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 April 11th, 2012, 02:22 PM   #3861
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
Then you return to the situation of only a few trains per hour, and all trying to do everything badly.
You are there already.

On the Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway I count, departing from Beijing towards Shanghai:
3 trains (2 G, 1 D) between 7:00 and 7:50
6 trains (5 G, 1 D) between 8:00 and 8:43
5 trains (4 G, 1 D) between 9:00 and 9:38.

On Tokaido Shinkansen I count, departing from Tokyo towards Nagoya:
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 7:00 and 7:56
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 8:00 and 8:56
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 9:00 and 9:56

Now tell, which of these 2 lines is saturated? Which of these 2 lines has a complex schedule?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 11th, 2012, 03:10 PM   #3862
yaohua2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 453
Likes (Received): 7

One more place for racing bullet trains



Left: Zhengzhou–Xi'an HSR Line
Right: Datong–Xi'an HSR Line

Parallel section between Weinan and Xi'an, more than 50 km long.

Image credit: bbs.hasea.com
yaohua2000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 03:35 PM   #3863
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
You are there already.

On the Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway I count, departing from Beijing towards Shanghai:
3 trains (2 G, 1 D) between 7:00 and 7:50
6 trains (5 G, 1 D) between 8:00 and 8:43
5 trains (4 G, 1 D) between 9:00 and 9:38.

On Tokaido Shinkansen I count, departing from Tokyo towards Nagoya:
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 7:00 and 7:56
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 8:00 and 8:56
10 trains (6 Nozomi, 2 Hikari, 2 Kodama) between 9:00 and 9:56

Now tell, which of these 2 lines is saturated? Which of these 2 lines has a complex schedule?
The Tokaido Shinkansen is 514km long, less than half the length of Beijing-Shanghai HSL. With 24 stations on the latter, the combinatorics is more complex than the Tokaido with 17 stations. The capacity of a HSL with no intermediate stops is about 15-18 tph, and it's clear how the Hikaris and Kodamas are already having an impact on line capacity.

There's easily enough latent demand for 15 tph eventually on most of the Beijing - Shanghai HSL, especially when the network is complete and you start running Shanghai - Taiyuan and Shanghai - Lanzhou services.

The G/D distinction on trunk lines need to go as a first step. Dwell times for D trains are like 20 minutes at each station to allow G trains to overtake, and they take up so many train paths. Slower = cheaper is a false economy in the long run, as the only way to reduce cost is to maximise the number of trains per hour.
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 03:57 PM   #3864
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,303
Likes (Received): 540

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
4 hours seems to be the watershed in terms of competitiveness against air. Routes like Shanghai to Beijing ought to be more competitive, and will be in the future if more direct trains are added, tickets become flexible and station entry procedures simplified. What isn't so easy to rectify is Hongqiao's location - a 30-minute commuter journey into town isn't that attractive.

There needs to be some sort of service rationalisation. Long distance trains should stop at as few stations as possible and there should be enough demand for hourly direct non-stop services between any two major cities. Secondary cities should be served by frequent connecting regional services. This is the way you minimise journey times and maximise flexibility.
The high-speed stations are not currently in convenient location for the majority of people in Beijing either, or most any other city I can think of, and barely more convenient than the airports. This may, should, change over time, but the connecting infrastructure isn't there yet, to the inconvenience of the destination traveler, but also people wanting to change to a connecting train. Easier connections and easier ticket sales that should make trains more competitive.

Some of these trains have few stops, like G11, with two intermediate stops, Jinan and Nanjing, or one stop every 400 km or so.
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 04:21 PM   #3865
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
The Tokaido Shinkansen is 514km long, less than half the length of Beijing-Shanghai HSL. With 24 stations on the latter, the combinatorics is more complex than the Tokaido with 17 stations.
Tokaido is not using all the complex combinatorics of their 17 stations anyway, not even as much as Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway does.

All Nozomi trains have the same 6 stops (Tokyo, Shinagawa, Shin-Yokohama, Nagoya, Kyoto, Shin-Osaka). All Kodama trains have the same stops, namely all they reach. The only trains which play combinatorics are the Hikaris, which make all Nozomi stops plus a few more, and different for different trains.

On Beijing-Shanghai, the only trains with regular stopping patterns are the expresses G1-G4 and G11-G22 - G1-G4 stopping at Beijing, Nanjing and Shanghai, G11-G22 also in Jinan. These also have regular schedule departing at full hours from termini.

