[CH] Swiss highways and motorways

[ChrisZwolle]

Keep on dreaming. Such things never work. Do you think they gonna buy a vignette, and then get on a train because they are afraid traffic is gonna increase slightly at the Gotthard?

The general problem is that every increase in capacity of a road creates more traffic.

How much can that be? 20.000 vehicles is NOTHING for such an important axe. Hell, we call those the most quiet motorways in the Netherlands or Germany. I really don't think the train idea is gonna work. It only works when there is absolutely no other option, like the Channel tunnel.

Sorry, I heard to many "hallelujah-stories" about rail transport that didn't work out to believe in this railplan.

[Coccodrillo]

There will a limit of 650.000 trucks instead of 1.200.000 today. UE agreed on this limit because Switzerland offered the railway as alternative.

The freight traffic of the Gotthard railway is about ten times more the traffic of the Channel tunnel.

Switzerland will not offer truck shuttles like the Eurotunnel, instead it promotes intermodal and traditional freight trains.

As for passengers, for example, Milan-Zurich is 3h20 by car (estimed by mappy.it), 2h40 by train in the future. Sure families on holiday will still probably prefer the car to transport their luggage. But some passenger traffic will use the railway instead.

[ChrisZwolle]

Station to station is completely different than door-to-door. I know this kind of promotional talk about public transport. That's also the disadvantage of public/rail transport, station to station is fast, but additional transport to reach your destination takes up a lot of time.

Again, Switzerland should be happy about the number of trucks. Transport axes in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands carry over 6.000.000 trucks per year, and it's estimated that that will grow by 80%.

[Coccodrillo]

The Gotthard has less traffic also compared to the Brenner, but if we can reduce it, why not?

=================================

A strange single-lane tunnel, with alternate traffic. It is 3,4 km long and lies there.



http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_Munt_La_Schera

http://www.engadin-strom.ch/en/fs_in...n=5&sprache=en

http://www.belofastow.com/

http://picasaweb.google.com/Nlogax.n...29175963904962

[Jeroen669]

Originally Posted by Chriszwolle

It only works when there is absolutely no other option, like the Channel tunnel.

And even the channel tunnel has alternatives: the boats. In fact, not that much truck traffic goes through the tunnel, practicly only high priority goods (like flowers).

Originally Posted by Thun

The general problem is that every increase in capacity of a road creates more traffic.

Even if that effect would be a few thousand vehicles a day (which already would be quite much), where are we talking about? There's no doubt Swiss has a well PT network, but that doesn't mean you have to attract just a few possible car drivers to take trains for every price. Tunnels are extremely expensive, and it's clear a second tube would solve the real problems (people queueing for hours, plus the increase of traffic safety) instead of those micrograms of pollution.

[thun]

That's the different point of view you can e.g. see between perhaps NL and Switzerland, but surely between Switzerland and Austria or Germany.
The Swiss try to increase public transport options whilst other countries still prefer motorway building. With rising oil prices, the attractiveness of such transit train connections will rise even more, not only for freight but also passenger traffic. And I think therefore it's a decision that will fit better in teh upcoming decades than expanding the road. Btw. the general problems such a motorway in a narrow valley cause aren't comparable to flat NL as well.
Have you ever looked down to the valley the motorway runs across/through. The Wipptal and lower Inntal (Brenner) is a perfect example how transit traffic can ruin the living standard. Therefore, putting as much traffic as possible on rails under the mountain (and not only trucks, but conventional freight trains) is by far the better option than expanding the motorway monster which creates only more pollution (exhaust pollution that doesn't leave the valley and noise pollution reflected by the mountains...).
With increasing traffic the Gotthard monotube will probably get more and more unattractive for freighthaulers and the rail option more and more attractive. And for passengers (at least business travellers) the trains can be for the first time a real alternative because they will need the same time as cars for the first time.

[GENIUS LOCI]

Originally Posted by Coccodrillo

As for passengers, for example, Milan-Zurich is 3h20 by car (estimed by mappy.it), 2h40 by train in the future. Sure families on holiday will still probably prefer the car to transport their luggage. But some passenger traffic will use the railway instead.

