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 November 19th, 2015, 01:39 AM   #10301
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 381

Quote:
Originally Posted by flankerjun View Post
New CRH train reach 385km/h in test

That is nice but it does not cut for me until it breaks the 380A record at 486.1 km/h

__________________

hightower1 liked this post
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 19th, 2015, 01:59 AM   #10302
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,977
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
That is nice but it does not cut for me until it breaks the 380A record at 486.1 km/h

I prefer the record of the CRH380BL at 487.3 km/h.
__________________

Sopomon liked this post
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 06:17 AM   #10303
flankerjun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shenyang/Wuhan
Posts: 461
Likes (Received): 1230

more pictures



__________________

FM 2258, ARHANGELstGAVRIIL liked this post
flankerjun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 07:47 AM   #10304
skyridgeline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,524
Likes (Received): 1214

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
I refer back to what was previously discussed - average urban incomes are not enough to sustain commutes on the CRH. So what is the purpose of adding stations even if you myopically chop up city pairs along these long lines?
Large population base, environmental constraints and future demands are good enough reasons.


According to the 2014 GLOBAL METRO MONITOR MAP ( brookings.edu ) :

Suzhou US $52,020 (GDP per capita (PPP))
Wuxi 44,760
Nanjing 31,434
Changzhou 30,205
Hangzhou 24,637
Shanghai 24,065
Ningbo 23,153
skyridgeline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 08:08 AM   #10305
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,926
Likes (Received): 18188

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyridgeline View Post
Large population base, environmental constraints and future demands are good enough reasons.


According to the 2014 GLOBAL METRO MONITOR MAP ( brookings.edu ) :

Suzhou US $52,020 (GDP per capita (PPP))
Wuxi 44,760
Nanjing 31,434
Changzhou 30,205
Hangzhou 24,637
Shanghai 24,065
Ningbo 23,153
PPP basis distorts actual affordability. You need to go to the raw figures :

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...t_21020693.htm

The average salary of urban employees in Beijing's public sector is 102,268 yuan ($16 475), as much as 1.9 times more than those in the private sector.

Urban employees in the private sector earned 36,390 yuan on average, experiencing a growth rate that surged by 11.3 percent, or 9.0 percent in real terms.




With these types of incomes, high-speed rail is not a commuting option for the general masses, regardless of how large these masses is.

Once incomes rise in the future, then adding stations and commuter-friendly schedules may become more feasible.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 09:52 AM   #10306
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
So what is the purpose of adding stations even if you myopically chop up city pairs along these long lines?
One obvious reason is to serve suburbs of major cities and decrease both crowding and simple inconvenience of long connection to actual destination.
Beijing South-Tianjin is 116,9 km
The only station so far is Wuqing. 33,7 km from Tianjin.
What is at or around Wuqing? Do people commute Tianjin-Wuqing by CRH? Does Tianjin Metro serve Wuqing Station?
On the other hand, 21,3 km from Beijing South, Yizhuang Station has been prepared.
And a Beijing metro line has been prepared to Yizhuang.

If Yizhuang Station were opened, people whose destination is in Tongzhou or in southeast suburbs of Beijing could, instead of riding to Beijing South and then travelling back towards Tongzhou, get off at Yizhuang and then ride Yizhuang Line to their actual destination.

Are there any plans to open Yizhuang Station?
What does Yizhuang Station look like now?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 10:04 AM   #10307
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,926
Likes (Received): 18188

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
One obvious reason is to serve suburbs of major cities and decrease both crowding and simple inconvenience of long connection to actual destination.
Beijing South-Tianjin is 116,9 km
The only station so far is Wuqing. 33,7 km from Tianjin.
What is at or around Wuqing? Do people commute Tianjin-Wuqing by CRH? Does Tianjin Metro serve Wuqing Station?
On the other hand, 21,3 km from Beijing South, Yizhuang Station has been prepared.
And a Beijing metro line has been prepared to Yizhuang.

If Yizhuang Station were opened, people whose destination is in Tongzhou or in southeast suburbs of Beijing could, instead of riding to Beijing South and then travelling back towards Tongzhou, get off at Yizhuang and then ride Yizhuang Line to their actual destination.