All other G and D trains are playing combinatorics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
The G/D distinction on trunk lines need to go as a first step. Dwell times for D trains are like 20 minutes at each station to allow G trains to overtake, and they take up so many train paths. Slower = cheaper is a false economy in the long run, as the only way to reduce cost is to maximise the number of trains per hour.
The 250 km/h D trains among the 300 km/h G trains in the 350 km/h lines were shoved there during the First Slowdown Campaign.

There are not many of these - on Beijing-Shanghai 4 daily (the other 3 Ds are on slow speed line). And these 4 take between 7:52 and 8:54. They do have more stops than Gs - between 14 and 17. They are playing combinatorics, though.

The experience of G trains shows that a 300 km/h needs roughly 7 minutes for a stop - dwell time plus acceleration/deceleration.

Suppose that a train with 300 km/h top speed were put on the Beijing-Shanghai line with stops on all 24 stations without exceptions. If properly handled, this should travel only slightly over 7 hours. Still faster than the D trains, makes more stops, and the passengers and schedule makers are free from combinatorics.

Then say, 4 such trains daily, on simple times, so as to be fitted around the express trains. The combinatorics trains can then be fitted around the fixed schedule...
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 04:40 PM   #3866
UD2
A very cool person
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,294
Likes (Received): 31

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bannor View Post
To me it is more interresting that the percentage of passenger growth is so low with the increased wealth. It reminds me of that high income news anchor in Beijing who said she felt richer 10, or was it 20 years ago. The problem being that China doesn't have any welfare system in place. No pension funds etc etc, so people has to save their money. If we want to see growth, as I assume the MOR does, a welfare system needs to be in place.

The growth of 0.3% might just all be from the increasing number of tourists to China.
to the Chinese rail planners it's more about how much more freight the old line are able to carry using the passenger capacity that are freed-up by the high-speed lines.

Those who understand China's rail system understand that the passenger railway network's market penetration is high enough that it will not experience substantial growth year over year. Those same people also will understand that the creation of high speed railway in China is motivated mostly by the need to create a dependable freight transportation system on China's railways, thus freeing China from the current dependencies on truck based transportation amid raising fuel costs and increasing highway congestion.


The thing was less about.. hmm... let's build the best passenger transportation network in the world so that people will travel faster... and more about... hmmmm... if we have to build a new passenger line anyways to free up capacity, let's build the best lines in the world

Of course due to political and public opinion reasons, such understandings are rarely publicized.
__________________
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed" - President Eisenhower
UD2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 04:51 PM   #3867
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Suppose that a train with 300 km/h top speed were put on the Beijing-Shanghai line with stops on all 24 stations without exceptions. If properly handled, this should travel only slightly over 7 hours. Still faster than the D trains, makes more stops, and the passengers and schedule makers are free from combinatorics.

Then say, 4 such trains daily, on simple times, so as to be fitted around the express trains. The combinatorics trains can then be fitted around the fixed schedule...
Ideally the small settlements along the route should get 2tph stopping trains connecting to the big hubs, but this would have a significant impact on other train paths. Without impacting on train paths too much you can only do some combinatorics tricks to serve the small towns, but then they still only get an irregular service.
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 05:11 PM   #3868
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
Ideally the small settlements along the route should get 2tph stopping trains connecting to the big hubs, but this would have a significant impact on other train paths. Without impacting on train paths too much you can only do some combinatorics tricks to serve the small towns, but then they still only get an irregular service.
Case in point Cangzhou West to Shanghai.
G trains depart 7:36 (travel time 4:36), then 12:08 (travel time 4:37), 12:20, 12:43, 14:23, 15:50, 16:07, 17:07, 17:38 and 18:17.

In the morning all they have are D trains with travel times 7:20...7:21.

Stopping trains even once per 2 hours but at regular times and with regular service pattern would be an improvement over what they now have.

I also keep my suspicion that a train which stops and lets an express train pass at a station but then accelerates to the same speed as the next express would have less serious impact than the existing D trains which travel at 250 km/h between stations.

Quote:
Those who understand China's rail system understand that the passenger railway network's market penetration is high enough that it will not experience substantial growth year over year. Those same people also will understand that the creation of high speed railway in China is motivated mostly by the need to create a dependable freight transportation system on China's railways, thus freeing China from the current dependencies on truck based transportation amid raising fuel costs and increasing highway congestion.
But good high speed railways also have the potential to clear away congestion of planes in heaven, and of buses and private cars on highways.

