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 1st, 2013, 03:53 PM   #5641
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,980
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
In any case this seems moot. Kazakhstan is building a new line between Astana and Almaty, with the goal of being finished by the time Astana holds EXPO2017. It will use Russian gauge (1520mm), single track, with rated speed of 250 km/h. A French company, Systra, will oversee it. The travel time is supposed to be reduced from 12 hours to 5 hours.
1435 mm Khorgos-Almaty HSR it would not be moot. It would connect Almaty, itself a major city, to China, and provide a convenient connection/break of gauge at Almaty station.
Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
Well, back to China domestic lines.
Indeed.

Have tests of Dalian-Harbin railway speedup started?
What shall be the trip time Harbin-Dalian on 21st instant?
__________________

China Hand liked this post
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 1st, 2013, 05:23 PM   #5642
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,303
Likes (Received): 540

Quote:
Originally Posted by coth View Post
Early or later Russia will connect Moscow with Yekaterinburg and Chelyabinsk. So then there will be "just" 2,5 thous km to connect Chelyabinsk with Urumqi via Troitsk, Kostanay, Astana and Karaganda. Or via Tyumen, Omsk, Pavlodar, Semey and Ust'-Kamenogorsk.
I cannot justify it economically but I like the idea of a Trans-Eurasian express. I have never taken the Transsibirian railway, but if there were a Eurasian HSR link I would take it (though frankly most times I would take a plane). For that reason I am a little peeved with the Russians for staying with the broad gauge, but the time changing trains would be a small part of the journey, so it may not be that big a deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stainless View Post
^ Why only single track? Or do they mean one track each way?
Single track is cheaper, and for some areas with long distances and little traffic it makes sense. This would be the second single track HSR after the Bothnia line in Sweden, and this one will be five times as long. Crossing trains may have to wait at a passing loop like a station, which can make high-speed travel far less speedy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
1435 mm Khorgos-Almaty HSR it would not be moot. It would connect Almaty, itself a major city, to China, and provide a convenient connection/break of gauge at Almaty station.
Yes, that would be preferable to changing trains on the border. A line like that could in principle continue, even all the way to Iran (using standard gauge) as need be, as per the map above.

It is all a bit off-topic, but international travel could be part of the motivation for HSR to places like Urumqi or Kunming.
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2013, 05:47 PM   #5643
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,980
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
For that reason I am a little peeved with the Russians for staying with the broad gauge, but the time changing trains would be a small part of the journey, so it may not be that big a deal.
The Russian broad gauge network is huge and it WORKS. No point in changing it - they are better off developing high speed trains of wide gauge.

Spaniards have built Talgo 250/Renfe class 130 trains - which run at 220 km/h on 1668 mm and 250 km/h on 1435 mm. They have already built 1520 mm Talgo 130, and it is running on Tashkent-Samarkand high speed railway.

So how about buying some variable gauge Talgo 250 trains which could travel Urumqi-Almaty on 1435 mm and after changing gauge at a gauge changer somewhere in Almaty station - rather faster than bogie exchange - continue some to Astana and then Moscow, some to Tashkent, Samarkand and then Ashabad?
Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
Single track is cheaper, and for some areas with long distances and little traffic it makes sense. This would be the second single track HSR after the Bothnia line in Sweden, and this one will be five times as long. Crossing trains may have to wait at a passing loop like a station, which can make high-speed travel far less speedy.
Or constrain schedule options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
It is all a bit off-topic, but international travel could be part of the motivation for HSR to places like Urumqi or Kunming.
How is the Hangzhou-Changsha-Kunming high speed railway progressing?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 03:02 AM   #5644
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
The Russian broad gauge network is huge and it WORKS. No point in changing it - they are better off developing high speed trains of wide gauge.

Spaniards have built Talgo 250/Renfe class 130 trains - which run at 220 km/h on 1668 mm and 250 km/h on 1435 mm. They have already built 1520 mm Talgo 130, and it is running on Tashkent-Samarkand high speed railway.

So how about buying some variable gauge Talgo 250 trains which could travel Urumqi-Almaty on 1435 mm and after changing gauge at a gauge changer somewhere in Almaty station - rather faster than bogie exchange - continue some to Astana and then Moscow, some to Tashkent, Samarkand and then Ashabad?

Or constrain schedule options.

How is the Hangzhou-Changsha-Kunming high speed railway progressing?
The Russian Gauge network is large, but it only accounts for about 5% of global passenger-km. So basically that means any Russian passenger train has to be custom designed/modified and then built.

In comparison Standard Gauge is used in the USA, Europe and in China, and accounts for the vast majority of passenger-km and railway R&D in the world.
So everything standard gauge really is cheaper, faster and better.