Are there any plans to open Yizhuang Station?
What does Yizhuang Station look like now?
There is a reason why people live far out - they can't afford otherwise. So these are not the types of people who will likely ride at the top end of the income distribution. So you advocate convenience and crowd relief but have you considered whether people can afford a CRH commute?
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 12:26 PM   #10308
flankerjun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shenyang/Wuhan
Posts: 461
Likes (Received): 1230

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
That is nice but it does not cut for me until it breaks the 380A record at 486.1 km/h

This train has a new bogie,so it is a milestone for this train.
The power of this train is 10000KW,8 cars,to break the record of 380AL is a little difficult,

Last edited by flankerjun; November 19th, 2015 at 12:33 PM.
flankerjun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 01:42 PM   #10309
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
There is a reason why people live far out - they can't afford otherwise.
Another reason: thatīs where they are from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
So these are not the types of people who will likely ride at the top end of the income distribution.
It is not only the people who live far out who ride. People who work far out also have to ride.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
So you advocate convenience and crowd relief but have you considered whether people can afford a CRH commute?
Could Japanese afford the cost of Shinkansen "commute" in 1964?
Could they afford the time, then or now?
The 346 km section Tokyo-Nagoya now has 11 intermediate stations. On opening, back in 1964, there were 7. Japanese did add 4 stations, of which Shin-Fuji and Mikawa-Anjo were new (both opened in 1988). Mishima and Kakegawa were Shinkansen passing into existing station without stopping, but were built into Shinkansen stations in 1969 and 1988 respectively.
Take Toyohashi. 274 km from Tokyo. An existing midsized city - 68 km from Nagoya, 35 km from Hamamatsu.
No Nozomi has ever served Toyohashi.
Kodama travel time Toyohashi-Tokyo is 2:10...2:21.
Do you think the time is affordable for "commute" as in going to work every day? Do you think the money was affordable for poor workers back in 1964?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 01:55 PM   #10310
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,926
Likes (Received): 18188

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Another reason: thatīs where they are from.

It is not only the people who live far out who ride. People who work far out also have to ride.


Could Japanese afford the cost of Shinkansen "commute" in 1964?
Could they afford the time, then or now?
The 346 km section Tokyo-Nagoya now has 11 intermediate stations. On opening, back in 1964, there were 7. Japanese did add 4 stations, of which Shin-Fuji and Mikawa-Anjo were new (both opened in 1988). Mishima and Kakegawa were Shinkansen passing into existing station without stopping, but were built into Shinkansen stations in 1969 and 1988 respectively.
Take Toyohashi. 274 km from Tokyo. An existing midsized city - 68 km from Nagoya, 35 km from Hamamatsu.
No Nozomi has ever served Toyohashi.
Kodama travel time Toyohashi-Tokyo is 2:10...2:21.
Do you think the time is affordable for "commute" as in going to work every day? Do you think the money was affordable for poor workers back in 1964?
Japan is far shorter country than China when you measure their high-speed line from end-to-end. You can't apply their type of station spacing to China. Do you think Harbin - Beijing - Shenzhen is comparable to Kagoshima - Tokyo - Aomori? Before even considering affordability, increasing the number of stations on such a long line can easily cannibalize journey times. This will jeopardize Beijing - Shanghai, which is a long journey already with a very marginal time advantage against airplanes.

You need to explain how current average urban incomes can sustain even short-distance suburban commutes on the CRH. So far and as before, you have not presented any analysis to indicate these are affordable. New stations and services are driven by affordability, not how other countries build their networks, nor just population size alone.

It is this type of affordability that is driving cheaper public transport options, such as a new subway line, or even slower buses. The residents need to make the best of what their wallet can afford.

Blindly applying other countries' high-speed rail development to China shows a lack of understanding of China's demographics, income profile, and rail transportation needs.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 07:07 PM   #10311
skyridgeline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,524
Likes (Received): 1214

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
PPP basis distorts actual affordability. You need to go to the raw figures :

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...t_21020693.htm

The average salary of urban employees in Beijing's public sector is 102,268 yuan ($16 475), as much as 1.9 times more than those in the private sector.

Urban employees in the private sector earned 36,390 yuan on average, experiencing a growth rate that surged by 11.3 percent, or 9.0 percent in real terms.




With these types of incomes, high-speed rail is not a commuting option for the general masses, regardless of how large these masses is.