See the report:
Quote:
Originally Posted by High-Speed Rail – The First Three Years: Taking the Pulse of China’s Emerging Program
The competing bus service along the Changchun to Jilin route described above charges roughly the same fare as the new HSR line but offers a much lower quality of service, and has thus been all but eliminated; the service has reduced from a bus every 5-10 minutes to one or two buses a day, travelling via intermediate towns. The competing bus services along the Beijing to Tianjin route still maintain a significant price advantage over HSR (about half the HSR fare) but nonetheless have not been able to hold onto to their riders, having lost over half their patronage
Slower IS cheaper and has other advantages - only provided that it is not inefficient by holding up the faster services, i. e. is on dedicated 250 km/h lines. Like Wuhan-Yichang. Or Wuhan-Xianning.

Is Wuhan-Xianning high speed railway on schedule?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 05:40 PM   #3869
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post

I also keep my suspicion that a train which stops and lets an express train pass at a station but then accelerates to the same speed as the next express would have less serious impact than the existing D trains which travel at 250 km/h between stations.
Acceleration and deceleration take about 10-20 km in total IIRC. To not eat into train paths you will need 20 km loops (basically a 10km 4-track stretch either side of the station), which I doubt exist on Chinese HSR. Accelerating and decelerating on the mainline will slow down the fast trains behind or eat into at least 1 train path or 2.
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 06:20 PM   #3870
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 381

This topic never disappoints.

Some say China is over-investing on high speed rail forgetting it has more than a billion people to move.

Some say China should double the high speed rail lines forgetting it will require another trillion dollar.

Some say Chinese trains are running too slow, cannot compete with air travel, forgetting they have the fastest average speed.

Some say Chinese trains are too fast, uneconomical, forgetting they are the most efficient way of mass transit.

Interesting, though. Fun to discuss.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 07:33 PM   #3871
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
This topic never disappoints.

Some say China is over-investing on high speed rail forgetting it has more than a billion people to move.

Some say China should double the high speed rail lines forgetting it will require another trillion dollar.

Some say Chinese trains are running too slow, cannot compete with air travel, forgetting they have the fastest average speed.

Some say Chinese trains are too fast, uneconomical, forgetting they are the most efficient way of mass transit.

Interesting, though. Fun to discuss.
Responding to the second point - it's less about doubling HSR than integrating the high-speed and classic networks, and in some cases integrating two tiers of high-speed lines as well. What works best is HSLs concentrating on the major cities only while classic lines provide slow services that feed onto HSTs. This way you don't need to build all the new stations for the small towns saving you dollars while providing everyone with a fast and turn-up-and-go service. This would however require HSTs to terminate at existing central stations to connect with classic services. It's not about how much is spent but how much value you get out of your money.
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 08:42 PM   #3872
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
Responding to the second point - it's less about doubling HSR than integrating the high-speed and classic networks, and in some cases integrating two tiers of high-speed lines as well.
Indeed, China already had doubled some high speed lines. Shanghai-Nanjing, Beijing-Tianjin.

And China should double some more lines. Japan is finding they need to double Tokaido Shinkansen, too, so China can take lesson.

But there are plenty of lines where China needs to have 1 pair of high speed tracks, not spend on 2 pairs of tracks.

And the most important part is proper use and integration of high speed railways with each other, slow speed railways, local transport and airports.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
What works best is HSLs concentrating on the major cities only while classic lines provide slow services that feed onto HSTs.
Agreed about feeder services.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
This would however require HSTs to terminate at existing central stations to connect with classic services.
Not necessarily. There are obvious difficulties with getting high speed railways into old central stations through narrow and crooked existing lines. There can be a real need for new, big stations in suburbs.

