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 7th, 2007, 11:20 AM   #161
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,530
Likes (Received): 6560

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brice View Post
we say km/h, kph is not correct
that's the same
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 7th, 2007, 03:12 PM   #162
Brice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,642
Likes (Received): 168

Nein
Brice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2007, 04:54 AM   #163
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brice View Post
Nein
Ja. It is the same. km/h is more widely used, but kph is still understood. It is like pphpd where they also use "p" for "per", hence kph is acceptable.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2007, 10:43 AM   #164
Minato ku
Moderator
 
Minato ku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 16,746

I would find the picture of the HQ of the SNCF with this.


HQ of SNCF
__________________
すみません !
J’aime Paris et je veux des tours !
Minato ku no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2007, 12:35 PM   #165
CharlieP
Tax avoider
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 23,762
Likes (Received): 1980

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Ja. It is the same. km/h is more widely used, but kph is still understood. It is like pphpd where they also use "p" for "per", hence kph is acceptable.
"kph" is not acceptable - first of all the symbol for kilometres is km, not k, and secondly, SI units[1] should be written with a / or a negative exponent.

[1] km/h are not part of SI, but accepted for use in it.
__________________
This signature is socialist and un-American.
CharlieP no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 9th, 2007, 02:22 AM   #166
odegaard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: California
Posts: 75
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Maglev is more expensive to build, but cheaper to maintain (at ~300km/h). This is maglev's strongest point, not its speed.
says who? where's the proof?

Unfortunately TRZ there's not that much public data available to prove that maintenance expenses for maglev systems are cheaper.

However putting that aside lets ask ourselves why would a maglev system be cheaper to maintain? Is it because there is no friction?

NOTHING lasts forever, even something that is not subjected to friction. The electromagnets on a maglev line would eventually degrade through other factors like weather and heat generation. If it's superconducting then there's a complex cooling system that has to be maintained and that can't be cheap.

Furthermore I'd like to point out there are STRESSES placed on the system. Even though there are no wheels the weight of the maglev train still gets transfered to the line via electromagnetic forces. However the weight would be more evenly distributed throughout the length of the train and not concentrated at wheel to rail contact points like a conventional train. This may be more advantageous from a structural perspective but those stress forces still exist.

Secondly A maglev line must be very accurately "aligned". I'm going to assume this alignment must be monitored regularly and re-adjusted when necessary to stay within tolerances.

Sorry TRZ I have yet to see conclusive proof...so the verdict is still out. My gut tells me a maglev system is not something that can be built, then ignored and assumed to function properly perpetually simply because there is no friction. It still needs "attention" and that costs money.

my 2 cents...feel free to disagree
odegaard no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 9th, 2007, 09:14 AM   #167
Brice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,642
Likes (Received): 168

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Ja. It is the same. km/h is more widely used, but kph is still understood. It is like pphpd where they also use "p" for "per", hence kph is acceptable.

kph is not an abbreviation of the international system SI. It is nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Km/h
Brice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 9th, 2007, 07:19 PM   #168
C-Beam
Trickficker
 
C-Beam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Frankfurt
Posts: 2,879
Likes (Received): 3395

Quote:
Originally Posted by steph35 View Post
this TGV call AGV is a new technology, no other train used or actually use it
What is new about it?
C-Beam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 10th, 2007, 03:02 AM   #169
Facial
Seeking truth from facts
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Los Angeles / San Diego
Posts: 636
Likes (Received): 10

I suspect it's something new with the suspension; Hunting oscillations are a killer.
Facial no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 10th, 2007, 02:08 PM   #170
Jean Luc
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 15

The AGV is an EMU (electric multiple unit). That is, it has traction motors distributed along the length of the train mounted on the bogies, like the Japanese Shinkansen. The existing TGV has power cars at each end, with usually only the first bogies on the adjacent passenger carriages powered as well, and hence is not an EMU.

Check out:
http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/frenchtgv (scroll down to rolling stock)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automot...grande_vitesse

Last edited by Jean Luc; April 10th, 2007 at 02:13 PM.
Jean Luc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2007, 11:53 PM   #171
De Snor
Forever Travelling
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,385
Likes (Received): 40

FRANCE | High Speed Rail

The Rhine-Rhone high-speed line consists of three branches: the Eastern branch, the Western branch and the Southern branch.