Once incomes rise in the future, then adding stations and commuter-friendly schedules may become more feasible.

They must not be using the income approach to calculate those GDP numbers .

Chinese citizens do not report as much as US$2.34 trillion of their incomes every year, according to Wang Xiaolu, a Chinese economics scholar at the National Economic Research Institute in Beijing.
- wantchinatimes.com - Staff Reporter 2013-03-10 16:07 (GMT+8)


We utilized the well-known relationship between Engel’s coefficient and income level through two different approaches to deduce the true level of household income for each of the seven Chinese income categories (lowest income, low income, lower middle income, middle income, upper middle income, high income, and highest income). We found that the ratio of our estimated income to official income increased from 1.12 for the lowest income group to 3.19 for the highest income group. Total household disposable income in 2008 is RMB 14.0 trillion according to the official data but RMB 23.2 trillion according to our estimate ...
- http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/...2010-12-25.pdf


High speed rail is a long term investment. For China, build it now is a very wise/sensible decision for many reasons.
skyridgeline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 07:38 PM   #10312
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,926
Likes (Received): 18188

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyridgeline View Post
They must not be using the income approach to calculate those GDP numbers .

Chinese citizens do not report as much as US$2.34 trillion of their incomes every year, according to Wang Xiaolu, a Chinese economics scholar at the National Economic Research Institute in Beijing.
- wantchinatimes.com - Staff Reporter 2013-03-10 16:07 (GMT+8)


We utilized the well-known relationship between Engel’s coefficient and income level through two different approaches to deduce the true level of household income for each of the seven Chinese income categories (lowest income, low income, lower middle income, middle income, upper middle income, high income, and highest income). We found that the ratio of our estimated income to official income increased from 1.12 for the lowest income group to 3.19 for the highest income group. Total household disposable income in 2008 is RMB 14.0 trillion according to the official data but RMB 23.2 trillion according to our estimate ...
- http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/...2010-12-25.pdf


High speed rail is a long term investment. For China, build it now is a very wise/sensible decision for many reasons.
I don't see how anyone can provide an accurate figure of unreported income - isn't this contradictory? Chinese people are not living Western lifestyles but reporting mediocre incomes. Also, what would constitute an unreported income anyway - one-offs that probably have disappeared now in the recent economic and market turmoil plus the anti-corruption sweep? Does it apply to the average folk or the privileged few in the upper echelons?

You don't build expensive infrastructure to let it ferment for 20-30 years before the economics can catch up to use it. After a hefty construction bill, it also costs a lot to maintain. The Taiwanese are now suffering the consequences of their debt-financed THSRC line.

The fact is CRH is too expensive for the average urban resident to use for a daily commute.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2015, 08:12 PM   #10313
_Night City Dream_
Registered User
 
_Night City Dream_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 19,163
Likes (Received): 101747

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
The fact is CRH is too expensive for the average urban resident to use for a daily commute.
Still, every day I face loads of farmers and peasants on the train, very often tickets are sold out and I just can't take a train.

I think Chinese people CAN afford it.
__________________
Big Cities is one of the major inventions by human beings

My Baku / Мой Баку / 我的巴库

_Night City Dream_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 12:01 AM   #10314
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Japan is far shorter country than China when you measure their high-speed line from end-to-end. You can't apply their type of station spacing to China.
You can. And should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Do you think Harbin - Beijing - Shenzhen is comparable to Kagoshima - Tokyo - Aomori?
No. But, for example, Nanjing-Beijing, 1023 km, is comparable to Hakata-Tokyo, 1069 km.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Before even considering affordability, increasing the number of stations on such a long line can easily cannibalize journey times.
It need not. Refer to Taiwan HSR again. Adding stations where expresses do not stop has no effect on the journey times of expresses which do not stop there.
Again, look at Hakata-Tokyo.
I count 33 stations between Hakata and Tokyo (not counting the termini).
Nozomi trains cover the distance in slightly over 5 hours - 5:08, 5:01...
And they donīt make 33 stops! They make 10 stops.
Compare Beijing-Nanjing: trip time 3:39 on nonstop G1 and G3; up to 7 intermediate stops can be made in 4:28 (G411).
A Shinkansen train Hakata-Tokyo with all 33 stops would take something like 8:45. It is not a coincidence that no such trains exist: Kodama trains run and make all stops on Hakata-Osaka and on Osaka-Tokyo, but these are different trains.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
This will jeopardize Beijing - Shanghai, which is a long journey already with a very marginal time advantage against airplanes.
About as long as Hakata-Tokyo, which also competes against airplanes.
But there is another obvious disadvantage of CRH against planes. Arriving in Shanghai from Beijing, you are stuck at Hongqiao airport - which you could have reached by plane anyway. You still have to reach your actual destination in central Shanghai.

