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 March 10th, 2010, 07:31 AM   #2121
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Still confused, my man?
I'm not, but I think you are... Something that is trivially easily disrupted is not a strategic logistic asset. In Europe France and Germany build railways to the same gauge, even when they were mortal enemies. WWI and WWII showed how easily railways were disrupted. One of the reason the Allies managed to win over the Germans was that they used trucks for supply, not trains.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 10th, 2010, 07:35 AM   #2122
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgk920 View Post
Keep in mind, too, that China's basic railroad technical standards are identical to those of North America (Canada/Mexico/USA), so options in that direction are also available for the REAL dreamers.
The basic standards in China are more like Europe than the USA. China has bought lots of European and Japanese HST's and is basing it's own designs on those imports. These designs do not meet FRA requirements, so they can't just be imported to the States.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 07:47 AM   #2123
Nozumi 300
Registered User
 
Nozumi 300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 222
Likes (Received): 6

I found this interesting article in the Wall Street Journal, it's a bit old but it may explain why we probably will never see any other Shinkansen models offered to China.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...atestheadlines
Nozumi 300 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 09:02 AM   #2124
highway35
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 33
Likes (Received): 1

Well, JR Central had refused to work with China right from the beginning when China was soliciting bids from foreign train manufacturers several years ago. Kawasaki participated and offered their technologies of 200 kmh class train to form a JV with CSR. It's the base model for CRH-2C. China now has developed the 300-350 kmh class train on its own based on these technologies and is developing the 380 kmh class trains.

I could understand Yoshiyuki Kasai's bitterness. These days, you could accuse Chinese of any crimes: cheating, low-quality products and environment-polluting ...

Alstom, for the similar reason of not willing to transfer their technologies, did not participate the bids to work with Chinese train manufacturers. They had complained loudly and publicly over a year ago that China "steals" its technologies. Now, obviously they have had second thoughts and offered their 360 kmh train to China (http://www.toocle.com/china-business...igh-speed.html).

I'm afraid it's a little bit too late.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozumi 300 View Post
I found this interesting article in the Wall Street Journal, it's a bit old but it may explain why we probably will never see any other Shinkansen models offered to China.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...atestheadlines
highway35 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 12:34 PM   #2125
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Invasion, by default, means that foreign troops march inside a target country(in this case China proper) while domestic troops ( Chinese troops) are within her own border. The high speed line disrupted in foreign land and thus controlled by foreign forces (logically by definition of invasion) could serve as the perfect mean for transporting resources(human and natural) for invasion purpose should it be called upon during war time.

Disrupted by whom?

Well, as I said, apart from several hostile countries in the region, there're at least a couple of dozen terrorist groups around, officially. Off the record, I would be prefectly happy to take down and get hold on a train-worth Made-in-China high tech elec. gargets heading towards the EU with handheld rocket-propelled grenades, if I were some improverished and anonymous East Turkistan "freedom fighter " based in some moutainous Stanland - who can do anything about it?

Or CIA would do that to make it believe with "photos evidences" to prove that I or whomever they want it to be did it.

If a train is loaded with valuable natural resources during troubled time, it would and will become a nice target for ransom.

In fact the trail track itself becomes a highly valuable bargain tool.

...

I am only talking about individual groups here, hostile countries could do much much more indirectly with no hard evidences leaking out.

The best example is that Japan, having both sufficient funds and leading HSR tech for decades, has never drawn up a proposal of setting up land-based energy/natural resources/its export high speed rail acrossing CHina and stanlands towards the Middle East and the EU. That's telling enough.


Still confused, my man?





That's what all the mental retards used to call Werner von Braun. Depending on who you are, I could be honored being addressed as such.
No one in the world seriously thinks they can invade and then occupy China. China is simply is too large for that to happen. If Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be subdued, how does anyone expect to conquer Guizhou and Gansu? These two provinces are much richer and more united.

As for the railways, the other countries have much more to fear from China, considering that China has much more military and economic power. They also know that China will always be their neighbour - no matter what happens.

Your reading of Chinese-foreign relations is also very inaccurate. China generally has "good" relations with most other countries - they are not implacable and hostile enemies.

However, these countries are worried about how to compete with China, and what kind of China they will have to deal with in the future.

You are right that there are risks to China when building a railway line, but China's neighbours have an even bigger stake in ensuring peaceful trade because they are much smaller.

And Japan has never bothered with promoting railway routes to Europe because it is an ISLAND nation that could never connect to the railway network. In contrast, China is at the centre of the network and will benefit the most.

