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.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old July 31st, 2012, 01:57 PM   #61
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): 63091

Can anyone tell me what China has done that is truly revolutionary in high speed rail.

The only thing I can think of is the speed in which the network is being built, but then again it's all done with conventional construction methods. Building a line more straight isn't really revolutionary either, it's just using the geographical advantages of a flat country. Upgrading existing foreign High Speed Train technology also isn't that revolutionary, it didn't yet result in game changing trains. The operating speeds at the start where revolutionary, but since that was a failure it didn't cause a revolution. And when it comes to safety, reliability, economical operation China is miles behind other countries.

China is using the most of all the technology on offer but has yet to do something that will really change the game.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 está en línea ahora  

Sponsored Links
Old July 31st, 2012, 04:34 PM   #62
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

they haven't. The high speed rail revolution can be jointly attributed to the countries of Japan and France, the companies Siemens, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, some other Japanese one, Alstom, and then loads of others involved in signalling and hardware and design such as Arup and that German one previously mentioned.

I think the thread itself misunderstands the complexity and depth of the high speed rail industry across the globe.
__________________
"There is no problem so bad that you can't make it worse" - Chris Hadfield
makita09 no está en línea  
Old July 31st, 2012, 04:51 PM   #63
gramercy
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 799

China is not flat...
gramercy no está en línea  
Old July 31st, 2012, 05:23 PM   #64
PredyGr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 69
Likes (Received): 4

Code:
                                                            speed 350km/h
Minimum radius of curvature (m)*:            
        - reccomended                                             7143
        - normal                                                  6250
        - exceptional                                             5556

* from data given by SNCF
source UIC

The radius of curvature it's not the only parameter that determines the max. permissible speed of a line. Some other parameters are: maximum cant, cant deficiency, excess of cant and a few others. So, comparing different lines with min. curve radius as basis will not give conclusive results. For example a mixed traffic line and a passenger only line can both have a maximum design speed of 300kmph. The latter can be designed with min. curve radius of 3350m with a max cant of 170mm as is the case with the KRM. The mixed traffic line will have a considerable larger min. curve radius because of the limitations imposed by the freight traffic and the freight rolling stock, cant, length of the transition curves, etc. The design of a new line is extremely complicated.

IMHO the high speed revolution was the opening of the tokaido shinkansen, since then mostly is evolution. So again IMHO, the leaders in high speed rail evolution is Japan and France.

I consider revolutionary rolling stock, the NGT project from DLR
PredyGr no está en línea  
Old July 31st, 2012, 05:54 PM   #65
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): 63091

Quote:
Originally Posted by gramercy View Post
China is not flat...
A big part of the Eastern coastal areas is very flat, the Beijing - Shanghai line. The only bump is between Jinan and Taian, and that part of the line could even be constructed in a very straight line. And the big mountainous areas are all at the edges of the country. All in all it's not the most challenging country to construct new lines especially between the important cities. Only it's size is what makes it remarkable, but that's not really a problem if you have almost unlimited resources.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 está en línea ahora  
Old July 31st, 2012, 09:07 PM   #66
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

This thread is a flamebait thus should be closed.
__________________
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  
Old July 31st, 2012, 11:25 PM   #67
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,077
Likes (Received): 8825

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmwv View Post
This thread is a flamebait thus should be closed.
Not quite yet. It COULD be an interesting discussion about the technologies on offer when it comes to HSR, however, as is all too evident, it has also become a contest as to who has the bigger, who can go the fastest blahblahblah. How about celebrating revolutionary developments rather than saying "BLAHBLAH IS FASTER THAN BLAHBLAH".

I would also, very much urge members to NOT resort to personal attacks and to contact me if any occur (as I cannot read every post in every thread). I have been alerted to this thread and will keep my eyes on it from now on.
Svartmetall está en línea ahora  
Old August 1st, 2012, 01:44 AM   #68
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 2,004
Likes (Received): 1039

On that train of thought (pardon the pun), I'm curious if anyone has any information or thoughts on the upcoming >360kmh operating speeds planned for the next generation of high speed trains, having in mind specifically the CRH500 trains, the KTX-III, the L0 series shinkansen, and the Talgo Avril.