How about, run express trains Beijing-Shanghai which pick up passengers at a few major stations (Tianjin, Jinan West, Nanjing, Suzhou...) but which at Kunshan South cross over from Beijing-Shanghai HSR to Nanjing-Shanghai HSR, and terminate at Shanghai Station, rather than Hongqiao Airport?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
You need to explain how current average urban incomes can sustain even short-distance suburban commutes on the CRH. So far and as before, you have not presented any analysis to indicate these are affordable. New stations and services are driven by affordability,
And you need to explain why it has to be "commuters"
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post

It is this type of affordability that is driving cheaper public transport options, such as a new subway line, or even slower buses. The residents need to make the best of what their wallet can afford.
I emphatically agree. China needs frequent stations, and frequent services, on the old rail lines. In addition to CRH.
__________________

Silly_Walks liked this post
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 01:18 AM   #10315
skyridgeline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,524
Likes (Received): 1214

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
I don't see how anyone can provide an accurate figure of unreported income - isn't this contradictory? Chinese people are not living Western lifestyles but reporting mediocre incomes. Also, what would constitute an unreported income anyway - one-offs that probably have disappeared now in the recent economic and market turmoil plus the anti-corruption sweep? Does it apply to the average folk or the privileged few in the upper echelons?

You don't build expensive infrastructure to let it ferment for 20-30 years before the economics can catch up to use it. After a hefty construction bill, it also costs a lot to maintain. The Taiwanese are now suffering the consequences of their debt-financed THSRC line.

The fact is CRH is too expensive for the average urban resident to use for a daily commute.

China's total toll road revenue for 2014 is ~ US $62 billion. Shanghai sold ~ US $1 billion worth of licence plates annually for years. Contradictory? To your assertion maybe.

And don't forget about externalities such as energy/environmental security.

Might be expensive for the average person, but maybe 1/3 of China's "urban" population can afford CRH right now?
skyridgeline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 01:41 AM   #10316
Pansori
planquadrat
 
Pansori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London - Vilnius
Posts: 9,973
Likes (Received): 6909

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyridgeline View Post
China's total toll road revenue for 2014 is ~ US $62 billion. Shanghai sold ~ US $1 billion worth of licence plates annually for years. Contradictory? To your assertion maybe.

And don't forget about externalities such as energy/environmental security.

Might be expensive for the average person, but maybe 1/3 of China's "urban" population can afford CRH right now?
It should not be forgotten that large scale transport projects are built with long-term in mind. China is building HSR not just to satisfy today's demand but to satisfy demand in 2050. This is the problem in hkskyline's position, he only takes short-term/present into consideration completely ignoring the implications of long-term or even medium-term development in China's social order (including income level). This is why such position is pretty much invalid.
Pansori no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 03:55 AM   #10317
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,926
Likes (Received): 18188

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Night City Dream_ View Post
Still, every day I face loads of farmers and peasants on the train, very often tickets are sold out and I just can't take a train.

I think Chinese people CAN afford it.
Looking at the average incomes, that is not the case - not for everyday use. They may be able to afford an occasional weekend trip, but a peasant or migrant cannot afford routine, regular use. These people move to the cities and are provided housing already because their wages are so low, so I doubt they even consider using CRH unless in the worst case scenario they cannot secure the slow train or bus trickets for their annual CNY hometown.

The other aspect which I have raised in a previous discussion of this same topic in this same thread is why would people want to spend a fortune commuting on CRH when average urban rents are low? Would you half of your rent on public transport? What kind of rental savings can you realistically achieve by moving far with CRH transport costs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
You can. And should.