The whole Rhine-Rhone high-speed project may be likened to a three-pronged star:



- the Eastern branch, between the Dijon (Genlis) and Mulhouse (Lutterbach) urban areas, with 190 km of new line.
- the Western branch, from the Western end of the Eastern branch towards Paris via Dijon.
- the Southern branch, from the junction of the two other branches towards Lyon.

A view of the track:
http://www.lgvrhinrhone.com/medias/pdf/medias79.pdf

http://www.rff.fr/biblio_pdf/lgv_RR_BE.pdf

A project with a difference : Journey times

With the very first tranche of the Eastern branch, journey times for a large number of origin-destination pairs will be substantially reduced.



A project with a difference : Key figures

A few figures illustrating the scale of France’s biggest civil engineering project

- 140 km of line, including 40 % through forests
- 85 municipalities
- 6,000 site-related jobs
- 160 bridges
- 12 viaducts
- 12-km long tunnel
- 400 km of fencing
- 500,000 sleepers
- 2 new stations
- 24 million m³ of excavations
- 18 million m³ of embankment

A project with a difference: timelines

The line will be built in two stages: earthworks and civil engineering structures between 2006 and 2009, and railway equipment (rails and overhead lines, signalling systems and fencing) between 2009 and 2011.



More info : http://www.lgvrhinrhone.com/english.php & http://www.rff.fr/pages/projets/fich...7&codeRegion=9
De Snor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2007, 01:49 PM   #172
Insane alex
Stockholm rules!
 
Insane alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden/ Gold Coast, Australia
Posts: 1,738
Likes (Received): 23

I just love the french railway, especialy the TGV!
__________________
Stockholm projects

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=449245
Countries i've been to: Australia, Austria, Canada, Brazil, China, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Lichtenstein, Germany, The Netherlands, Latvia, Italy, UK, USA, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hong Kong.
Insane alex no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 10th, 2007, 10:50 PM   #173
eomer
Bring Constantinople back
 
eomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Val de Marne (Paris)
Posts: 13,989
Likes (Received): 4728

FRANCE | High Speed Rail

It's a bit late but it's done: http://lgv2030.free.fr

Soon the 40 000° viewer: a pint of bier for the man (or woman) who bring me a copy of the screen with number 40 000 !
__________________
Cordialement, Kind Regards
Eomer
Look to my coming, at first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East.
A l'aube du cinquième jour, regardez vers l'est
eomer está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2007, 09:12 PM   #174
De Snor
Forever Travelling
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,385
Likes (Received): 40

A great site you got
De Snor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2007, 07:40 AM   #175
ER_441
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23
Likes (Received): 0

FRANCE | High Speed Rail

With Gare de Lyon and Gare Montparnasse being both already being congested railway terminals in Paris, are there plans that SNCF is planning to upgrade Gare d'Austerlitz, so that some of the train services on the TGV Sud-Est (Paris-French Riviera, Montpellier and Lyon) can be used for by both Gare de Lyon and Gare d'Austerlitz?

Currently Gare d'Austerlitz is predominantly used for their overnight train service to/from Spain and Gare de Lyon serves trains that are bound for Lyon and the French Riviera.
ER_441 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2008, 10:41 PM   #176
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

FRANCE | High Speed Rail

http://comment.independent.co.uk/com...cle3310022.ece

Quote:
John Lichfield: Shunted off in a tale of two railways

While British trains are a byword for chaos, vision and flair are the French way

Published: 05 January 2008

While we curse our railways, the French celebrate them. And expand them. The Grand Palais, the enormous exhibition hall just off the Champs-Elysées, has been turned into a virtual railway station until next week, housing rolling stock and artistic displays to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the SNCF, the French state railway system.

To mark the occasion, Guillaume Pépy, the dynamic deputy head of the SNCF, and head of Eurostar, invited a few Paris-based European journalists to lunch. For someone such as myself, who is not afraid to admit that he was once a trainspotter and remains a great enthusiast for railways, the exhibition – L'Art entre en gare – was a delight.