Please have a look at an atlas and look at the population, wealth and trading patterns of all of China's neighbours, and you will see how most of them are very dependent on what China does.

I recommend you start with the World Factbook to get an understanding of the geopolitical and economic situation https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...orld-factbook/
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 12:39 PM   #2126
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

JR Central Chairman Aims to Bring Shinkansen to U.S.
By MARIKO SANCHANTA And YOSHIO TAKAHASHI
= = = =

TOKYO—The chairman of Central Japan Railway Co. said the company is aiming to work with U.S. companies such as General Electric Co., as part of an aggressive bid to see its platypus-billed shinkansen whiz its way through the state of Florida.

At the same time that the company is aggressively ramping up to do business in the U.S., Yoshiyuki Kasai, the 69-year-old head of JR Central, said in an interview Monday that he will never try to sell his world-leading product in China—a strategy at odds with many Japanese companies focusing increasingly on their rapidly growing neighbor.

"It's not possible to export our trains to China. They would steal our technology and they would not respect it," said Mr. Kasai, who has worked in Japan's rail business for 48 years and has become a larger-than-life figure who doesn't mince his words, a rarity in corporate Japan. Known as an outspoken nationalist, he said bluntly: "The risks are too high—if there was an accident they would blame us and it would be the end."

"JR East uses the cheap version of their train in China. I told them not to do it," Mr. Kasai added, referring to East Japan Railway, an independent company operating the shinkansen in central and northern Japan. JR Central and JR East are two of six former state-owned rail companies that were privatized in 1987.

Mr. Kasai also took a swipe at global competitors, notably French firms looking to export their own high-speed railway systems. "In France, if a train is five minutes late, then it's just on time. In Japan, if it's one minute late then it's late," said Mr. Kasai, who got his master's degree in economics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1969. "In 45 years of operation, we have had 4.5 billion passengers and zero casualties as a result of a train accident."

A spokeswoman for French engineering company Alstom SA, a major French train maker, declined to comment.

As for the U.S., "we would make the cars in America and operate a factory in Florida," said Mr. Kasai. "We could partner with American firms, such as General Electric, and engage in technology transfers—these would be 50-50 joint ventures."

Mr. Kasai, however, made clear that these discussions had not reached official stages yet. "We have not received any information on [a proposed tie-up]" said a GE spokeswoman in Tokyo.

Mr. Kasai is vying to export the N700I version of the Japanese shinkansen to the U.S. If his bid is successful, it would mark the first time its total system—including the track, rolling stock, signal equipment and railway management systems—would be used outside of Japan.

Mr. Kasai said he wants to do so in the spirit of what could be called shinkansen diplomacy, or fostering better ties between two nations due to technology transfers and joint infrastructure development projects. "Japan and the U.S. should pursue a free trade agreement or an economic partnership agreement—people should be able to move freely between both countries," said Mr. Kasai. "As a private company we want to improve U.S.-Japan relations."

A big U.S. contract could also be good for the firm's bottom line. The shinkansen remains one of Japan's enduring technological icons and is renowned for its punctuality—trains arrive to the minute—and its efficiency. JR Central's high speed connection between Tokyo and Osaka is one of the few profitable train routes anywhere in the world, and accounts for 80% of the company's revenue.

President Barack Obama announced last month the recipients for an $8 billion plan to develop high-speed rail throughout the U.S. Of that amount, $1.25 billion is earmarked to construct a high-speed link between Tampa and Orlando, which Mr. Kasai says is the most promising area in the U.S. to use shinkansen technology.

A high-speed rail link between the two cities would result in a 45-minute train ride, though the entire project would cost $3.5 billion to finance. A decision on the successful bidder is set to be decided later this year.

Mr. Kasai said that close to a dozen firms in Japan would benefit if JR Central won the bid to build its bullet train in Florida, including Nippon Steel Corp., Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd.,Hitachi Ltd., Nippon Sharyo Ltd., which makes rolling stock, Toshiba Corp. and Mitsubishi Electric Corp.

Dozens of international companies, including Germany's Siemens AG, Canada's Bombardier Inc., France's Alstom, and General Electric Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. of the U.S. are all vying to win the lucrative contracts. Mr. Kasai said that while competition would be tough, Japan's technology, timeliness and safety record spoke for itself.

JR Central is marketing two types of trains in the U.S.: the shinkansen, which travels as fast as 330 kilometers per hour; and the magnetic-levitation, or maglev, train, which can run up to 581 kph, but is more expensive and in only limited use so far. JR Central has already spent more than $1 billion developing the technology behind it.

