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 September 23rd, 2010, 03:31 PM   #161
strandeed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 654
Likes (Received): 108

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMiler View Post

Freight trains do not run at 200 mph; they run at 50 mph.
Perhaps in the United States, but in Europe it's common to see freight trains running at over 100mph
strandeed no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:00 PM   #162
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

AFAIK 120km/h is typical for intermodal and empties, 100km/h for oil, metals and aggregates. It may occur occasionally, but I'd like to see some specific examples to believe it. If anything the speeds of freight in the USA is higher than in Europe, having seen plenty of intermodals going 80-90mph. But there isn't likely to be too much difference.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:12 PM   #163
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMiler View Post
China has only one passage to Europe; the one that runs through Kazakhstan. Or China can detour and go to Russia's far east to be connected to Russia's Trans-Siberia railway.
Sorry, four, not one. The westernmost one is the link between Urumqui and
Kazakhstan, as you mentioned, but there is also the link through Mongolia
(Ulan-Bator, Ulan-Ude), the Trans-Mandchourian at Alashankou, and a
fourth one near the end of the Trans-sibérian line at Vladivostok.

Those 4 links are already used for both passenger and freight traffic.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:19 PM   #164
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
Your entire post seems to assume that if such a link is built the only journey available would be China all the way to Europe. I wonder what proportion of Japanese rail travellers take the entire length of the Sanyo and Tokaido Shinkansens from Tokyo to Hakata? Not many, therefore don't build the Sanyo and Tokaido Shinkansens? Hmm.
In Japan there are indeed very whealthy cities along the course of the
Shinkansen railway, cities of more than one million inhabitants every 100 km
or so... and many journeys are not for the entire length of the line.

But a link between Europe and China would, between the two, cross
essentially desertic territory. If you don't believe so, please list the
cities that this line would serve, the number of inhabitants, and the
distance between them. You will soon realize that this market will never
be able to sustain more than a few trains a day. This is not enough to
sustain the costs of a high-speed line, which is not profitable if not
travelled by a train every hour at least.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:21 PM   #165
strandeed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 654
Likes (Received): 108

yes you appear to be correct... British freight typically is pulled up to 90mph on intermodel compatible trains.

American trains are limited to 70mph for the most part though correct? I know they can travel faster in Canada though.
strandeed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:22 PM   #166
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slagathor View Post
Yeah me neither. "Next stop: Teheran." I don't think so
Why so ? Have you been there already ? I have. I felt over there much safer
than in the streets of New York. You should not believe all the junk the press
is telling you about this country.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:39 PM   #167
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon91 View Post
Actually, the economic potential is massive. Not only Kazakhstan is a pretty dynamic economy, but this HSR would cater mostly to freight transportation. Shipping goods to Europe, a massive consumer of Chinese produce within 2 days at a bargain cost is surely what China hopes for, as opposed to over a week on current railways or by ships. The corridor along the line will likely generate economic activities itself due to excellent accessibility. Some more budget travelers and backpackers are very likely to use it as well, me included
1) You have to make choices here : is it high-speed rail or freight ? You can't
have both on the same tracks. High speed requires precision-laid tracks,
which can be travelled only by very light trains, in order to preserve track
geometry. Freight requires heavy trains with a much slower speed, so
different curve banking, and so on. This is what I find the most nebulous
about this project : you even don't know its exact purpose...

2) 2 days for passenger trains travelling at high speed is already too optimistic
in my opinion. And you expect freight trains to have the same performance ?
Get real, please ! Today, with simplified border control, freight trains from
Belgium still need 4 days just to reach Istanbul ! You expect all those middle
east and central asia countries to let freight trains go thru without extensive
border inspections ??? A container from here to China takes over two weeks
to get there by train and almost one month by ship.

3) Budget travellers and backpackers will probably find the plane much
cheaper than the train. What makes the price is the number of passengers
per vehicle and the time the trip takes. Budget airlines propose today less
expensive price for trips over 1000 km than train companies. Why do you
expect that it would be different here ? And, by the way, do you expect
many travellers to go through the hassle of getting all the visas needed to
cross between and here and China by land, while by plane you need only
the visa for the destination ? At just 50 Euros per visa, it will already double
the airline fare...
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 04:50 PM   #168
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by strandeed View Post
Perhaps in the United States, but in Europe it's common to see freight trains running at over 100mph
Most freight trains in Europe travel at speeds not exceeding 120 km/h. Higher
speeds require specialized rolling stock that exists only in very limited
quantities, and for very specific purposes.

There is a "high-speed" freight train in France, the so-called "MGVG". Speed
is, as far as I know, 160 km/h. Only one link, between south of France and
Paris. It uses a very specialized pool of electrics and rolling stock.