No. But, for example, Nanjing-Beijing, 1023 km, is comparable to Hakata-Tokyo, 1069 km.
I don't see the purpose of chopping the lines for a myopic analysis. Are you suggesting people commute between Fukuoka and Tokyo on a daily basis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
It need not. Refer to Taiwan HSR again. Adding stations where expresses do not stop has no effect on the journey times of expresses which do not stop there.
Again, look at Hakata-Tokyo.
Adding stations in between means less express trains can run on the line overall because they are being held up by the slow trains occupying the same track. That means you jeopardize the long-distance routes, which are the business case for CRH right now, by putting in short-distance runs that people cannot afford to use on a daily basis. You can overcome that problem by duplicating tracks but who would want to spend so much money without a proper business case? That is silly transport planning in light of China's current income profile.

The proper analysis should be Beijing - Shanghai, which is what that line was built for originally, not Beijing - Nanjing. Again, you can't myopically chop and dice things up. You need to understand where the customers come from and why they take the train.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
About as long as Hakata-Tokyo, which also competes against airplanes.
But there is another obvious disadvantage of CRH against planes. Arriving in Shanghai from Beijing, you are stuck at Hongqiao airport - which you could have reached by plane anyway. You still have to reach your actual destination in central Shanghai.
Not really a big issue since Hongqiao is directly connected to 2 subway lines that will get you into town in about 30-40 minutes - a reasonable amount of time although not ideal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
I emphatically agree. China needs frequent stations, and frequent services, on the old rail lines. In addition to CRH.
The old rail network will still have its customer base - the migrants, peasants, and below. When there were attempts to "rationalize" these services, there was a huge uproar among the lower classes that they cannot afford CRH for their hometown pilgrimmage at Chinese New Year. The Z and K trains (and their friends) will always have their role in China, given the income profile and disparity across the country. This obvious fact needs to be remembered when people start thinking whether CRH commutes are feasible these days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyridgeline View Post
China's total toll road revenue for 2014 is ~ US $62 billion. Shanghai sold ~ US $1 billion worth of licence plates annually for years. Contradictory? To your assertion maybe.

And don't forget about externalities such as energy/environmental security.

Might be expensive for the average person, but maybe 1/3 of China's "urban" population can afford CRH right now?
So are you saying the toll revenue should be redistributed to per capita income? Keep in mind a lot of cargo travels by road as well, and those trucks need licence plates, too.

Looking at the average urban income, you need to be far high up on the food chain to afford CRH. Even if you hit the average on the dot, CRH would be too expensive for daily use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pansori View Post
It should not be forgotten that large scale transport projects are built with long-term in mind. China is building HSR not just to satisfy today's demand but to satisfy demand in 2050. This is the problem in hkskyline's position, he only takes short-term/present into consideration completely ignoring the implications of long-term or even medium-term development in China's social order (including income level). This is why such position is pretty much invalid.
The operator would have needed a state bailout or gone through bankruptcy paying all the interest on the debt incurred to build extravagant projects that are not used by the passengers they were built for. You plan for 2050 by building new lines but you don't build and commission all the stations 35 years before they are realistically viable.

In these days of austerity, white elephants like your "long-term planning" fantasies are no longer encouraged. China has enough of these white elephants on display already.

I still see a lot of hand-waving "economics" and no realistic analysis of incomes, rents, and train ticket prices - the drivers of passenger use, and why CRH was designed and operates in this way today.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!

k.k.jetcar liked this post
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 04:54 AM   #10318
ChinaBRICS
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 497

TGV is also too expensive for daily use for middle class in France.
Even more expensive for middle class in Germany or Spain.
ChinaBRICS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 04:56 AM   #10319
ChinaBRICS
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 497

HSR is not a commuting option anywhere.
ChinaBRICS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2015, 07:35 AM   #10320
skyridgeline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,524
Likes (Received): 1214

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
...



So are you saying the toll revenue should be redistributed to per capita income? Keep in mind a lot of cargo travels by road as well, and those trucks need licence plates, too.

Looking at the average urban income, you need to be far high up on the food chain to afford CRH. Even if you hit the average on the dot, CRH would be too expensive for daily use.

....
Trucks and buses combined for a total of ~10%?

Why daily? Maybe once a week? There are a lot of people living in the areas along the route.
skyridgeline 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 07:47 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