What Shinkansen has done with suburban stations was build them on crossings with existing railways. Shin-Yokohama was built on existing Yokohama branch line, 7,9 km from the Yokohama central station. Shin-Osaka was built on Tokaido main line, 3,8 km from Osaka central station.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 09:03 PM   #3873
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
The trouble between Nanjing and Tianjin is the lack of 4-tracking which might limit the potential to separate slow and fast services, so you might still have too many trains that try to do everything (and badly). Another possibility is serving the smaller settlements with a 2tph stopping service on the classic line, but there's the almost insurmountable challenge of providing connection between classic and HSR services that use different stations.
I think for intercity services of smaller cities along the Beijing-Nanjing line they can use the conventional line, the entire line is upgraded to 160km/h with some section to 200km/h. It'd be perfect to run something like the CRH6. Also due to the relatively low speed it's not going to cause much trouble with scheduling of freight traffic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
The First Slowdown Campaign was indeed announced before Wenzhou crash, but it only afflicted 350 km/h lines, and exempted some of them (Beijing-Tianjin, Shanghai-Hangzhou). The Second Slowdown Campaign afflicted not only these exempt lines, but also slowed 250 km/h lines to 200 km/h (whic had operated since 2007 speedup of Qinhuangdao-Shenyang high speed railway) and 200 km/h lines to 160 km/h (which had operated since 1998 speedup of Guangzhou-Shenzhen line).
Both slow downs were already decided after Shen Guangzu took over, it was just implemented in three stages, with Beijing-Tianjin and Shanghai-Hangzhou the last two lines to be slowed down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UD2 View Post
Of course due to political and public opinion reasons, such understandings are rarely publicized.
I believe it's publicized as one of the primary justification for HSR build up, even in official Chinese media.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
Acceleration and deceleration take about 10-20 km in total IIRC. To not eat into train paths you will need 20 km loops (basically a 10km 4-track stretch either side of the station), which I doubt exist on Chinese HSR. Accelerating and decelerating on the mainline will slow down the fast trains behind or eat into at least 1 train path or 2.
The second stage of HSR speed reduction put in place many very strict rules regarding operating speed, most notably on the Wuhan-Guangzhou line. The ATP regulates that trains will automatically slowed down by regen braking at 310km/h, and emergency braking engaged at 315km/h, Guangzhou Rail Group dictates speed limited to 305km/h, any drivers breaks that speed limit will be fined, so most driver actually operate at around 298km/h. The drivers have also been instructed by respective maintenance sections (机务段)to brake earlier than the SOP to utilize regenerative braking more to save on brake pads. The discrepancies between actual operating practices and MOR's SOP and ATP programming here cause an additional 50 to 90 second delays at each station. Which also means causing a lot more trouble for passing or trailing trains.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
This topic never disappoints.

Some say China is over-investing on high speed rail forgetting it has more than a billion people to move.

Some say China should double the high speed rail lines forgetting it will require another trillion dollar.

Some say Chinese trains are running too slow, cannot compete with air travel, forgetting they have the fastest average speed.

Some say Chinese trains are too fast, uneconomical, forgetting they are the most efficient way of mass transit.

Interesting, though. Fun to discuss.
All we know is that he's the Stig's Anti HSR cousin.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 09:08 PM   #3874
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Not necessarily. There are obvious difficulties with getting high speed railways into old central stations through narrow and crooked existing lines. There can be a real need for new, big stations in suburbs.

What Shinkansen has done with suburban stations was build them on crossings with existing railways. Shin-Yokohama was built on existing Yokohama branch line, 7,9 km from the Yokohama central station. Shin-Osaka was built on Tokaido main line, 3,8 km from Osaka central station.
Well use Shanghai-Nanjing as an example, the 350km/h PDL already terminates at the old Nanjing and Shanghai station inside the city, so technically it's feasible to route some trains from Beijing-Shanghai HSR to the Shanghai-Nanjing PDL for better city access, but the stations have limited capacity and the trains have to slow way down before entering the stations, significantly reduce the efficiency and diminish the advantages of this trunk line.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 09:32 PM   #3875
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv View Post
Well use Shanghai-Nanjing as an example, the 350km/h PDL already terminates at the old Nanjing and Shanghai station inside the city, so technically it's feasible to route some trains from Beijing-Shanghai HSR to the Shanghai-Nanjing PDL for better city access, but the stations have limited capacity and the trains have to slow way down before entering the stations, significantly reduce the efficiency and diminish the advantages of this trunk line.
All direct trains Kunshan South-Shanghai take 16...20 minutes, with no discernible difference between the ones terminating in Hongqiao and those going to main station.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 10:22 PM   #3876
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Not necessarily. There are obvious difficulties with getting high speed railways into old central stations through narrow and crooked existing lines. There can be a real need for new, big stations in suburbs.

What Shinkansen has done with suburban stations was build them on crossings with existing railways. Shin-Yokohama was built on existing Yokohama branch line, 7,9 km from the Yokohama central station. Shin-Osaka was built on Tokaido main line, 3,8 km from Osaka central station.
I (grudgingly) do aknowledge the need for new 'parkway' stations to increase platform numbers. The trouble is there is almost no connection between the old and new Beijing - Shanghai railways. Connection stations should be in the major cities as anything else slows the fasts down. It makes sense for local stoppers to use central stations, so fasts should at least start and terminate there to connect, and pass through parkway stations along the way. Remember most people want to go to city centres, so even though the final leg of the journey on classic metals might only be 160km/h, it's still better than using a local metro or bus from a parkway station.