Granted, most if not all of these will likely end up operating at the 350kmh threshold due to concerns of economy and efficiency, but what comes after that? Will we see a prolonged period of logistical adjustments to compensate for this performance ceiling? It seems more likely to me than a rapid switchover to maglev.

Obviously, geo- and demographical constraints will make ever-higher traditional HSR speeds easier and/or more plausible for some countries than others, and we're not here to focus on the geographic and demographic facts of a nation. Why not try to keep this discussion about trains instead?
aquaticko no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 03:11 AM   #69
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

^ The L0 won't run below 500 km/h, otherwise the maglev would have been pointless to build. It should run 505 km/h which I have no doubt will be sped up over time (since it's 0, the first series after all).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Svartmetall View Post
I would also, very much urge members to NOT resort to personal attacks and to contact me if any occur (as I cannot read every post in every thread). I have been alerted to this thread and will keep my eyes on it from now on.
Thanks
__________________
🌸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🌸
ukiyo no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 03:52 AM   #70
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by PredyGr View Post
Code:
                                                            speed 350km/h
Minimum radius of curvature (m)*:            
        - reccomended                                             7143
        - normal                                                  6250
        - exceptional                                             5556

* from data given by SNCF
source UIC

The radius of curvature it's not the only parameter that determines the max. permissible speed of a line. Some other parameters are: maximum cant, cant deficiency, excess of cant and a few others. So, comparing different lines with min. curve radius as basis will not give conclusive results. For example a mixed traffic line and a passenger only line can both have a maximum design speed of 300kmph. The latter can be designed with min. curve radius of 3350m with a max cant of 170mm as is the case with the KRM. The mixed traffic line will have a considerable larger min. curve radius because of the limitations imposed by the freight traffic and the freight rolling stock, cant, length of the transition curves, etc. The design of a new line is extremely complicated.

IMHO the high speed revolution was the opening of the tokaido shinkansen, since then mostly is evolution. So again IMHO, the leaders in high speed rail evolution is Japan and France.

I consider revolutionary rolling stock, the NGT project from DLR

I've never heard of this before, and a quick Google gave me results that are mainly in German. Is this a serious study? (I.E: Likely to go towards a production run?) Has it been commissioned by anyone? Are there any early projected stats? (Top speed, capacity, weight, acceleration, etc..)

Entirely new developments in HSR rolling stock don't come around very often.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 03:56 AM   #71
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by gincan View Post
LOL, and you are dumber than f***.
This is what I wrote:
all lines built for speeds in excess of 300km/h have 7 km curve radius. This is as I stated industrial standard.
You find them in Spain, France, Korea, Italy and Japan I forgot to mention Taiwan but I guess you don't even know that country exist, I'll give you a hint, Chinese Taipei
This is what I wrote:
of cause exceptions exists where geography don't allow it such as urban areas.
You see, in the civilized world where there are basic human rights, governments can't simply bulldozer huge swaths of land displacing hundreds of thousands of citizens without their consent.
And as I stated, these exceptions you find in urban areas because in Europe and the civilized part of Asia, trainstations are located as close as possible to the city center. Not like in China where you often find youself having to take a 40-50 minute taxi ride to reach the city centre or commercial district.
Actually you can, it has already been done during test runs.
And now you post a map of a line I have not even mentioned
You know, even the the Chinese ruling elite in Bejing could not bulldoze completely as they pleased so you still have slow curves on Beijing-Shanghai railroad right after Beijing south railway station, they certainly aren't 7000 meters, more like 700 meters
Hi there, disinformation effort is in its full swing, huh?

Chinese 350km/h network has no "exceptions" and that is the point. All lines you are referring has much tighter turns than 7000m and that is why trains cannot go at full speed all the time.

You are using circular reasoning to claim these lines have min 7000m curve radius because trains can go 320km/h Yes, they can go 320km/h when there is no exception but there are. capisce??