In Germany, the two first high-speed lines (Hannover-Wurzburg and
Mannheimm-Stuttgart) have been designed for both high-speed and freight.
The technical constraints are such (track strenght, alignment, and limitation
on slopes) that the cost has been deemed too high, and for the third line
(Köln-Frankfurt) this option has been abandoned and the line is passenger
only.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2010, 05:49 PM   #169
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
For example, Russia is not an enemy of imperialistic China, Russia is an ally of China. Russia is not too worried about the activity of China in outer Manchuria, and wants China to build 900 km HSR between Haishenwei and Boli. Russia is also developing their own HSR, Sapsan already runs between St. Petersburg, Moscow and Nižni Novgorod and Russia wants to extend it to Jekaterinburg. If China wants to build high-speed Transsiberian and cut the trip time from the present 7 days to less than 2, Russia would agree.
Trafic on the transsiberian railway is mainly freight. The density of population
along this line is far too low to promote enough passenger traffic to make a
high-speed line profitable. It will never happen. And, by the way, Sapsan is
not HSR. It is just a glorified ICE3 that runs at conventional speed on
conventional track. There is not yet any single mile of true HSR in Russia,
and I suggest you don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 11:46 AM   #170
greenlion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 374
Likes (Received): 30

http://beta.brecorder.com/section/50...ambitions.html

China reawakens trans-Asian railway ambitions

PETER JANSSEN

ARTICLE (September 22, 2010) : Plans to link mainland Asia by railway have been around for decades. In 1960, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia Pacific (ESCAP) initiated the Trans-Asian Railway project to establish a 114,000-kilometre rail network between Asia and Europe.

The project was derailed by wars in Indochina, the Cultural Revolution in China and a lack of finance for Asian mega-projects. The scheme was given a new shot in the arm, on paper anyway, in 2006 when 22 Asian governments signed a deal to cooperate on the rail link. That agreement finally went into effect in June last year after China ratified it.

More significant than the agreement itself has been China's push to turn the rail network dream into reality, especially in South- East Asia, which accounts for the lion's share of the 8,000 kilometres of "missing links."

Thailand and China this year started talks about constructing a high-speed standard-gauge 850-kilometre new rail link from Nong Khai, on the Thai-Lao border, to Bangkok. A second 1,000-kilometre line, between Bangkok and Padang Besar, on the Thai-Malaysian border, would be built later.

The two lines would cost an estimated 300 billion baht (9.7 billion dollars). "The Chinese government believes this can be implemented within three years," Thai Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanich said. "If there is any delay, I suspect it will be at our end, not theirs," he said.

One foreseeable obstacle is the State Railways of Thailand (SRT), which runs the country's existing rail network at a massive loss. It is highly politicised, prone to strikes and historically opposed to any attempts at privatisation. "If the SRT is given no role in the project, I will oppose it as an advisor to the SRTlabour union and the head of the New Politics Party," said Somsak Kosaisuk, a politician who formerly headed the SRT's labour union.

Another likely problem for the Thai-China rail project is the Lao link. Having a high-speed rail link between Nong Khai and Bangkok makes little economic sense unless there is a similar link between Laos and southern China. Such a link is under discussion. In August, senior railway officials from China visited Vientiane to discuss the project with the Lao Railway Authority, which manages the country's current rail network - a 3.5-kilometre link between the Thai-Laos Friendship Bridge and Dongphosy town, outside Vientiane.

China and Laos have signed an agreement to conduct a feasibility study on a medium high-speed (200-kilometre-per-hour) rail link between Boten, Luang Namtha province, and Vientiane, a distance of about 400 kilometres. The link would provide a connection for freight and passengers with Kunming, the capital of China's Yunnan province.

The cost of construction would be prohibitive. "I understand they are looking at three different routes but all of them would be mountainous, and potentially very expensive," said one Vientiane-based aid expert. "But the Lao government is taking the project extremely seriously, as part of their aim to turn Laos from a landlocked to land-linked country," he added.

A lot will depend on whether Laos sees sufficient economic returns from the railway for providing the link between its two economically much more active neighbours, China and Thailand. "Laos is the weakest but most important link," said Nipon Poapongsakorn, president of the Thailand Development Research Institute, a think tank. "Unless there is a benefit for Laos it will just become a transit for goods and passengers. What will they get from this programme other than pollution?"