I agree that Russia should be licensing the Talgo technology if they really want to get into high-speed trains. But given how sparsely populated Russia is and how few HSR lines have enough people to justify construction, it's probably better just to do a one-off purchase because they'll really struggle to sustain the design. It takes years of learning and continuous refinement to get a train design right.
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 08:31 AM   #5645
China Hand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 705
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
In any case this seems moot. Kazakhstan is building a new line between Astana and Almaty, with the goal of being finished by the time Astana holds EXPO2017. It will use Russian gauge (1520mm)
Right there you know that the Chinese dream will not happen. HSR? Yes. China sourced? Could be. But one continuous continguous line? No. K are going with the Russian gauge.

China is standard gauge, 1535mm.
China Hand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:04 AM   #5646
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
The Russian Gauge network is large, but it only accounts for about 5% of global passenger-km. So basically that means any Russian passenger train has to be custom designed/modified and then built.
A standard design on broad gauge axles doesn't involve much in the way of extra development or tooling costs.

Quote:
In comparison Standard Gauge is used in the USA, Europe and in China, and accounts for the vast majority of passenger-km and railway R&D in the world.
So everything standard gauge really is cheaper, faster and better.
The standard gauge doesn't mean a unified rolling stock market. The US has the same gauge as Europe and China, however an off-the-shelf European train can't run in the US. In fact, taking an European train set and modifying it for the Russian network is trivial compared to modifying it for the US.

As to passenger volumes: Don't discount Japan (narrow gauge) and India (broad gauge).
__________________

Think liked this post
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:16 AM   #5647
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,980
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
I agree that Russia should be licensing the Talgo technology if they really want to get into high-speed trains.
Not really.

Variable gauge technology is needed for direct trains across breaks of gauge. It does mean a persistent cost in terms of weight and braking capacity. Spain uses fixed gauge trainsets alongside variable gauge ones, because fixed gauge trains are cheaper where the route stays on single gauge.

Likewise, Russia should be developing high speed trains on wide gauge, for Moscow-St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg-Helsinki, Helsinki-Lahti.... Variable gauge is proper for the direct trains across break of gauge, like Oulu-Boden, Tallinn-Warszawa, Moscow-Berlin, Baku-Tbilisi-Ankara, Ashabad-Teheran, Astana-Urumqi, Ulan-Bator-Beijing, Vladivostok-Changchun...

On the Kunming end: 1000 mm is not very well suited for high speed due to stability problems. Queensland does operate 160 km/h on 1067 mm, but this is hard. Therefore Burma, whose mainlines are 1000 mm, is better off accepting the high speed lines from Kunming at 1435 mm, and connecting to local train network.

But Bangladesh has some 1676 mm, and India is standardizing on 1676 mm and regauging 1000 mm lines. Therefore, China can buy Talgo trainsets designed for 1435/1676 mm (besides the sets of 1435/1520 mm on northern border) and send them across Hump... Where should the crossing to 1676 mm width be? Calcutta? Dhacca? Chittagong?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:39 AM   #5648
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,303
Likes (Received): 540

Quote:
Originally Posted by China Hand View Post
Right there you know that the Chinese dream will not happen. HSR? Yes. China sourced? Could be. But one continuous continguous line? No. K are going with the Russian gauge.
Or that the dream of long-distance train is just a beautiful dream, whether outside China or inside China. HSR can compete with air for being more comfortable, and being more point to point (though not always in China where the station can be as inconveniently located as the airport; this will improve, but so will the airport), the security is less annoying and less quick. This gives an advantage for short-distance trips (where planes are at a disadvantage anyway, take-off and landing is very energy intensive and uncomfortable for passengers, something cruising at high altitude is not).

For trains to compete long-distance with planes (speed 900 km/h), they would probably have to go at speeds of 600 km/h or more, in which case the drag would be absolutely atrocious. That could possibly be mollified with long trains (16 cars, 32 cars or something), but that would affect frequency. More importantly, infrastructure made today couldn't be upgraded to such a speed, and would have to be rebuilt, leaving a very expensive network for local transport (where it can easily beat cars and busses for trunk lines).

To actually be an improvement, and thus justifying the cost, it would need to exceed. That means 1000+ km/h trains in evacuated tubes or similar. Never mind that nothing such exists, the cost of building such a thing when it were to exist would be absolutely humongous, even on a comparably short route, say Beijing-Shanghai. Even then air transport could easily compete if origin and destination were not on the line.

In a way we are back 50 years ago in the 1960s when the beautiful dream was the supersonic flight. Concorde aside, it never happened.
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:51 AM   #5649
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,980
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
HSR can compete with air for being more comfortable, and being more point to point (though not always in China where the station can be as inconveniently located as the airport; this will improve, but so will the airport), the security is less annoying and less quick. This gives an advantage for short-distance trips (where planes are at a disadvantage anyway, take-off and landing is very energy intensive and uncomfortable for passengers, something cruising at high altitude is not).