Also to return to the point I made (i.e. China is the leader when it comes to infrastructure); sometimes pictures can explain it much better than words:

Which line does look like have more potential??

Madrid-Barcelona


LGV Méditerranée


Beijing–Shanghai
foxmulder no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 04:07 AM   #72
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 2,004
Likes (Received): 1039

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
^ The L0 won't run below 500 km/h, otherwise the maglev would have been pointless to build. It should run 505 km/h which I have no doubt will be sped up over time (since it's 0, the first series after all).
I kind of stuck the L0 in there as I'm not aware of any upcoming traditional trains from the Japanese companies that exceed a 350-360kmh design speed. The Chinese plan to ramp train speeds up to 380kmh was dropped after the former MOR head resigned (was removed?).

But the desired operational speed of HS2 in the UK, the CAHSR in the US, and the HEMU-430x in Korea all exceed the 350kmh threshold. Is anyone aware of how these three systems intend to circumvent the massive energy consumption increase that comes with doing so, or are they simply taking into account the extra cost in their operating budgets?
aquaticko no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 04:16 AM   #73
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

^ There isn't really any need in Japan to run faster than 320 km/h really. Most lines have frequent enough stops and Japan is quite dense so they don't want too fast speeds due to tunnel boom and other noise pollution (often times there's houses right up next to the shinkansen line).

With that said the Hokkaido Shinkansen has a plan to run at 360 km/h (half of it will open by 2015, the other half 2035). The best cases for faster speeds on Japan will be on Tohoku and Hokkaido Shinkansens (not as dense, noise pollution isn't as big of a concern), I hope the Tokaido will increase to 300 km/h eventually, next year the Tohoku will increase to 320 km/h, but I think they can raise it more since they will use the same type of train as the Hokkaido Shinkansen which should run at 360 km/h. BTW the E5 can take a 4000m radius curve at its current maximum service speed of 320km/h.
__________________
🌸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; August 1st, 2012 at 04:23 AM.
ukiyo no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 10:38 AM   #74
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
Chinese 350km/h network has no "exceptions" and that is the point. All lines you are referring has much tighter turns than 7000m and that is why trains cannot go at full speed all the time.
What planet are you on? For example, the LGV Nord has no alignment-restriction between les banlieux de Paris and Lille. I'm not even sure there is a speed restriction as it turns into the LGV to Brussels.

Only the LGV Sud-Est has bits that are poor alignment and therefore are restricted to 270km/h. Guess what? The French realised that was a mistake so they didn't do that anymore.

Precisely what point are you trying to make anyhow? China is amazing because its trains could go for 1000km without slowing whereas nowhere else in the world is this possible? Even though it will be possible soon if it isn't already? I mean, even if Paris - Brussels TGVs need to slow to 250km/h past Lille, that would slow the train by about 90 seconds - and that would be the only retardation. Whoop de do.

And no, posting individual pictures of individual corners on various high speed lines does not make your point at all.
__________________
"There is no problem so bad that you can't make it worse" - Chris Hadfield
makita09 no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 11:41 AM   #75
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post

Which line does look like have more potential??
This explains nothing. It only shows that France and Spain are happier to use tried-and-tested technology.
With proper maintenance, all three lines have exactly the same potential. And no, ballast does not magically fly up when a train passes over. The railway engineers would have spotted and rectified it a long, long time ago if that were the case. The benefits of ballastless track lie in that it requires less maintenance, thus making it slightly cheaper in the very long run.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 11:55 AM   #76
leipility
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2
Likes (Received): 0

Look at the speed, then certainly the Chinese stay in the forefront.Quality of these is not clear!China's high iron sitting comfort good.Shortly before the Chinese travel back!
leipility no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 04:33 PM   #77
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,070
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
What planet are you on? For example, the LGV Nord has no alignment-restriction between les banlieux de Paris and Lille. I'm not even sure there is a speed restriction as it turns into the LGV to Brussels.
That's the other way around. It's the Paris-Brussels direction which is
straight, and you need to take a curve to exit the line before you enter
Lille. And yes indeed, the whole high speed line between Paris and Brussels
can be travelled at max speed, without any slow down in between.
MarcVD no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 04:59 PM   #78
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by leipility View Post
Look at the speed, then certainly the Chinese stay in the forefront.Quality of these is not clear!China's high iron sitting comfort good.Shortly before the Chinese travel back!
Ow geez a Google Translate 50-cent army message



