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 30th, 2013, 06:36 AM   #661
sacto7654
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 796
Likes (Received): 283

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
Fukui Prefecture pushes Wakasa route for Hokuriku Shinkansen
新幹線敦賀以西 若狭ルート整備を前面に

http://www.fukuishimbun.co.jp/localn...ial/42132.html

Fukui is pushing for this route as it puts more of the route in Fukui Prefecture, particularly the less accessible southern / western parts along Wakasa Bay, including Obama City. These parts are less developed than Tsuruga and Fukui, but a Shinkansen alignment would connect Obama City and Fukui City in about 20 minutes and potentially spur development in these areas. The Wakasa route does offer additional benefits over the other two routes (Kosei and Maibara) because it does not take capacity away from the Tōkaidō Shinkansen, although this comes at the price of a much higher cost.
While the Wakasa option will mean no need to rebuild the Kosei Line, it would be ENORMOUSLY expensive because of the need to procure new right of way between Tsuruga and Shin-Osaka. I still like the idea of a potential parallel right of way to the JR West Kosei Line and a new tunnel into Kyoto, where west end of the Hokuriku Shinkansen will be in a rebuilt Kyoto Station with expanded JR local train service, expanded Kintetsu train service, and access to Hankyu trains for the first time so there is plentiful capacity from Kyoto back to Osaka.
sacto7654 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 30th, 2013, 09:06 AM   #662
StuZealand
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Palmerston North
Posts: 234
Likes (Received): 111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post
How did they fix this, and how did they solve it from occurring again, for example, while a train is going through it
In some cases by using special rings (a technology borrowed from mines) that closed up as the crushing pressure from above came down. There are some videos on the 'net about how this was achieved.

In some other places, they increased the diameter of the TBM to bore the tube deliberately larger, knowing it would close up again to the required diameter. This was determined to be easier and cheaper than having to re-profile the tunnel afterwards.
StuZealand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 09:09 AM   #663
StuZealand
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Palmerston North
Posts: 234
Likes (Received): 111



This of course was done to the raw tunnel, before the concrete lining was installed. Touch wood they got their calculations right and the tunnel lasts for its planned 100 years.
StuZealand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 08:42 PM   #664
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

And what is expected to happen after 100 years? In the grand scheme of things a century is a short period of time. A planned lifetime should be at least a millennia.

Last edited by Sunfuns; April 30th, 2013 at 11:50 PM.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 11:49 PM   #665
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 767

It will be refurbished. Other tunnels were or will be closed for a while because of that: Gotthard (road), Furka basis, Mont Blanc*, Fréjus (railway)**, San Bernardino, ...to remain in Europe. As the Gotthard base tunnel has two tubes works will not decrease capacity as if it was single tube (the Seikan refurbishment will be more challenging in that).

* that has been done just after the fire in 1999, if they wanted just to repair the fire damages the tunnel would have reopened earlier

** it is very likely that during loading gauge enlargement works damaged parts of the tunnel were repaired, although in old rail tunnel there is less to repair than in new tunnels (road or rail)
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2013, 09:31 PM   #666
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Stalemate in fight over name for new Hakodate station on Hokkaidō Shinkansen
道新幹線「新函館」か「北斗函館」か 新駅名称、膠着続く 道の仲裁求める声も

http://www.hokkaido-np.co.jp/news/economic/463653.html



This type of debate frequently flares up in situations where the Shinkansen alignment can’t serve the city’s traditional terminus. Hakodate’s new station will actually be located at the current Oshima Ōno Station in Hokuto City, and Hokuto City wants to name the new station “Hokuto Hakodate”, while Hakodate City wants to name it simply “Shin-Hakodate”. There is plenty of precedence for “dual” station names, particularly on the Tōhoku Shinkansen (Iwate Numakunai, Shichinohe Towada, etc.), so there should be no reason not to just go with “Hokuto Hakodate”.
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2013, 03:06 PM   #667
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 1,996
Likes (Received): 1031

That station is nearly 20km away from Hakodate, and it says it takes about half an hour via train to the city. That seems like kind of a bad idea to me; is that sort of situation quite normal in Japan?
aquaticko no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2013, 03:37 PM   #668
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 452

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquaticko View Post
That station is nearly 20km away from Hakodate, and it says it takes about half an hour via train to the city. That seems like kind of a bad idea to me; is that sort of situation quite normal in Japan?
As you know, HSR lines don't like abrupt curves, and in the cases where an on-line city station is rather off the alignment, the standard solution is to build a greenfield or greyfield station (Shin~ Station in Japan). These are called parkway stations in the UK, I believe. Hakodate is a rather extreme example, as the existing city station is a stub end terminal located at the foot of a cape/promontory.