Shanghai - Wuhan line is a funny one. The line is just over 800km long, and the speed is 200-250 km/h west of Nanjing and 300-350 km/h east of Nanjing. Theoretically speaking a 4-hour journey would be possible and would be extremely competitive against air, but all services take about 6 hours, because they have to use the Shanghai - Nanjing PDL instead of Beijing - Shanghai east of Nanjing, and stop about 6 times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv View Post
All we know is that he's the Stig's Anti HSR cousin.
Who are you referring to?
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 10:36 PM   #3877
FM 2258
Registered User
 
FM 2258's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,438
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
Well, did anyone have a real doubt that high speed rails would have trouble finding passengers in China???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Swordsman View Post


I'm sorry, couldn't resist that. :P



As an American who visited China for a month in 2010, I knew it had to work. I was so amazed at how extensive their public transportation options were that it makes me ashamed when the biggest cities in Texas can't get their shit together as fast when it comes to public transportation.

Cheers to China for getting this high speed rail network up so well and so quickly. I feel it's one of the best investments China has made.
FM 2258 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 10:58 PM   #3878
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
I (grudgingly) do aknowledge the need for new 'parkway' stations to increase platform numbers. The trouble is there is almost no connection between the old and new Beijing - Shanghai railways. Connection stations should be in the major cities as anything else slows the fasts down. It makes sense for local stoppers to use central stations, so fasts should at least start and terminate there to connect, and pass through parkway stations along the way. Remember most people want to go to city centres, so even though the final leg of the journey on classic metals might only be 160km/h, it's still better than using a local metro or bus from a parkway station.
All Shinkansen trains approaching Tokyo from Tokaido make stops in Shin-Yokohama (a parkway station 25,5 km from Tokyo) and Shinagawa. All Shinkansens coming from north stop at Omiya (31,9 km from Tokyo), and almost all also stop at Ueno.

Shanghai, unlike Tokyo, does not need to worry about even potential of through trains (located on a peninsula). Would it make sense to schedule all trains into Shanghai incl. expresses to stop at Kunshan South? Then several metro lines can be built to go through or to Kunshan South station, and the many passengers whose actual destinations are not in central Shanghai but in Kunshan or in western suburbs of Shanghai between Kunshan and Shanghai can plan on connecting to these metro lines....

Also, note that while Longhua Station is in outskirts of Shenzhen, 40 km of high speed railway is under construction through heavily built up areas of Shenzhen and Hong Kong, with 2 major stations in Futian and Kowloon West.

Could it make sence to build a new high speed railway, even if limited to 200 km/h in tunnels like Futian-Kowloon West high speed railway, through and under Shanghai, with major stations under central Shanghai and in Pudong airport? The Nether Central Shanghai station can be kept compact by requiring each train to stop briefly and then continue to Pudong; Pudong Station in suburbs can have spare space for platforms and maintenance depots.

This way, not only can people who actually want to get to eastern suburbs of Shanghai get on metro in Pudong station, but people who actually want to get on long distance planes in Pudong airport disembark right in the terminal and do not need to spend 100 minutes (and secretly 2 connections) on Shanghai Metro Line 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCT View Post
Shanghai - Wuhan line is a funny one. The line is just over 800km long, and the speed is 200-250 km/h west of Nanjing and 300-350 km/h east of Nanjing. Theoretically speaking a 4-hour journey would be possible and would be extremely competitive against air, but all services take about 6 hours, because they have to use the Shanghai - Nanjing PDL instead of Beijing - Shanghai east of Nanjing, and stop about 6 times.
How are the repairs of Wuhan-Yichang high speed railway progressing?

When Wuhan-Yichang high speed railway opens, what shall be the best direct train time Shanghai-Nanjing-Wuhan-Yichang-Lichuan-Wanzhou?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 11:10 PM   #3879
particlez
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 106

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Of course, a problem is that neither Singapore nor Hong Kong relies heavily on long distance trains.

They both do have train connection and stations. Singapore with Johore and Malaya, Hong Kong with Canton. However, both lines are cut across with border checkpoints - neither Singapore nor Hong Kong is dealing with massive commuter flows to Johore, Kuala Lumpur, Shenzhen or Guangzhou.

Singapore and Hong Kong give good examples of how to plan public transport, pedestrian access and housing. What is missing is the experience of fitting a major rail station into public and pedestrian transport networks.