Anyway, I agree with a previous post:

The Japanese revolutionized rail with their first implementation of HSR. Everything after that, no matter how great (France, Germany, Spain, China) has just been evolution.
Silly_Walks no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 07:46 PM   #79
PredyGr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 69
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Is this a serious study? (I.E: Likely to go towards a production run?) Has it been commissioned by anyone? Are there any early projected stats? (Top speed, capacity, weight, acceleration, etc..)

Entirely new developments in HSR rolling stock don't come around very often.
The NGT is a research project covering different rail specific topics. The aim is the coordination and the common presentation of the different rail vehicle research activities in the NGT as integration platform.

Some known stats : Top speed: 400km/h, axle load:16t

About the bogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by WCRR2011 presentation
This ambitious concept of a passenger running gear has a realization horizon of approximately 10 years.
A description of the project:
http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefa.../740_read-916/

DLR will demonstrate at innotrans 2012 a 1:1 mock up of the medium car
http://www.eurailpress.de/article/vi.../browse/1.html
PredyGr no está en línea  
Old August 1st, 2012, 08:44 PM   #80
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
What planet are you on? For example, the LGV Nord has no alignment-restriction between les banlieux de Paris and Lille. I'm not even sure there is a speed restriction as it turns into the LGV to Brussels.

Only the LGV Sud-Est has bits that are poor alignment and therefore are restricted to 270km/h. Guess what? The French realised that was a mistake so they didn't do that anymore.

Precisely what point are you trying to make anyhow? China is amazing because its trains could go for 1000km without slowing whereas nowhere else in the world is this possible? Even though it will be possible soon if it isn't already? I mean, even if Paris - Brussels TGVs need to slow to 250km/h past Lille, that would slow the train by about 90 seconds - and that would be the only retardation. Whoop de do.

And no, posting individual pictures of individual corners on various high speed lines does not make your point at all.

I am an unbiased citizen of Earth. Which planet are you from?

LGV Nord has a min turn radius of 4000m so it is not up to standard of Chinese 350km/h network. I am sorry to let you down but it is the hard cold fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon
This explains nothing. It only shows that France and Spain are happier to use tried-and-tested technology.
With proper maintenance, all three lines have exactly the same potential. And no, ballast does not magically fly up when a train passes over. The railway engineers would have spotted and rectified it a long, long time ago if that were the case. The benefits of ballastless track lie in that it requires less maintenance, thus making it slightly cheaper in the very long run.
If you guys look at the pictures I send and see no difference, it just surprises me. There are quite a lot of fundamental differences among these mentioned lines.

1) Chinese network is mostly elevated which has quiete a lot of advantages:

a) Required footprint of the lines decreases. (You can tell from the pictures that Beijing-Shanghai line's foot print is less than half of those in Spain and France)

b) It is inherently safer for people who lives around.

c) It creates a foundation to increase minimum horizontal and vertical curve radius of line since elevation imperfections of the geography becomes less of an issue. This in turn translates into a higher potential maximum speed.

2) The minimum curve radius is 7000m without any exceptions: The advantage of this obvious, you can go at top speed all the time. This is why Chinese lines even though they are limited to 300km/h right now still have the highest average speed.

3) It uses ballastless track:

a) It requires significantly less maintenance. There are many reasons for this, will not go into details. a simple google search gives nice information.

b) It is more stable so do not require solutions to stabilize it like this:



So, again it presents the potential for higher speeds.

Only disadvantages of these standards is the cost. It is more expensive to build.

Moreover, when one considers the sheer scale of the Chinese network build with these standards, it is easy to claim, in high speed rail infrastructure, China is the leader.
foxmulder no está en línea  


Closed Thread

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 09:16 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