for a top speed of 300 km/hr or less. Anything above 300 km/kr is none of Japan's problem; it is CSR's problem now as CSR is trying to do with Shinkansen E2 what Kawasaki never intended to do.

Quote:
Shinkansen cars just make me nervous because of their design.
Shinkansen will not show up in the US, save for the possibility of private lines built with Japanese money in Texas.
Ditto for CRH380s, they won't show up in the US.

Quote:
40 tons a car is too light and 70 or so tons is obviously too heavy, in order to be fast and durable I'd say the 50 to 60 ton range is the safest and most efficient.
Or the third option is to build the train with composite and the resulting structure is as strong as Velaro, but weigh closer to Shinkansen. The best of both words.
HyperMiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 07:46 PM   #916
x-type
con los terroristas
 
x-type's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bjelovar [HR]
Posts: 13,473
Likes (Received): 3448

talking about axle loads - what is situation with Talgo 350?
__________________
Svaki dan sanjam autobahn...
x-type no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 10:23 PM   #917
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1865

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
Yeah, but that's rather the problem, isn't it? As you yourself hint, current safety rules makes it virtually impossible to introduce proper HS technology in the US. The Acela Express, for example, is extremely heavy by international comparison and consequently accelerates and brakes very slowly.

Not really, as I said before, Sapsan, Zefiro and Italian ETR are all just a few examples of heavy high speed trains.

These trains have more like, say, the body of a commercial aircraft (or maybe tougher) rather than a tin can.

There is never any excuse for building a flimsy train. That's absurd.
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 11:22 PM   #918
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1865

Here's a Shinkansen car, looks like pretty solid, tough metal to me. Maybe they just use really light but really strong metal.

Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 12:09 AM   #919
thun
Registered User
 
thun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,829

What did you expect? PET?
__________________
Folglich mein TagesTipp => Es genau so hinzunehmen wie ich es sagte. Notorisches Widersprechen wird nichts bringen. Ehrlich! Vertraut mir da voellig!
__________ __________ __________
thun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 12:18 AM   #920
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,539
Likes (Received): 21253

Of the "accelerated" train sets available out there, the ones serving Acela routes have by far and large the highest survivability and sturdiness of all. In regard of HS crash worthiness, these two philosophies will keep competing: the "nuclear power plant approach" (make and encase the reactor strongly, redundantly and capable of surviving almost anything) or the "hydro power dam approach" (build well the whole dam as to avoid any risk of cracking on the embankment, because if it cracks, chaos will ensure).

Ultimately, it has to be decided where money will be spent: on tracks and other infrastructure, as to render collisions near impossible, or on trains to make eventual collisions less severe to their passengers). You can, again, compare the approaches in regard of airplanes (passengers can't eject from a civilian aircraft, and if a wing fails, everybody will die, but you build and maintain so well the damn plane that it will just not lose a wing) and cars (crashes will happen, so you put airbags, ABS, fire retardants, seat-belts etc).
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!

Last edited by Suburbanist; October 11th, 2010 at 01:20 AM.
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium