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 June 29th, 2012, 07:43 AM   #4141
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddes View Post
By the same token, I should be cautious when I ride on Spain's AVE, Korea's KTX and many others then because they don't have decades of experience.
Why should you be cautious?
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 29th, 2012, 08:29 AM   #4142
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by joseph1951 View Post
The Paris Lyon and the Lyon- Marseille sections were built as LGVs and were entirely new lines.


http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGV_Sud-Est

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGV_M%C3%A9diterran%C3%A9e
Thank you, I stand corrected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
Just curious what is your criteria for being the most advanced?
Fastest designed speed, longest viaducts, built on the most difficult terrains, all new tracks, all new stations, three 380km/h rated trainsets, etc. I think it's the most advanced, but not the best, I think that title goes to JR.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 08:33 AM   #4143
ukiyo
スーパーモデレーターSuper Moderator
 
ukiyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 大阪府 Ōsaka
Posts: 7,245
Likes (Received): 10747

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv View Post
Fastest designed speed, longest viaducts, built on the most difficult terrains, all new tracks, all new stations, three 380km/h rated trainsets, etc. I think it's the most advanced, but not the best, I think that title goes to JR.
Interesting thanks for the clarification. Under that criteria it is definitely the most advanced. I am not familiar with the terrain (I have only used the Shanghai HSR) but China is a big country with many kinds of terrain. What kinds of examples of the difficult terrains? Why do you think JR is the best?
__________________
🌸My Pictures: Tokyo, Tokyo 2, Kobe, Kamakura, Osaka, Kyoto, Nara, Himeji, Atlanta, China
🌸Japan Forum 日本フォーラム please stop by!
🌸浮世🌸

Last edited by ukiyo; June 29th, 2012 at 08:42 AM.
ukiyo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 09:51 AM   #4144
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,260
Likes (Received): 63092

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv View Post
It's true that China is far behind the HSR pioneers such as Japan and France in terms of experience in operating HSR, however the technologies available for China today are the product of accumulation of the aforementioned experience. Just like China's space program, they don't have to reinvent the wheel if it's already been done by others, lessons have been learned, and improvements made. China did build the largest and most advanced HSR network in the world in the shortest amount of time, and are operating relatively smoothly for five years now, that feat itself is a testimony of CRH employees' competency. You are surprised that they are able to keep up 300km/h because most outsiders constantly underestimate the Chinese people, and in this case they clearly have learned very fast on how to run a vast HSR network. And just like you said, they are gaining experience every day, and the CRH network is getting safer and more reliable every passing day. It's sad that there was the July 2011 accident which claimed many lives, but note that accident has absolutely nothing to do with speed since it happened when the train is traveling at 99km/h. The speed reduction also has nothing to do with the accident because it was announced before 7.23, and like I've said it's a pure political and economical move.
I know I know, China does nothing wrong and therefore you cannot criticize them.

But let's be honest. Even though I'm Dutch I will be the 1st person to criticize the Dutch efforts on running a HSL. Basically my thoughts are that the only right decision was to be build a high speed line, all decisions afterwards where very poor and resulted in the complete failure that it is now.

So when I see a country announce in the worldwide media that they are building the biggest network and have the fastest trains in the world, only to quietly reduce speeds to more normal levels after just a year I cannot do anything else then raise my eyebrows. I can only see over-ambition caused by inexperience as the main reason behind the slowdown. And I don't care if this happened in China, or Japan, Europe or America, that has nothing do with it. Saying that the outside world doesn't believe that China can't do anything right are just excuses to cover up the failures. So my statement that I'm actually surprised that they can keep up the 300 km/h might be a tip over the top. But not as over the top as the initial Chinese statements that they would simply run the fastest high speed trains in the world.

And you can fool yourself looking back at the accident saying that it wasn't a high speed accident because the trains where just going 100 km/h... But it was a collision between 2 high speed trains on a new line. It's far more a situation of thank the gods it was just at 100 km/h. Of course the speed wasn't the cause of the accident, but that's not really the point. The system failure and human errors that caused this accident could also have resulted in an accident at really high speeds. It's basically the initial flaw of the Chinese efforts. Focusing mainly on speed and not as much at reliability and safety.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddes View Post
By the same token, I should be cautious when I ride on Spain's AVE, Korea's KTX and many others then because they don't have decades of experience.
Spain AVE started operation in 1992, and then without big announcements that it would be the fastest high speed service in the world. Later on the Madrid - Barcelona line that fully opened in 2008 was designed for 350 km/h, they also wanted to reach the 350 km/h in commercial service. But after the test runs they wisely decided that the max speed on the whole AVE network would only be 300 km/h, right now they have slowly increased it to 310 km/h on some parts of the line.

Korea also started in 1992, and also with 300 km/h on lines designed for 350 km/h. Also didn't go from nothing to the fastest in the world.

Inexperience is not something that makes a High Speed Network unsafe by default. It only becomes a big factor when the ambitions are too high for a nation that just starts a high speed network.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 10:26 AM   #4145
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,812
Likes (Received): 452

Apparently KHI or perhaps JR East advised the Chinese railway authorities to start at a slower speed, and gradually increase speeds as experience was gained, and after overcoming any of the inevitable glitches that arise on a new system. But it seems such advice was ignored by bureaucrats and politicos more interested in making a name for themselves and generating headlines "Fastest X in the world" and the like. Hubris trumped prudence.
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 04:47 PM   #4146
Norge78
Registered User
 
Norge78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 471
Likes (Received): 388

TGV Technology is better than japanese one

@Momo1435

FUKUSHIMA "chernobyl" disaster, shame of the century, was a just a big example of japanese transparency and safety experience, we all know it.

We all Europeans should learn from japan, even if i wonder how many people will die in future in the world thanks to the japanese lies.

Thx

Last edited by Norge78; June 29th, 2012 at 04:55 PM.
Norge78 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 05:27 PM   #4147
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
I know I know, China does nothing wrong and therefore you cannot criticize them.

But let's be honest. Even though I'm Dutch I will be the 1st person to criticize the Dutch efforts on running a HSL. Basically my thoughts are that the only right decision was to be build a high speed line, all decisions afterwards where very poor and resulted in the complete failure that it is now.

So when I see a country announce in the worldwide media that they are building the biggest network and have the fastest trains in the world, only to quietly reduce speeds to more normal levels after just a year I cannot do anything else then raise my eyebrows. I can only see over-ambition caused by inexperience as the main reason behind the slowdown. And I don't care if this happened in China, or Japan, Europe or America, that has nothing do with it. Saying that the outside world doesn't believe that China can't do anything right are just excuses to cover up the failures. So my statement that I'm actually surprised that they can keep up the 300 km/h might be a tip over the top. But not as over the top as the initial Chinese statements that they would simply run the fastest high speed trains in the world.

And you can fool yourself looking back at the accident saying that it wasn't a high speed accident because the trains where just going 100 km/h... But it was a collision between 2 high speed trains on a new line. It's far more a situation of thank the gods it was just at 100 km/h. Of course the speed wasn't the cause of the accident, but that's not really the point. The system failure and human errors that caused this accident could also have resulted in an accident at really high speeds. It's basically the initial flaw of the Chinese efforts. Focusing mainly on speed and not as much at reliability and safety.


Spain AVE started operation in 1992, and then without big announcements that it would be the fastest high speed service in the world. Later on the Madrid - Barcelona line that fully opened in 2008 was designed for 350 km/h, they also wanted to reach the 350 km/h in commercial service. But after the test runs they wisely decided that the max speed on the whole AVE network would only be 300 km/h, right now they have slowly increased it to 310 km/h on some parts of the line.

Korea also started in 1992, and also with 300 km/h on lines designed for 350 km/h. Also didn't go from nothing to the fastest in the world.

Inexperience is not something that makes a High Speed Network unsafe by default. It only becomes a big factor when the ambitions are too high for a nation that just starts a high speed network.

Constructive criticism is the best thing. It is a very fair point to say "start at 300km/h and then increase the speed".

I have couple points to make though. It was not a new line, accident happened on an upgraded line with "older" generation trains. So it was not really about 350km/h speed limit.

Spanish and Korean networks are not as advanced as Chinese rail network because of two fundamental differences:

1) Ballastless trucks and
2) 7000m turn radius.

One cannot overlook these extremely crucial differences.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 05:34 PM   #4148
sekelsenmat
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,139
Likes (Received): 50

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
Basically my thoughts are that the only right decision was to be build a high speed line, all decisions afterwards where very poor and resulted in the complete failure that it is now.
From what I read in this forum the ridership of HSR is like 5 times of what the older conventional rail was in the same lines. That alone is already proof of success. The best way to measure the success of an infra-structure project is to see how many people use it, and a 5x increase in passengers is something huge.
__________________
True Democracy for Android - A realistic political simulation game where you are the premier/president and guides your country competing against other political parties =)

My blog about trains, politics and urbanism.
sekelsenmat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2012, 07:17 PM   #4149
FM 2258
Registered User
 
FM 2258's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,438
Likes (Received): 612

What percentage are they finished with the entire high speed rail network plan? Looking at videos there are so many high speed rail bridges under construction. It looks like a spaghetti bowl of rail lines.
FM 2258 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 07:15 AM   #4150
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
Spanish and Korean networks are not as advanced as Chinese rail network because of two fundamental differences:

1) Ballastless trucks and
2) 7000m turn radius.

One cannot overlook these extremely crucial differences.
In terms of safety, neither of these make much difference, and here's why:

1. Ballastless track is only safer by virtue of it not moving around as much and the removal of possibly dangerous ballast. HOWEVER, when maintained properly, tracks with ballast are just as safe as ballastless tracks. It all depends on the rate of use and the maintenance schedule. And again, even with HSR, ballasted track is safe with maintenance, I don't believe the engineers would have looked over such a massive problem as flying ballast if it actualy had a chance of occurring.

2. The turn raduis has nothing do do with safety or advancement. It simply allows the trains to run faster, but at the price of the line being more expensive as it can't avoid obstacles as easily, and thus more tunelling and bridging must be performed.

So, truly, I don't think these differences are crucial at all.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 08:00 AM   #4151
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
In terms of safety, neither of these make much difference, and here's why:

1. Ballastless track is only safer by virtue of it not moving around as much and the removal of possibly dangerous ballast. HOWEVER, when maintained properly, tracks with ballast are just as safe as ballastless tracks. It all depends on the rate of use and the maintenance schedule. And again, even with HSR, ballasted track is safe with maintenance, I don't believe the engineers would have looked over such a massive problem as flying ballast if it actualy had a chance of occurring.

2. The turn raduis has nothing do do with safety or advancement. It simply allows the trains to run faster, but at the price of the line being more expensive as it can't avoid obstacles as easily, and thus more tunelling and bridging must be performed.

So, truly, I don't think these differences are crucial at all.
Well, I don't want to enter an argument but have to say that you are absolutely wrong. If you want to go faster than the current "conventional" high speed rail in a safe manner you have to have these.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 09:20 AM   #4152
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post

I have couple points to make though. It was not a new line, accident happened on an upgraded line with "older" generation trains. So it was not really about 350km/h speed limit.
That's not really a good point, since the conditions the accident happened under are the same on "new" lines and "newest" generation trains.

It's just luck it didn't happen on a 350 km/h line.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 09:31 AM   #4153
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
I know I know, China does nothing wrong and therefore you cannot criticize them.

But let's be honest. Even though I'm Dutch I will be the 1st person to criticize the Dutch efforts on running a HSL. Basically my thoughts are that the only right decision was to be build a high speed line, all decisions afterwards where very poor and resulted in the complete failure that it is now.

So when I see a country announce in the worldwide media that they are building the biggest network and have the fastest trains in the world, only to quietly reduce speeds to more normal levels after just a year I cannot do anything else then raise my eyebrows. I can only see over-ambition caused by inexperience as the main reason behind the slowdown. And I don't care if this happened in China, or Japan, Europe or America, that has nothing do with it. Saying that the outside world doesn't believe that China can't do anything right are just excuses to cover up the failures. So my statement that I'm actually surprised that they can keep up the 300 km/h might be a tip over the top. But not as over the top as the initial Chinese statements that they would simply run the fastest high speed trains in the world.