Perhaps they can name the new station Shin Hakodate Hokuto Station, utilizing kana for Hokuto. All-kanji may be too cumbersome and go against naming conventions.
__________________

aquaticko liked this post
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2013, 12:48 AM   #669
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Yeah, it's a bit unfortunate, but given the geography of Hakodate, it's just not practical to serve the existing terminal station. Muroran is in an identical situation geographically (i.e., small promontory with a stub terminal off the mainline), and it likely would have gotten similar treatment if they had selected the southern Hokkaidō route for the Shinkansen.

Shin-Hakodate actually isn't so bad... It will be only 15-20 minutes by train to Hakodate Station.
Otaru is getting a greenfield station, but it won't have any connecting rail service.
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2013, 03:11 AM   #670
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 452

Quote:
Otaru is getting a greenfield station, but it won't have any connecting rail service.
I reckon most tourists from down south will be staying in hotels in Sapporo anyway, so it's not that big a minus.
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2013, 10:16 AM   #671
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 767

What about a spur to Hakodate, together with a greenfield station, like it has been done in Reims, France? In this case there is a station on the HSL (although near the city and connected by a tram line) and, to the east, a branch line going to the city centre station. Paris-Reims trains skip the greenfield station and stop in the central one, while trains going beyond Reims only stop at the greenfield station.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2013, 01:51 PM   #672
loefet
Registered User
 
loefet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Göteborg
Posts: 525
Likes (Received): 233

Since most trains will continue onwards to Sapporo once the extension is complete and not end in Hakodate, I don't really see the point. There might on the other hand be trains from Sapporo that might terminate there, but I doubt that there will be enough traffic to demand a separate spur to Hakodate.

How likely would it be that JR Hokkaido would double track the final bit from Nanae to the location of the Shinkansen station? And also electrify the whole stretch between Hakodate and the Shinkansen station. It would really improve the service to and from the new station.
loefet no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2013, 05:24 AM   #673
sacto7654
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 796
Likes (Received): 283

They should just call it Shin-Hakodate and call it a day. After all, weren't they going to electrify the Hakodate Main Line from the new station to the original Hakodate Station anyway, so they could run faster trains from the new Shinkansen station back to Hakodate?
sacto7654 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2013, 01:46 PM   #674
M-NL
Mixed-mode traveller
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,157
Likes (Received): 274

Does anyone know the reason why JR Kyushu uses N700-8000 trainsets instead of extra 800-series sets for the Sakura and Mizuho services? Was it to improve mixed operations with JR West? Or was the 285 km/h top speed of the 800-series deemed unsufficient for the (300 km/h) Sanyo Shinkansen (doesn't make sense, because the remaining 500 and 700 series trains also have 285 km/h top speeds)? I bet Hitachi could have built 300 km/h 8-car 800-series trains without any problems.
M-NL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2013, 02:22 PM   #675
Silver Swordsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 101

Speaking of which, what is the limiting factor for the newer Japanese shinkansen trains with reduced top speeds?

500系 was designed for 320km/h; what technology was rescinded that gave the 700 and 800 series 285km/h?
__________________
My Virtual-Model Railroad: High Speed Rail in RCT3
Project Anniversary: Click Here
Silver Swordsman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2013, 02:54 PM   #676
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 452

Quote:
Does anyone know the reason why JR Kyushu uses N700-8000 trainsets instead of extra 800-series sets for the Sakura and Mizuho services?
Operational commonality, also the N700 is a newer, higher performance design. The 800 series is the same generation as the 700 series.