Mr. Kasai said a maglev link between Baltimore and Washington, D.C., would result in a journey between the two cities of less than 10 minutes. But the cost to construct the line would be exorbitant, totaling several of billions of dollars.

Maglev trains use powerful magnets that allow the train to skim along its guideway without touching it, reducing friction. JR Central's trains float 10 centimeters above the guideway but need supercooled, superconducting magnets to generate lift. The train still uses wheels because it lifts clear of the guideway only after picking up speed.
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 12:45 PM   #2127
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by highway35 View Post
Well, JR Central had refused to work with China right from the beginning when China was soliciting bids from foreign train manufacturers several years ago. Kawasaki participated and offered their technologies of 200 kmh class train to form a JV with CSR. It's the base model for CRH-2C. China now has developed the 300-350 kmh class train on its own based on these technologies and is developing the 380 kmh class trains.

I could understand Yoshiyuki Kasai's bitterness. These days, you could accuse Chinese of any crimes: cheating, low-quality products and environment-polluting ...

Alstom, for the similar reason of not willing to transfer their technologies, did not participate the bids to work with Chinese train manufacturers. They had complained loudly and publicly over a year ago that China "steals" its technologies. Now, obviously they have had second thoughts and offered their 360 kmh train to China (http://www.toocle.com/china-business...igh-speed.html).

I'm afraid it's a little bit too late.
Seconded...

There are already Siemens, Kawasaki and Bombardier high speed train designs in China now, so what can Alstom offer that the others haven't already?
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 12:58 PM   #2128
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,974
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
And Japan has never bothered with promoting railway routes to Europe because it is an ISLAND nation that could never connect to the railway network.
Oh, Japan can. Singapore is an island nation, too.

But how high priority is a Soya Strait tunnel to Sakhalin if it only leads to sparsely settled Sakhalin, and connecting even to Khabarovsk means building another 1000 km railway and another tunnel? How high priority is a Tsushima Strait tunnel that goes only to South Korea, and no further?

Whereas China... If they are building 500 to 1000 km HSR-s to connect Guangzhou to backwaters of Nanning, Kunming and Guizhou, why not build another 1000 km railway Guangzhou to Hanoi?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 02:17 PM   #2129
[email protected]
Registered User
 
Panda@Play's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 159
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
No one in the world seriously thinks they can invade and then occupy China. China is simply is too large for that to happen. If Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be subdued, how does anyone expect to conquer Guizhou and Gansu? These two provinces are much richer and more united.

As for the railways, the other countries have much more to fear from China, considering that China has much more military and economic power. They also know that China will always be their neighbour - no matter what happens.

Your reading of Chinese-foreign relations is also very inaccurate. China generally has "good" relations with most other countries - they are not implacable and hostile enemies.

However, these countries are worried about how to compete with China, and what kind of China they will have to deal with in the future.

You are right that there are risks to China when building a railway line, but China's neighbours have an even bigger stake in ensuring peaceful trade because they are much smaller.

And Japan has never bothered with promoting railway routes to Europe because it is an ISLAND nation that could never connect to the railway network. In contrast, China is at the centre of the network and will benefit the most.

Please have a look at an atlas and look at the population, wealth and trading patterns of all of China's neighbours, and you will see how most of them are very dependent on what China does.

I recommend you start with the World Factbook to get an understanding of the geopolitical and economic situation https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...orld-factbook/
First off, I wouldn't use a public source of cia to read up geopolitical implications if I were you. As for the purpose of tieing up and intergrating economy with the neighbouring stanland, you don't need to build up a posh line to do so, since their economies have been already depending on CHina even without the line as you just proved.

Secondly, I haven't completely denied the potential economic benefits of the project which actually seem to be the only consideration project planner put on the table so far. I was arguing that the potential risks would outweight the benefits. Tan China could afford to build a Silk Road for east-west trade since its per cap income was the highest in the world; while with low per cap income, China today should not squander hard-earned cash on this opulent showpiece when social security and medicare for the mass need investments much more urgently at this stage. In fact, before thinking about external consolidation, one should think first on more inter-provinces consolidation within China herself for the time being.

On the invasion of China, of course no one would do so or could succeed now and today. Not doable doesn't mean it's impossible ( WWI, WWII were not that ancient history).

More importantly, the global geopolitical chess is NOT about pure invasion per see, particularly betwwen the 2 superpowers USA and China, but control and/or having ability to disrupt, sabotage at minimum costs - just think in terms of the US control of East China Sea 1st/2nd island chains; the US current attempt to control Yemen using Al Qaeda as an excuse to control China's oil shipping sea route bottleneck ... Did the US threaten invasion of CHina by doing so? Of course NO, but CHina feels euqally threatened as if it were an "invasion" since indeed China has been effectively "controlled"/: managed" in this way.