Taiwan, South Korea and Japan do have the experience of fitting rail into cities. But much of the experience of the rebels of Taiwan was with low speed (under 130 km/h) narrow gauge railways. The THSR was only opened in 2007. Ditto with South Korea - KTX was opened in 2004.

It is only Japan who has had high speed railways for 47 years. What should Chinese learn?

Singapore and Hong Kong are good examples because they're functional cities, have humid-cooling climates, have been built relatively recently, and serve as a model for high density, non-auto dependent development.

There are a lot of Singapore-Johor, and Hong Kong-Shenzhen/Dongguan commuters. I've been unlucky enough to be amongst them. the MAIN issue is to have the intercity trains conveniently connect to the municipal trains/buses. The Singapore-Johor commute is a mess, as it's surprisingly dominated by private vehicles. Johor isn't exactly known for its public transit.

The Hong Kong/Mainland commute however, offers up some interesting lessons. The "border" between Hong Kong and the Mainland is very quick to eligible residents and anyone with a valid visa. Several hundred thousand commuters cross the border every day, with a growing plurality using rail transport. The HK rail link hasn't been completed. I'll get to that later. Going north from Hong Kong, the following is a rough outline of the train journey:

On the Mainland side, the trains first stop off at Luohu in the Shenzhen center, then to Shenzhen North, then through a bunch of tiny stations in less urbanized/less developed Dongguan, then to Guangzhou East, then to the main Guangzhou station.

Dongguan's rail terminals are waiting to be refurbished/expanded. As of now the place is a mess. Dongguan is building its elevated rail system, when it starts running and connects with the intercity railway stations, the city should start to ease its reliance on the car. The Shenzhen and Guangzhou stations are heavily used. These four stations, Shenzhen, Shenzhen North, Guangzhou East, and Guangzhou are all served by multiple subway lines. Guangzhou East was built in 1990. Now it's surrounded by a business district. Shenzhen North was only built last year, and surrounded by... literally a dump. The detractors in this thread may despise the overly large, greenfield stations away from the city center, but these stations are heavily used, and the areas around the stations are vibrant. Because these cities are still overcrowded and their populations are expanding, the traditional city centers have NOT been harmed by the building of the new stations.

Despite what the thread's detractors say, this set up is really not so different from anywhere else in the world. The main issues with infrastructure planning are:

1. the temptation to explicitly rely on the car
2. going the cheap route and cutting off funding--the "let them eat cake" approach that's often held up by neoliberal/austerity boosters.

Boss is around. I'll write about the HK train station's connectivity problems in a bit.


Eh... Most of this is just redundant.
particlez está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2012, 11:15 PM   #3880
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,209
Likes (Received): 1772

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
All Shinkansen trains approaching Tokyo from Tokaido make stops in Shin-Yokohama (a parkway station 25,5 km from Tokyo) and Shinagawa. All Shinkansens coming from north stop at Omiya (31,9 km from Tokyo), and almost all also stop at Ueno.

Shanghai, unlike Tokyo, does not need to worry about even potential of through trains (located on a peninsula). Would it make sense to schedule all trains into Shanghai incl. expresses to stop at Kunshan South? Then several metro lines can be built to go through or to Kunshan South station, and the many passengers whose actual destinations are not in central Shanghai but in Kunshan or in western suburbs of Shanghai between Kunshan and Shanghai can plan on connecting to these metro lines....

Also, note that while Longhua Station is in outskirts of Shenzhen, 40 km of high speed railway is under construction through heavily built up areas of Shenzhen and Hong Kong, with 2 major stations in Futian and Kowloon West.

Could it make sence to build a new high speed railway, even if limited to 200 km/h in tunnels like Futian-Kowloon West high speed railway, through and under Shanghai, with major stations under central Shanghai and in Pudong airport? The Nether Central Shanghai station can be kept compact by requiring each train to stop briefly and then continue to Pudong; Pudong Station in suburbs can have spare space for platforms and maintenance depots.

This way, not only can people who actually want to get to eastern suburbs of Shanghai get on metro in Pudong station, but people who actually want to get on long distance planes in Pudong airport disembark right in the terminal and do not need to spend 100 minutes (and secretly 2 connections) on Shanghai Metro Line 2.
You are well and truly in fantasy world now!
__________________
My Shanghai photos - Nanjing Road, People's Square, The Bund, Xintiandi and more!
NCT está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
china, high speed rail

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 09:22 PM.


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