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 4th, 2014, 03:49 PM   #1601
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

If you have a direct connection from Göschenen, you are right. If you don't the time lost is bigger:
Quote:
Zürich HB
Zürich HB ab 16:09
bungskarte: Göschenen
Göschenen an 17:48
Göschenen ab 18:12
Andermatt an 18:22
Andermatt ab 18:27
Sedrun an 19:14
As you can see, you lose over half an hour because you have to change trains twice.

With a stack cross station in Andermatt it would be possible to let the IR in both directions and Glacier Express in both direction stay for 10 Minutes and let passengers switch.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 4th, 2014, 04:00 PM   #1602
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
With a stack cross station in Andermatt it would be possible to let the IR in both directions and Glacier Express in both direction stay for 10 Minutes and let passengers switch.
But you'd need to build underground sidings or else you'd limit considerable capacity on the Gotthard Rail Tunnel.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 04:56 PM   #1603
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

We speak about the old tunnel here, the capacity will not be needed anymore. There were some ideas of the SBB to drop the old line completely.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 05:08 PM   #1604
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
We speak about the old tunnel here, the capacity will not be needed anymore. There were some ideas of the SBB to drop the old line completely.
Won't they use the old tunnel to provide capacity for truck shuttles?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 07:03 PM   #1605
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

TGVs to France

I had read a while ago that the TGVs from Paris to Lausanne (via Dijon) would be cancelled and replaced by more TGVs Geneve-Paris.

However, it appears these TGVs to Lausanne will no be cancelled next June timetable change.

What are they planning for the TGV connections with France?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 08:24 PM   #1606
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
As you can see, you lose over half an hour because you have to change trains twice.

With a stack cross station in Andermatt it would be possible to let the IR in both directions and Glacier Express in both direction stay for 10 Minutes and let passengers switch.
But it would save passengers only about 5 minutes or so. In your example you picked a time when the connections between the IR and the R in Göschenen aren't very good. However, often the transfer is only 5 minutes, which means that you are in Andermatt 15 minutes after getting of the train in Göschenen.
With a station in the tunnel this would not be that much different. The train would stop there about 5 minutes after leaving Göschenen, and passengers would then need to be brought up to the surface, which would take time.
And that all to only maybe shave a few minutes of a trip undertaken mostly by people who are not in a hurry. There are better way to spend that money.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 08:48 PM   #1607
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Won't they use the old tunnel to provide capacity for truck shuttles?
Only if the road tunnel is closed. There is not yet a decision made about the road tunnel yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
But it would save passengers only about 5 minutes or so. In your example you picked a time when the connections between the IR and the R in Göschenen aren't very good. However, often the transfer is only 5 minutes, which means that you are in Andermatt 15 minutes after getting of the train in Göschenen.
With a station in the tunnel this would not be that much different. The train would stop there about 5 minutes after leaving Göschenen, and passengers would then need to be brought up to the surface, which would take time.
And that all to only maybe shave a few minutes of a trip undertaken mostly by people who are not in a hurry. There are better way to spend that money.
We speak about a 200 Meters lift, something very common in modern skyscrapers. Just to give a relation, the deepest London underground station is 58 meters below surface the proposed Porta Alpina in Sedrun would have been 800 meters deep.

I don't think it would cost that much. Not as much as the Vereina or Furka tunnels.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 09:09 PM   #1608
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

The Göschenen-Andermatt line requries special stock (because of its steepness), so MGB wants to operate it separately. This mean that to go from Oberwald to Zürich one would have to change in Andermatt, Göschenen, Erstfeld, and maybe Arth Goldau...I had already imagined sucha station and I like the idea, altough I doubt I will see it. The acces shaft would be around 330 m high thought, not 200.

About the truck shuttles: if the road tunnel will be closed truck shuttles will run also in the base tunnel, but probably not in the summit tunnel, because it doesn't allow trucks higher than 3.85 m (and the maximum height for trucks in Switzerland is 4 m).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
I had read a while ago that the TGVs from Paris to Lausanne (via Dijon) would be cancelled and replaced by more TGVs Geneve-Paris.

However, it appears these TGVs to Lausanne will no be cancelled next June timetable change.

What are they planning for the TGV connections with France?
Lyria wants to reroute Paris-Lausanne TGVs via Geneva, passengers don't. I don't know what will happen.
__________________
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 April 4th, 2014, 09:37 PM   #1609
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
Lyria wants to reroute Paris-Lausanne TGVs via Geneva, passengers don't. I don't know what will happen.
Travel time differences are not that big. Lausanne - Paris via Geneve would take only 12 minutes more than the current route via Vallorbe.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 10:10 PM   #1610
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
The acces shaft would be around 330 m high thought, not 200.
Sorry my bad. But 330 meters is still a height that can be served by a standard high speed lift for Skyscrapers. The 800 meters are not.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2014, 10:11 PM   #1611
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

A view of the hybrid system that connects Lauterbrunnen (780m) to Muerren (1644m), in the Alps near Interlaken (aka Bernese Oberland).


First you need to use a public transit gondola to Grutschalp

(c)JungfrauCH


Then a short railway (which is physically unconnected to the rest of the rail network, I have no idea how do they perform maintenance on the rail equipment and rolling stock)



(c)JungfrauCH
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!