So were M. Pépy's bubbling enthusiasm and vision for railways as a transport system, not of the past, but of the future. His vision is all the more exciting – or depressing if you prefer – against the background of the latest tangle of rail-engineering delays and line closures in Britain.

Not all recent developments on Britain's railways have been bad but we no longer, it seems, have anyone capable of making strategic decisions, or inspired guesses, about the shape of the eco-friendly rail systems that we need. Two centuries, almost, after we invented railways, where are our Stephensons or Brunels? Or even our Pépys?

Guillaume Pépy hopes that the French government will make the development of railways – and especially high-speed railways – one of the principal themes of its presidency of the European Union in the second half of this year. In particular, M. Pépy hopes that Paris will be able to persuade its European partners to back the latest bright idea to come from the SNCF: high-speed overnight goods trains.

Most of the high-value, next-day-delivery business, handled by FedEx, DHL and others, goes by air. The SNCF has been working with Air France and FedEx on the possibility of using high-speed railway lines at night to capture much of this traffic for rail (and reduce the level of carbon emissions per parcel by as much as 80 times). M. Pépy hopes that the idea – called "Carex" – can be spread Europe-wide, as Europe's high-speed rail network expands.

A couple of high-speed double-decker parcels trains on the new fast line between Paris and London would carry as much overnight cargo and parcels traffic as two jumbo jets. At present, the fast line to the Channel Tunnel is closed at night for maintenance. So are all the high-speed railway lines in France.

M. Pépy and the SNCF want to use these lines, after midnight, for a few high-speed "cargo express" trains. If spread across Europe, he believes that the idea would not only reduce carbon emissions but also radically reduce the cost of overnight letters and packages. The SNCF, FedEx and – interestingly – Air France have already commissioned preliminary studies for double-decker, TGV cargo trains, capable of carrying everything from a postcard to a full-size freight container. Such a network would help to reduce the noise nuisance of freight flights in the early hours. It would reduce transport carbon emissions. It would strengthen the economic and environmental case for the building of further high-speed railway lines.

The SNCF is already planning to introduce night TGV trains later this year. These will be "party" trains, aimed at young people who, as M. Pépy says, associate traditional overnight trains with "the smell of socks". On the new high-speed trains, bookable only on the internet, passengers will not be expected to sleep: they will dance, watch films, play games, or "do anything they like so long as it is decent".

"Only 12 per cent of Europe's carbon emissions come from transport," M. Pépy says. "But that 12 per cent is enormous. Everyone knows that it is going to be difficult to reduce the carbon footprint of industry and home-heating. All eyes will turn to transport. It will simply no longer be acceptable, in 20 or 30 years' time, that short-haul journeys between European cities are conducted by air transport. There must be a more rational division between the use of aircraft on medium - and long-haul journeys and high-speed railways for short-haul journeys."

What does M. Pépy mean by short haul? He suggested that all journeys up to at least 500km (or 300 miles) should naturally become rail journeys. In France – and increasingly in Italy, Spain and Germany – the high-speed lines are being built or planned which make that vision possible. The SNCF is already in discussion with the Spanish railways to create a new service from Brussels to Madrid, using high-speed lines in three countries.

By 2020, France should have 3,000km (1,864 miles) of high-speed railway line. President Nicolas Sarkozy recently promised that studies would commence on the building of another 2,000km of lignes à grande vitesse by 2030.

The extra lines are likely to include a new link across the breadth of the south of France from Toulouse to Nice and a second line to the French entrance to the Channel Tunnel, passing through Amiens instead of Lille. They are also likely to include a second trunk line from Paris to Lyons, to relieve Europe's first high-speed line, opened in 1981, which is approaching capacity.

All of these new lines may, if marketing and engineering studies prove positive, be constructed with their double tracks further apart. This would allow the SNCF to run a new generation of TGVs with service speeds up to 360km/h (224mph) instead of 280 to 320km/h on existing lines.

How exciting. How depressing.

The rebuilt London St Pancras station is magnificent but is likely to remain the terminus of a high-speed branch line. Given the muddle over routine maintenance of Britain's overburdened railway network, what is the hope of this, or any, British government taking the courageous, strategic decision to build lignes à grande vitesse to the north of England and Scotland?