For trains to compete long-distance with planes (speed 900 km/h), they would probably have to go at speeds of 600 km/h or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
In a way we are back 50 years ago in the 1960s when the beautiful dream was the supersonic flight. Concorde aside, it never happened.
Subsonic flights could and did outcompete Concorde on comfort and costs - despite flying at less than half the speed.

So could high speed trains likewise outcompete planes?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 05:25 PM   #5650
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
A standard design on broad gauge axles doesn't involve much in the way of extra development or tooling costs.



The standard gauge doesn't mean a unified rolling stock market. The US has the same gauge as Europe and China, however an off-the-shelf European train can't run in the US. In fact, taking an European train set and modifying it for the Russian network is trivial compared to modifying it for the US.

As to passenger volumes: Don't discount Japan (narrow gauge) and India (broad gauge).
Changing axles is a major undertaking because it means all the design calculations have to be redone and components modified, and new tooling is actually pretty expensive.

And we're talking about HSR here, where there is effectively a unified market for rolling stock.
Note that because China is in the process of building out more high-speed rail than the rest of the world has in the past 50years.

To do so, train designs from Alstom, Kawasaki, Siemens and Bombardier have already been localised for Chinese standards - which are very very similar to Euro-HSR standards.

And a quick back of the envelope calculation ends up with China and Europe alone, accounting for almost half of all passenger-km in the world (for both HSR and non-HSR). So standard gauge is where most of the R&D money is going, and where most of the production capacity is.

Plus note that HSR in Japan is standard gauge and the future Indian HSR network may be standard gauge as well.
__________________

FM 2258, Bannor liked this post
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 05:39 PM   #5651
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Not really.

Variable gauge technology is needed for direct trains across breaks of gauge. It does mean a persistent cost in terms of weight and braking capacity. Spain uses fixed gauge trainsets alongside variable gauge ones, because fixed gauge trains are cheaper where the route stays on single gauge.

Likewise, Russia should be developing high speed trains on wide gauge, for Moscow-St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg-Helsinki, Helsinki-Lahti.... Variable gauge is proper for the direct trains across break of gauge, like Oulu-Boden, Tallinn-Warszawa, Moscow-Berlin, Baku-Tbilisi-Ankara, Ashabad-Teheran, Astana-Urumqi, Ulan-Bator-Beijing, Vladivostok-Changchun...

On the Kunming end: 1000 mm is not very well suited for high speed due to stability problems. Queensland does operate 160 km/h on 1067 mm, but this is hard. Therefore Burma, whose mainlines are 1000 mm, is better off accepting the high speed lines from Kunming at 1435 mm, and connecting to local train network.

But Bangladesh has some 1676 mm, and India is standardizing on 1676 mm and regauging 1000 mm lines. Therefore, China can buy Talgo trainsets designed for 1435/1676 mm (besides the sets of 1435/1520 mm on northern border) and send them across Hump... Where should the crossing to 1676 mm width be? Calcutta? Dhacca? Chittagong?
I should have clarified somewhat more. I suggested Talgo for Russia because can it can handle variable gauges AND it also uses tilting technology for HS running on existing networks, which is a very useful feature in Russia.
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 08:05 PM   #5652
admns
Registered User
 
admns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: hanoi
Posts: 22
Likes (Received): 3

to everyone chinas 2020 hsr construction plan excludes intercontinental railway connection. Kazakh hsr should be discussed elsewhere.
admns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 08:28 PM   #5653
China Hand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 705
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Subsonic flights could and did out compete Concorde on comfort and costs - despite flying at less than half the speed.

So could high speed trains likewise out compete planes?
I think they are in China. Lots of latent demand that appears when a CRH line opens up between major cities. Everything from comfort, time saving getting to/from the station, easier security procedures that save time, event oriented travel by families, and the fact that more than a few people do not like to fly and prefer to stay on the ground.

You do not need to exceed absolute speed to have an advantage. Many people place a value on time, but also intangibles will modify that such that more time may not 'cost more' to a given person.

I, for one, want to take a Principal Class seat to Guangzhou just because. I can fly for the same or less, in much less time. But sleeping whilst laying down in my seat on the way there? I cannot pass that up!
China Hand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 08:52 PM   #5654
Bannor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 507
Likes (Received): 107

It is all very situational when it comes to train or plane. Some might live or work closer to the train station or the airport. And that is a major variable.

Personally I like flying more, but getting a window seat is very important either if it is on a train or a plane. There are big improvements in new planes too. Like the Dreamliner and the A380 and A350, with larger windows, and new internal design. And taking a HSR can also be an attraction of its own. And like most planes each have their own niche, HSR, subways, monorails and maglevs are niches of their own as well.