2h40 counting HS in Italian stretch ana mid-high in Switzerland?

Anyway: this w.e. I came there, Coccodrillo, between Lausanne and Geneva... by train from Milan is about 3h30
By car about the same... but when I went there by car last time (as I poreviously said in the thread) I found heavy snow on Grand St. Bernard (in the first day of Spring!!!!) and my trip last about 8h!!!!!!

[Coccodrillo]

2h40 counting the Gotthard and Ceneri base tunnels, both under construction (the first will probably open in 2017, the second in 2019).

With the planned new lines (Milano-Lugano, Erstfeld-Zürich) travel time would be shorter, but this parts are not financed yet.

But again, this tunnels will allow also the reduction of transit traffic. It is known from the beginning that they will not pay for themselves. And their cost overruns are not enormous. Overcosts appeared because it has been decided to extend the original project with other options. Cost overruns due to the geology problems are "only" 700 millions of euro.

[ChrisZwolle]

I really don't think people are gonna buy a vignette PLUS paying for this train service.

[Timon91]

We can also just dig a tunnel under Switzerland, that would avoid this problems

[Dinivan]

Originally Posted by Chriszwolle

I really don't think people are gonna buy a vignette PLUS paying for this train service.

it depends on the price of the train service and the price of fuel, don't you think? SBB is not stupid and therefore it will set a reasonable price, taking into account that the priority is not to make money but to take traffic out of the roads; plus as you have already been told, the traffic limit of trucks will be substantially lower.

[Coccodrillo]

Originally Posted by Chriszwolle

I really don't think people are gonna buy a vignette PLUS paying for this train service.

There will no shuttle service like Eurotunnel, nor for trucks nor for private cars. The new line will be used only by passenger, freight and intermodal trains. If there will be a shuttle service, it will be for trucks only and on a very limited basis, like today (a train every 1 to 2 hours, or less).

In my opinion the old line could be used to shuttle only cars and only during peak periods. A limited service is still operated when the road tunnel is closed.

Anyway, often residents in Switzerland can buy a daily ticket valid everywhere (trains and buses) for 20 euro. And children up to 16 years travels for free, if they travel with their parents or grand-parents.

[thun]

I think they would rather put the freight on a train in the beginnning than transporting it to the Gotthard on a lorry, putting the lorry then on a train and so on. Would be even better.

However, Switzerland makes real efforts to increase the rail share on freight traffic, e. g. by cofinancing modernization of corridors to Switzerland: The rail line Munich - Lindau (-Zurich) will finally be electrified in some years which is really necessary only because the Swiss pay some million Euros, too.

[x-type]

Switzerland doesn't want lorries!! the tolls for them are incredible, and at bordercrossing they don't tolerate even 1 cm over 4 meters (height) without penalties¨, which are, again, really high

[Verso]

Originally Posted by thun

I think they would rather put the freight on a train in the beginnning than transporting it to the Gotthard on a lorry, putting the lorry then on a train and so on. Would be even better.

You're talking about freight. What about cars that get stuck in front of Gotthard for hours? It's inhumane.

[thun]

Cars are harder to fight, I guess. As said before, probably noone who goes on holidays will use a train instead of his car (but with rising oil price, this might change for some people). For business travellers, the train will surely be an good option (as fast but more reliable (no jams) and you can work in the train). But if there will be a significant decrease in lorries this would have a positive effect on car traffic, of course.
However, lorries are in general the bigger problem for a transit country I would say (loud, slow, pollution), so it's a good start to fight them.

Regarding the penalties: Well, Switzerland is a "special case", I would say...

[ChrisZwolle]

Nice climb to Griesalp:

Jetzt gehts los:

[x-type]

28?? the record i've seen so far was 22%

[Verso]

28% is enormous. What about those 360 curves between Chur and Arosa (720 with return drive)? Has anyone else driven them? I'm not driving there again.

[jarbury]

There's a street in Dunedin, New Zealand, which has a 40% incline I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_Street,_Dunedin