And you can fool yourself looking back at the accident saying that it wasn't a high speed accident because the trains where just going 100 km/h... But it was a collision between 2 high speed trains on a new line. It's far more a situation of thank the gods it was just at 100 km/h. Of course the speed wasn't the cause of the accident, but that's not really the point. The system failure and human errors that caused this accident could also have resulted in an accident at really high speeds. It's basically the initial flaw of the Chinese efforts. Focusing mainly on speed and not as much at reliability and safety.
Of course you can criticize Chinese HSR, that's why we are having this discussion, but that doesn't mean they are informed nor do I agree with you. China announced the 350-380km/h speed and then reduced it because the minister of railway was replaced, and then MOR's political infighting resulted in the speed reduction, not because of technical reasons. Many 350km/h lines have been operated safely, such as Wuhan-Guangzhou, Beijing-Tianjin, Shanghai-Nanjing, etc. You kept on ignoring these important facts and continuing to push the opinion that this is a cover up to their "failure" is board line arrogant, just shows you know very little about China. Also since we are discussing 350km/h here, bring the 7.23 accident is pointless because speed is not a cause, it did not occur during high speed travel, and it occurred on a standard 250km/h line.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 09:43 AM   #4154
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
Interesting thanks for the clarification. Under that criteria it is definitely the most advanced. I am not familiar with the terrain (I have only used the Shanghai HSR) but China is a big country with many kinds of terrain. What kinds of examples of the difficult terrains? Why do you think JR is the best?
Lines such as Baoji-Lanzhou passes through numerous mountain ranges, rivers, and valleys, on this 400km line bridge, viaducts, and tunnels account for over 92% of the entire track length. I think JR is the best because its operational efficiency, perfect safety record, and the general ride experience (station/train cleanness, passenger friendly infrastructure).

Quote:
Originally Posted by k.k.jetcar View Post
Apparently KHI or perhaps JR East advised the Chinese railway authorities to start at a slower speed, and gradually increase speeds as experience was gained, and after overcoming any of the inevitable glitches that arise on a new system. But it seems such advice was ignored by bureaucrats and politicos more interested in making a name for themselves and generating headlines "Fastest X in the world" and the like. Hubris trumped prudence.
MOR was being prudent when they announced the CRH380 will run on the 380km/h Beijing-Shanghai line, it was originally planned to be CRH400 and operate at 400km/h on that particular line. Crazy, yeah, I know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
I have couple points to make though. It was not a new line, accident happened on an upgraded line with "older" generation trains. So it was not really about 350km/h speed limit.
Just one correction, the Ningbo-Wenzhou line is a new built line, just not a passenger dedicated line, but mixed conventional/HSR line. The trains are old ones though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sekelsenmat View Post
From what I read in this forum the ridership of HSR is like 5 times of what the older conventional rail was in the same lines. That alone is already proof of success. The best way to measure the success of an infra-structure project is to see how many people use it, and a 5x increase in passengers is something huge.
You guys talking about the Dutch HSR, right?
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 10:24 AM   #4155
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post
That's not really a good point, since the conditions the accident happened under are the same on "new" lines and "newest" generation trains.

It's just luck it didn't happen on a 350 km/h line.
What conditions are you referring? Railroads (signaling, built quality etc.) and the trains on 250km/h lines are different than those ones on 350km/h lines.

Also, that wasn't the only point I made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv
Just one correction, the Ningbo-Wenzhou line is a new built line, just not a passenger dedicated line, but mixed conventional/HSR line. The trains are old ones though.
Noted.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 12:16 PM   #4156
everywhere
The Explorer
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,129
Likes (Received): 805

52.6 mln ride Beijing-Shanghai high-speed trains
(Shanghai Daily/Xinhua, June 30)


Quote:
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) -- Some 52.6 million passengers have travelled on the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed railway since it opened to the public a year ago, latest data showed Saturday.

More than 56,000 trains traversed the railway in the first year of its operation, Beijing-Shanghai High-Speed Railway Company said.

After three years of construction, the 1,318-km railway linking Beijing and Shanghai went into operation in June last year.