Building a posh rail line passing through stanland in light of the almost de facto US control of current Afgan and Iraq is nothing less than giving the US another convenient way to distupt/sabotage at minimum costs at the doorstep of its millitary bases. It is an imprudent and risky move given the current limited info we have on teh project- this is what I was arguing for.

As for Japan's case, even though it's an island country, shipping thru the short line betwwen a port of Russia to Northern Japan, then building a high speed railway passing thru either China, or Russia Far East - Outer Mogolia ( taking advantage of existing trans-siberia railline), towards theMiddle East and the EU, is not a fairytale idea given Japan's total dependence on energy , export and Malacca straits. Yet it hasn't done so, not even a proposal at any time in recent history. Isn't it weird?

Last edited by [email protected]; March 10th, 2010 at 02:36 PM.
Panda@Play no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 04:07 PM   #2130
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
First off, I wouldn't use a public source of cia to read up geopolitical implications if I were you.
What sources should we read then?
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 04:50 PM   #2131
[email protected]
Registered User
 
Panda@Play's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 159
Likes (Received): 3



Pandamonium Guide ( 2010 Edition) could be a good read, maybe it's too niche for ya?
Panda@Play no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 09:29 PM   #2132
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 381

Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless View Post
JR Central Chairman Aims to Bring Shinkansen to U.S.
By MARIKO SANCHANTA And YOSHIO TAKAHASHI
= = = =

TOKYO—The chairman of Central Japan Railway Co. said the company is aiming to work with U.S. companies such as General Electric Co., as part of an aggressive bid to see its platypus-billed shinkansen whiz its way through the state of Florida.

At the same time that the company is aggressively ramping up to do business in the U.S., Yoshiyuki Kasai, the 69-year-old head of JR Central, said in an interview Monday that he will never try to sell his world-leading product in China—a strategy at odds with many Japanese companies focusing increasingly on their rapidly growing neighbor.

"It's not possible to export our trains to China. They would steal our technology and they would not respect it," said Mr. Kasai, who has worked in Japan's rail business for 48 years and has become a larger-than-life figure who doesn't mince his words, a rarity in corporate Japan. Known as an outspoken nationalist, he said bluntly: "The risks are too high—if there was an accident they would blame us and it would be the end."

"JR East uses the cheap version of their train in China. I told them not to do it," Mr. Kasai added, referring to East Japan Railway, an independent company operating the shinkansen in central and northern Japan. JR Central and JR East are two of six former state-owned rail companies that were privatized in 1987.


Someone is really scared.... If you have proof open a law suit. China paid billions of dollars to Kawasaki and bought the tech. There is no stealing or copying or anything illegal. This is the case for almost everything China produces. People are just saying "China copies" because they are threatened with rising China. Nothing less nothing more. I've yet to seen a law suit about a serious copyright case.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 10:06 PM   #2133
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Call it misuse of the technology, if you like. Technology sold by Kawasaki to China and used in the CRH2 sets has a safe maximum operating speed of 275 kph, and JR East (which operates the E2-1000 series which the CRH2 units are based on) specifically instructed the Chinese not to operate above the design speeds.

Lo and behold, the CRH2 units are being operated at speeds much higher than that by beefing up the MT ratio. It was enough of a liability issue that Kawasaki went over to China's Ministry of Railway and demanded an official statement that they would not be held responsible in the event of an accident. rThe issue isn't just copyright, but also public image, and when an accident does happen, it will look bad on Kawasaki and Shinkansen technology, regardless of the fact that the technology was purchased.
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010, 10:56 PM   #2134
gincan
Gincan
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 887
Likes (Received): 183

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post


Someone is really scared.... If you have proof open a law suit. China paid billions of dollars to Kawasaki and bought the tech. There is no stealing or copying or anything illegal. This is the case for almost everything China produces. People are just saying "China copies" because they are threatened with rising China. Nothing less nothing more. I've yet to seen a law suit about a serious copyright case.
China has a long tradition of copying technology, Russia refuse to sell them any hightech weaponssystems after they begun to sell cheap clones of a russian fighterjet. In europe chinese train manufacturers are blacklisted by the european union and are basically unable to enter the market with their products. The only reason Bombardier and Siemens sell their trains to china is because they know that their homemarkets are safegarded by the EU. This however has not stoped the chinese train manufacturerers to try and sell clones to countries outside of the EU.
gincan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 12:27 AM   #2135
Ariel74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Posts: 414
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
Call it misuse of the technology, if you like. Technology sold by Kawasaki to China and used in the CRH2 sets has a safe maximum operating speed of 275 kph, and JR East (which operates the E2-1000 series which the CRH2 units are based on) specifically instructed the Chinese not to operate above the design speeds.