The variation is good, and there is a market for whats being built. I don't think trains will completely phase out planes in China either, simply because of how much Chinese plane prizes can still fall for the mass market. Just a small comparison to Ryanair while also looking at newer jets with less fuel consumption should give you an idea. HSR in China is still on the testbed when it comes to mainteinance, but I think we will see in the long run which one will be most affordable, and the market will go in that direction.
Bannor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:51 PM   #5655
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,303
Likes (Received): 540

Quote:
Originally Posted by admns View Post
to everyone chinas 2020 hsr construction plan excludes intercontinental railway connection. Kazakh hsr should be discussed elsewhere.
You are right. I am in good parts to blame for this side-track. Ürümqi-Almaty/Astana was bordering on being on-topic, Russian HSR is not. We should take this to another thread. ASIA | Pan Asian Railway is the closest one I could find.
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 07:34 AM   #5656
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
Changing axles is a major undertaking because it means all the design calculations have to be redone and components modified, and new tooling is actually pretty expensive.
Western European designs are being exported to Russian gauge countries, so it does not appear to impose a big barrier.

Quote:
To do so, train designs from Alstom, Kawasaki, Siemens and Bombardier have already been localised for Chinese standards - which are very very similar to Euro-HSR standards.
...
And a quick back of the envelope calculation ends up with China and Europe alone, accounting for almost half of all passenger-km in the world (for both HSR and non-HSR). So standard gauge is where most of the R&D money is going, and where most of the production capacity is.
All rolling stock manufacturers will happily build trains to any track and loading gauge you specify. The Chinese HST's are actually quite different from European ones. They have wider car bodies for example.

Quote:
Plus note that HSR in Japan is standard gauge and the future Indian HSR network may be standard gauge as well.
They'll build it to standard gauge. Indian standard gauge. 1676mm. There is no case to be made for going for a different gauge.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 11:43 AM   #5657
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,303
Likes (Received): 540

If the high-speed rail is an upgrade of existing low-speed rail, of course you wouldn't change gauge. If on the other hand you build new HSR track not intended to integrate with the existing system you would likely be better off using standard gauge. This is what Spain did with their AVE high-speed network.

All this is unrelated to Chinese HSR, which is all standard gauge. Please continue this discussion at ASIA | Pan Asian Railway. It's all there...
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 12:05 PM   #5658
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,980
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
If the high-speed rail is an upgrade of existing low-speed rail, of course you wouldn't change gauge. If on the other hand you build new HSR track not intended to integrate with the existing system you would likely be better off using standard gauge. This is what Spain did with their AVE high-speed network.
Yes, and Spain is probably at a serious disadvantage compared to France whose TGV is naturally integrated with low-speed rail. Spain would have been better off sticking to their gauge.

Back to China. One problem is integration of the high speed lines into a functioning network.

Harbin-Shenyang-Dalian high speed railway is an isolated line, for now.

How is the progress of Tianjin-Qinhuangdao high speed railway?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 11:35 PM   #5659
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Western European designs are being exported to Russian gauge countries, so it does not appear to impose a big barrier.


All rolling stock manufacturers will happily build trains to any track and loading gauge you specify. The Chinese HST's are actually quite different from European ones. They have wider car bodies for example.



They'll build it to standard gauge. Indian standard gauge. 1676mm. There is no case to be made for going for a different gauge.
I'm only aware of 2 designs with a handful of trains to be delivered with Russian Gauge.

Contrast that with the situation in China where 6+ HSR designs initially trialed on the tracks.
Over 800 HSR trains comprising almost 10000cars have now been mass-produced in China.
===

You're right that any manufacturer will build to a different gauge and loading.

But the Russian gauge market is just too small to support lots of manufacturers competing with lower prices and their best products.

I say that there is effectively a single market for HSR trains in Europe and China because the standards are very similar.

Trains in the EU are designed to a common interoperability standard, which means they have to work in over 20 different countries on standard gauge, each with their own ways of working, loading gauge, signalling etc. So the Chinese situation is pretty much covered already.

So when China started from scratch 6 years ago, they could apply the almost the same standards and operating manuals from Europe. Then you have to look at all the technology crossover and duplicate production facilities between the train manufacturers in Europe and China.

===

Where are you getting your information on Indian gauge HSR from??

Kerala plans high speed rail network

The high-speed corridor would have two parallel tracks in the standard gauge system as is the case with Delhi Metro Rail."

http://www.business-standard.com/art...1600096_1.html

Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Railway Corridor
Japan International Consultants for Transportation Co., Ltd. (JIC)


We propose standard gauge for HSR in India (even though
conventional line has broad gauge), as following reasons:
 Main stream of world HSR is standard gauge
 Capacity of the conventional line would be limited for HSR
 Securing safety in different speeds of railway operations

http://www.jterc.or.jp/english/kokus...esentation.pdf
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 11:54 PM   #5660
traveler
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,887
Likes (Received): 299

Nice!
traveler 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 04:21 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