Bart_LCY, Sangnaris liked this post
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2014, 11:01 AM   #1612
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

Its vehicles are stored and maintaiend in a small depot at the junction between the ropeway and the railway, and once bought up, thay have never been transported back.

https://maps.google.ch/maps?q=Lauter...Berna&t=h&z=19

The first trains were transported using the funicular which was replaced by the ropeway a few years ago, the last EMU (nr. 31) was transported by road using a special vehicle via Isenfluh:

https://maps.google.ch/maps?q=Lauter...Berna&t=m&z=17

(note the rare road spiral tunnel used during the transport)

Some photos of the transport of EMU nr. 31 (a 50 year old railcar refurbished in the plain and then sent in its new small world):

http://www.jungfrauzeitung.ch/artikel/103371/

http://www.srf.ch/player/video?id=1c...a-226bc1bd1f68

Some more photos of this railway:

http://www.ferrovie.it/forum/viewtop...25739&start=45

Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergba...en-M%C3%BCrren

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Travel time differences are not that big. Lausanne - Paris via Geneve would take only 12 minutes more than the current route via Vallorbe.
The problem is finding train slots between Geneva and Lausanne, and that intermediate stations on the existing route would not be served anymore, all that without any time advantage for passengers.
__________________
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 April 5th, 2014, 03:18 PM   #1613
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
We speak about a 200 Meters lift, something very common in modern skyscrapers. Just to give a relation, the deepest London underground station is 58 meters below surface the proposed Porta Alpina in Sedrun would have been 800 meters deep.

I don't think it would cost that much. Not as much as the Vereina or Furka tunnels.
I don't doubt it would be technically possible. The Swiss have a lot of know how when it comes to elevators.
However, my point is that bringing everyone up to the surface will take time.
The MGB can transport 300 persons up 300m in 10 minutes. I doubt many elevators can that. In the advantage of the MGB trains is that people don't have to wait. They just walk over from the IR and board. I'm sure people prefer that over standing in a queue for an elevator...
So no, it doesn't add any value, so how much it would cost is immaterial.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2014, 12:22 PM   #1614
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

A high speed elevator needs 40 seconds for that time. The capacity have to be - of course - large enough to carry all passengers that want to switch in a few runs.

And actually the switching in Göschenen takes 4 minutes. I think with the right elevators it should be possible to bring the people to the surface in the time they need currently to switch trains in Göschenen.

Another issue is the travelers from the south. They would have a much bigger improvement.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2014, 09:43 PM   #1615
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
A high speed elevator needs 40 seconds for that time. The capacity have to be - of course - large enough to carry all passengers that want to switch in a few runs. And actually the switching in Göschenen takes 4 minutes. I think with the right elevators it should be possible to bring the people to the surface in the time they need currently to switch trains in Göschenen.
So in the end the investment saves a whole 5 minutes in total. Not worth it.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 7th, 2014, 10:04 AM   #1616
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
So in the end the investment saves a whole 5 minutes in total. Not worth it.
I sum up 15 minutes (5 one changeover less, 10 for the train trip), but from the north, and about 20 from the south. But that's not really the point.

I would be new concept of a integrated junction station in Andermatt. Of course the cost would have to be estimated first. The estimated cost of the porta alpina were 50 millions which is a politically motivated low estimation. But as this station is not as much underground I assume it would be about 50 millions, even though the shafts are not made yet.

That is actually peanuts compared to any other project. Actually the original Porta Alpina is peanuts too, the problem with the original Porta Alpina is not the money, it's the concept itself.
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 7th, 2014, 04:30 PM   #1617
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post

That is actually peanuts compared to any other project. Actually the original Porta Alpina is peanuts too, the problem with the original Porta Alpina is not the money, it's the concept itself.
Would they bore parallel tracks for 1500 or 2000m as not to impede traffic on the main tracks of the tunnel?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 7th, 2014, 05:32 PM   #1618
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

No they wouldn't. There were several problems with the original Porta Alpina which made the project flawed:
- No parallels tunnels -> Trains couldn't pass as long as a train was in the station
- 800 m vertical distance
- 1 km long horizontal tunnel to the surface
- No train station at the surface exit.

__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 7th, 2014, 05:35 PM   #1619
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
I sum up 15 minutes (5 one changeover less, 10 for the train trip)
And that versus:
5 minutes (time to drive from Göschenen to the new tunnel station) + 4 minutes (time you say the elevator would need to get everyone up) + 1 minute (walk from train to elevator).
So again, only 5 minutes saved...
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 7th, 2014, 07:21 PM   #1620
earthJoker
Ölm
 
earthJoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,806
Likes (Received): 1988

Only for the direct train. I said that before, that you don't gain much over the direct train from Brig to Göschenen. I agreed with that long ago. The gain is for all other connections where you have to change trains twice. Like the current Belinzona to Oberwald connection or the Zürich to Sedrun connections.

Maybe it would be possible to have a system including the Göschenen-Andermatt train, but if this is possible, why isn't it done yet?
__________________
Is that you, John Wayne? Is this me?

See you in the Swiss Forum on skyscrapercity.com
earthJoker no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
basel, zurich

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 08:24 AM.


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