Lo and behold, the CRH2 units are being operated at speeds much higher than that by beefing up the MT ratio. It was enough of a liability issue that Kawasaki went over to China's Ministry of Railway and demanded an official statement that they would not be held responsible in the event of an accident. rThe issue isn't just copyright, but also public image, and when an accident does happen, it will look bad on Kawasaki and Shinkansen technology, regardless of the fact that the technology was purchased.
By the way, it is a widespread myth that China simply took the Japanese and German trains and made them, by fiat so to speak, run at a higher speed than specified by their Japanese and German providers. The core technologies come from Siemens and Kawasaki, no doubt. But the Chinese aimed to tweak and optimize these from the get go. There is a large amount of discussion about the (attempted) tweaks and improvements among the chinese railway fans on forums such as hasea. Interested (and linguistically competent) readers can surely profit from taking a look there.

So no, it will not look bad on Kawasaki, because we are talking about CRH2, trains built with the same core technologies as E2-1000 series, but not identical with them.

Last edited by Ariel74; March 11th, 2010 at 12:54 AM.
Ariel74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 12:32 AM   #2136
Ariel74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Posts: 414
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by gincan View Post
In europe chinese train manufacturers are blacklisted by the european union and are basically unable to enter the market with their products. The only reason Bombardier and Siemens sell their trains to china is because they know that their homemarkets are safegarded by the EU. This however has not stoped the chinese train manufacturerers to try and sell clones to countries outside of the EU.
Didn't China win a contract to supply England with moderately high-speed rolling stocks not too long ago? One of us is imagining things
Ariel74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 12:45 AM   #2137
Republica
BUND
 
Republica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,036
Likes (Received): 3

they did, Grand Central trains for some 125mph trains.

I dont know if it will happen though.
__________________
Rant
Republica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 05:40 AM   #2138
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 381

Quote:
Originally Posted by gincan View Post
China has a long tradition of copying technology, Russia refuse to sell them any hightech weaponssystems after they begun to sell cheap clones of a russian fighterjet. In europe chinese train manufacturers are blacklisted by the european union and are basically unable to enter the market with their products. The only reason Bombardier and Siemens sell their trains to china is because they know that their homemarkets are safegarded by the EU. This however has not stoped the chinese train manufacturerers to try and sell clones to countries outside of the EU.
wrong, wrong, wrong. All misinformation. You don't know anything about military trade between Russia and China. You just heard smt from God knows where and writing here like it has any substance. Which aircraft is Russia not selling to China? Come on, write here some specific ones.

China bought many fighters, bombers, missiles and always had build their clones. Russia has been OK every time because the Chinese market was profitable at the end. There was nothing illegal.

Mig-21 ==> J-7
Su-27 ==> J-11
Tu-16 ==> H-6

These are examples just come into my mind. There are countless examples.

But, now, due to economical hence technological development China have undergone she simply does not need to purchase weapons from Russia. This is the reason why we dont see any big purchases in last 5-6 years. Even right now, China is buying AL-31 and RD-33 jet engines from Russia. So, show me the so called embargo you are talking about.


Chinese trains in Europe.... This is again nothing to do with copyright. Show me single official document stating this. Siemens is selling both trains and technology period. China can use it however she wants. They paid billions for it. Also, as far as I know China already selling their rolling stocks to everywhere not only Europe.


You want to blame someone about copyright, look at big shiny companies like apple. How many law suits does apple have about copyright?
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 09:57 AM   #2139
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post


Pandamonium Guide ( 2010 Edition) could be a good read, maybe it's too niche for ya?
How is a computer game a source of better geopolitical information?
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2010, 10:20 AM   #2140
Bandit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 435
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by gincan View Post
China has a long tradition of copying technology, Russia refuse to sell them any hightech weaponssystems after they begun to sell cheap clones of a russian fighterjet. In europe chinese train manufacturers are blacklisted by the european union and are basically unable to enter the market with their products. The only reason Bombardier and Siemens sell their trains to china is because they know that their homemarkets are safegarded by the EU. This however has not stoped the chinese train manufacturerers to try and sell clones to countries outside of the EU.
Then why are the Russians trying to sell Su-35s to China? It has technology that they didn't sell to the Chinese before. Why did they want China on board with the PAK-FA project?
Bandit no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
china, high speed train, rail, 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 08:15 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