If M. Pépy is right, air traffic between London and Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds – even Glasgow – will be politically and ecologically unacceptable in two decades' time. One strategically placed high-speed line up the spine of Britain could link 80 per cent of the nation's population. The cost of building such a line would be immense. So will be – already is – the cost of not doing so.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2008, 06:19 AM   #177
AR1182
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,814
Likes (Received): 1777

Most major British cities don't seem to be as far apart from each other as Paris and Marseille or Bordeaux, so I don't think high-speed lines would have the same effect on travel times as in France. I'm not saying there's no need for them in Britain, but I think a lot of things could and should be worked on before building high-speed lines. It doesn't really take that kind of infrastructure nor "two decades' time" to make Air traffic between London and Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds "polictically and ecologically unacceptable".

British loading gauge and platform lengths, for example, make capacity increases on existing lines more difficult than in France and most of continental Europe. The existing infrastructure doesn't allow double-deck trains or up to 470 metres long double units as in France. Even the most congested or fastest British main lines still lack proper in-cab signalling systems, despite them being so common in other European countries. Many of those British main lines haven't even been electrified yet, which increases operational costs and emissions and reduces rolling stock performance.

It seems that by just upgrading the existing infrastructure with rather common equipment like in-cab signalling (allowing the existing rolling stock to reach the 225 or 240 Km/h it has been designed for instead of less than 200 Km/h), and by reducing stops en route, even longer journeys like London-Glasgow or London-Edinburgh could be done in less than four hours, which would give the train a very reasonable competitiveness without huge investments and years of construction works. Even less would be needed to reach a similar competitiveness on much shorter distances, like London-Birmingham/Manchester/Liverpool/York/Newcastle/Leeds or Birmingham/Manchester-Glasgow/Edinburgh.

Last edited by AR1182; January 6th, 2008 at 06:32 AM.
AR1182 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2008, 06:52 AM   #178
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Four hours? Reasonable? Paris-Strasbourg is now 2h and some - to be reduced to 1h50 in the decade. That's longer than London-Manchester. Three hours to Glasgow seems reasonable.
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2008, 07:48 AM   #179
AR1182
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,814
Likes (Received): 1777

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanBen View Post
Four hours? Reasonable? Paris-Strasbourg is now 2h and some - to be reduced to 1h50 in the decade. That's longer than London-Manchester. Three hours to Glasgow seems reasonable.
I was refering to the last words of the article:

Quote:
If M. Pépy is right, air traffic between London and Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds – even Glasgow – will be politically and ecologically unacceptable in two decades' time.
The less than four hours for London-Glasgow I was talking about would already be enough to consider "air traffic politically and ecologically unacceptable", and being slower than the Paris-Strasbourg TGV certainly wouldn't make it unreasonable. A new high speed line could of course further improve journey times, and I'm not saying it would be useless, but it doesn't seem indispensable for reasonable journey times.

As for London-Manchester, the completion of current WCML works in 2008/2009 will allow journey times of 1h58 minutes (which could be further reduced by nonstop trains), even without in-cab signalling and with a top speed of just 200 Km/h. None of the competing means of transport will be able to beat that, which makes the train very competitive in my opinion. This doesn't make HS2 unnecessary, but I guess if it's built some day it'll be rather to increase capacity than because of the 25 minutes it would slice off existing journey times.

Last edited by AR1182; January 6th, 2008 at 08:58 AM.
AR1182 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 6th, 2008, 03:21 PM   #180
Zibou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 0

HSL in France were build to cut off journeys' time, but also in order to increase the availability of regular (or "classic") railways for regional train service (Train Express Régional).
However, even if the country is investing so much in new railways, local ones are pretty dilapidated in some areas : I think of some lines in Massif Central that are often in quite a bad state (with rails dating back from the 1920s or 1930s)... and funding just doesn't follow for those local lines. Since the 1990s and the décentralisation, the Régions have taken up the actual TER service, but railways remain the property of RFF and of the State.
Zibou no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
alstom, high speed train, tgv

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 08:02 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