Trains were initially allowed to travel at a maximum speed of 350 km per hour, which was later adjusted to 300 km per hour to allegedly reduce operation costs.

Built with an investment of 217.6 billion yuan (34.5 billion U.S. dollars), the railway has shortened travel time between the two cities to about five hours.
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article...a.asp?id=80217
everywhere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 01:24 PM   #4157
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
What conditions are you referring? Railroads (signaling, built quality etc.) and the trains on 250km/h lines are different than those ones on 350km/h lines.

Also, that wasn't the only point I made.
Well, first of all, I was quoting you exactly:

"I have couple points to make though. It was not a new line, accident happened on an upgraded line with "older" generation trains. So it was not really about 350km/h speed limit."

So after saying you have a couple of points to make, you say the accident happened on an upgraded line with "older" generation trains, as if that would make any difference. However, the conditions under which the accident happened are the same on 350 km/h tracks, except perhaps the physical signalling in stead of "virtual" signalling. Had circumstances been exactly the same, but the track would have been 350 km/h track, and the trains were the newer trains, the accident still would have happened, because it was caused by lack of fail safes.

The track of the Wenzhou train collision was newly built, elevated track, just as much of the 350 km/h track is. It has only been operational since 2009.
The CRH1 and CRH2 trains have only been in operation since 2007, still rather new (ICE 3's have been in service since 2000 already).
But even newer 350 km/h trains can still have signal problems causing one train to run into another train, if systems are not fail safe as was the case at the Wenzhou accident.

So I would say, if this accident happened at 100 km/h on a 250 km/h track, that should be considered an extremely costly blessing in disguise, because it taught an important lesson before it happened on a 350 km/h track at speed.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 01:27 PM   #4158
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by everywhere View Post
52.6 mln ride Beijing-Shanghai high-speed trains
(Shanghai Daily/Xinhua, June 30)




http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article...a.asp?id=80217
An average of 939 people per train? That's awesome, and it sounds like a lot... what was the average capacity per train?
Is that just people running the entire length, or are Nanjing-Shanghai, etc., passengers also counted?
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 03:38 PM   #4159
George08
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 175
Likes (Received): 6

Xiamen - Longyan High speed rail open

The long-awaited Longyan-Xiamen Railway starts operation today, 1 day ahead of schedule, reports Xiamen Economic Daily.

The line has a total length of 171 kilometres with 6 stops: Xiamen Railway Station/ Xiamen North Station, Jiaomei Station, Zhangzhou Station, Nanjing Station, Longshanzhen Station and Longyan Station.

Tickets for Longyan-Xiamen bullet trains can be purchased or booked online via www.12306.cn (Chinese version only) as well as at ticket booths in Xiamen Railway Station.

According to the Nanchang Railways Bureau, there are two kinds of seat for the bullet trains; first-class and second-class. The prices vary as follows:
- Xiamen (Xiamen Railway Station)-Longyan: RMB60 for first-class seat and RMB49 for second-class seat
- Xiamen Bei (Xiamen North Station)-Longyan: RMB55 for first-class seat and RMB46 for second-class seat

The opening of the Longyan-Xiamen Railway may cause the highway bus industry to cut their ticket prices to compete.

According to the current timetable, the first bullet train heading for Longyan will depart from Xiamen Railway Station at 7:10 and arrive in Longyan Station at 8:39. The travel time from Xiamen to Longyan by train will be shortened to 90 minutes from the previous 4 hours.

However because of Chinas brand-new train timetable that will be implemented from 1st July, the schedule is liable to change. Please check for the latest schedule at the railway station.

Apart from train tickets, please note Chinese residents (including those from Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan) are required to present their ID cards and expats are required to present passports when boarding the train.



http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/travel-msg-1929.html
George08 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2012, 09:19 PM   #4160
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post
An average of 939 people per train? That's awesome, and it sounds like a lot... what was the average capacity per train?
Is that just people running the entire length, or are Nanjing-Shanghai, etc., passengers also counted?
It looks like there are 4 different types of trains running.

Some are 8 cars long (about 500-600pax) and others are 16cars (1000-1200pax)
Restless no está en línea   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 09:34 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