Quote:
Speaking of which, what is the limiting factor for the newer Japanese shinkansen trains with reduced top speeds?

500系 was designed for 320km/h; what technology was rescinded that gave the 700 and 800 series 285km/h?
The 500 series was an expensive design, though capable of 320km/h, line conditions dictated lower speeds. There are no "rescinded" specs- the Sanyo Line, for example has curves and tunnels that restrict top speeds to below 300km/h, as well as noise restrictions (the Sanyo Corridor is densely populated, unlike, say, northern Tohoku, where 320km/h operation is in effect). There is also some speculation that JR West is still keeping a low profile due to the Amagasaki crash, instead focusing on safety, especially on zairaisen lines.
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2013, 03:24 PM   #677
Silver Swordsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 101

No, no, no.

I'm aware of the track conditions that limit operating speeds; my question is what hardware differences were made to the trains themselves that reduced their top speed?
__________________
My Virtual-Model Railroad: High Speed Rail in RCT3
Project Anniversary: Click Here
Silver Swordsman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2013, 08:31 PM   #678
loefet
Registered User
 
loefet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Göteborg
Posts: 525
Likes (Received): 233

I would think that cost and JR Central have something to do with the lower top speed.

The 500 series was designed by JR West to be the fastest possible train for the Sanyo line, where as the 700 series was co-developed between JR Central and JR West for both lines as a replacement for the 300 series. And since the Tokaido line have a top speed of 270 km/h then you don't need trains that go much faster than that. Also the advantage in speed didn't really produce that much of an advantage in travel-time on the Sanyo Line (I'm pretty sure that the difference at that time was just 5-10 minutes).

Also cost, since why would you need to pay 25% more for a train that only gives a few minutes improvement in travel time when you can have a train that will perform just as great for a lower price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia on the 700 series Shinkansen train
The cost of a 16-car 700 series unit is approximately 4 billion yen compared with around 5 billion yen for a 16-car 500 series train.
And since the 800 series is just a 700 series with fewer cars and a different front, it got the same speed restriction. But then again since the Kyushu line have a limit of 260 km/h then they don't really need a faster train than that.
loefet no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2013, 02:26 AM   #679
sacto7654
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 796
Likes (Received): 283

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
Does anyone know the reason why JR Kyushu uses N700-8000 trainsets instead of extra 800-series sets for the Sakura and Mizuho services? Was it to improve mixed operations with JR West? Or was the 285 km/h top speed of the 800-series deemed unsufficient for the (300 km/h) Sanyo Shinkansen (doesn't make sense, because the remaining 500 and 700 series trains also have 285 km/h top speeds)? I bet Hitachi could have built 300 km/h 8-car 800-series trains without any problems.
Here's the thing:

1. The Sakura and Mizuho limited-stop Shinkansen trains can often run the full distance between Kagoshiima-Chūō and Shin-Osaka Stations. As such, it makes more sense to use 700 and N700 Series trainsets, which are already being used by Nozomi trains between Tokyo and Hakata Stations.

2. The 800 Series trainset is only limited to 260 km/h maximum, and are used on all-stops Tsubame service between Kagoshima-Chūō and Hakata Stations or a shorter-distance version of the Sakura service between the two stations I mentioned.
sacto7654 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2013, 08:59 AM   #680
M-NL
Mixed-mode traveller
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,157
Likes (Received): 274

The normal (16-car) 700 and N700 sets would be to long for the Kyushu platforms and have to much unused capacity. The 8-car N700 sets are not simply halved 16-car sets. They lack tilting, have all axles powered and only have 524 seats instead of the 650 you would expect.

The 800 series can do 285 km/h just like the 700 series. In fact given that the 700T does 300 km/h there is no reason why the 800 couldn't also. JR Kyushu could also have asked for N700s with the 800 nose design just to differentiate themselves from JR West. In a few years you will only see N700 variants south of Tokyo (Not that they are bad, but it's to much of a monoculture for me)

Thing is the difference between service speed and design speed. The 500 series might have a higher top speed then the N700, but accelerates slower because of it's taller gearing. I wonder if they changed it now that the 500's are limited to 285 km/h in Hikari/Kodama service.
M-NL no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 12:05 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