Meanwhile, China has already started building a rail link between Dali, Yunnan, and Ruli, on the China-Myanmar border. The project began two years ago. One physical constraint to China's railroad ambitions in South-East Asia is the different gauges. China uses the standard 1.435-metre gauge, whereas all of South-East Asia uses 1-metre gauge. Switching over to standard gauge would prove costly. "Obviously, if a network decided to shift from one gauge to another, it would require a huge investment in running stock," said Pierre Chartier, economics affairs officer at ESCAP's transport division.


Copyright Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 2010
greenlion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 11:48 AM   #171
Eda95
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 57
Likes (Received): 0

It's so nice
Eda95 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 02:24 PM   #172
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

@ MarcVD, dunno, I'm just doing a quick study. Doesn't appear to be able to support it, although the route on that map only goes through desert for 200 miles apart from the HSR in China between Xi'an and Urumqi which will be there anyway. The rest of the route through southern Russia is actually relatively highly populated. Plus the bit towards Iran and in Iran.

I understand this HSR is intended for freight use also, in which case regular high speed trains would be impossible anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by strandeed View Post
yes you appear to be correct... British freight typically is pulled up to 90mph on intermodel compatible trains.

American trains are limited to 70mph for the most part though correct? I know they can travel faster in Canada though.
Freight trains in the UK are limited to 75mph for class 6 freight, which includes intermodal. There are only 3 types of freight loco that can go any faster, the electric class 86 and 90, and the diesel class 67 which is really a bo-bo passenger loco. But these don't exceed 75mph on freight. The freight-dedicated electric class 92, and the diesel classes 59, 60, 66, 70 cannot exceed 75mph. There are some other older locos like the 37s and 47/57s that can also go faster, but only when hauling passenger trains.

I don't know what the limit is in the USA, but in documentaries I have seen the driver has mentioned they are going 80-90. Whether this is typical I am not sure at all.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 04:17 PM   #173
Luli Pop
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,529
Likes (Received): 40

take a look on this and you'll see that most travels in the euroasian HSR will surely take place inside each traversed country http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...y_with_key.png

notice that Argentina is not even light brown, even if in the pampas in a 700km strip there are 30 million people (40 million total), Asia is much darker.
yet is from 1994 and urbanization has been even stronger since then in Asia.


the most logical rail if we think of pop density would go through India and Iran, then north through Armenia, Georgia, Rusia, Ucranie.

as for "arguments" of some saying "that would be too expensive" or "HSR for both passenger and freight is way too expensive (its been done in Germany)", let my tell that we are talking about Chine. Nothing is too expensive for Chine, they just do it.

None of would have ever think it would be possible to construct in a couple years as much HSR as France has constructed in 30 years, yet China does!

Welcome to the new world!

Last edited by Luli Pop; September 24th, 2010 at 04:31 PM.
Luli Pop no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 04:20 PM   #174
Slagathor
Gay love is love too
 
Slagathor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Hague
Posts: 8,455
Likes (Received): 6140

1994? I like to think we've moved on.
Slagathor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 05:50 PM   #175
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,973
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
But a link between Europe and China would, between the two, cross
essentially desertic territory. If you don't believe so, please list the
cities that this line would serve, the number of inhabitants, and the
distance between them.
Xinjiang Autonomous Region - roughly 1,7 million square km of deserts, with less than 22 million people.
Kazakhstan - roughly 2,7 million square km of deserts, with about 17 million people.

The high-speed railway through deserts AND with a detour through Nanshan mountains, 1800 km from Lanzhou to Urumqi, is seriously under construction. Due for completion in 2014. After it is completed, where will China build next few thousands km HSR? Why not add Urumqi-Astana, Urumqi-Yining-Almaty or both?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2010, 11:33 PM   #176
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,069
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Xinjiang Autonomous Region - roughly 1,7 million square km of deserts, with less than 22 million people.
Kazakhstan - roughly 2,7 million square km of deserts, with about 17 million people.

The high-speed railway through deserts AND with a detour through Nanshan mountains, 1800 km from Lanzhou to Urumqi, is seriously under construction. Due for completion in 2014.
Yes, and I have serious doubts about the profitability of that line too. But OK,
this is China, and they can, if they want, build unprofitable railway lines in
their own country (more power to them, I'd say) because it is part of a
system.

But please remember that they did not propose to build all this eurasian
network at their own expense, but rather to be paid for this construction
in raw materials from the countries traversed. I doubt very much, political
problems put aside, that all those neighbours of China can afford to pay,
even in raw materials, for an unprofitable high-speed railway.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2010, 07:16 AM   #177
greenlion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 374
Likes (Received): 30

I found this news which was published by 2004 about China-Kazakhstan railway

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english...ent_315973.htm

Quote:
New railway linking China, Europe to be built
(peopledaily.com.cn)
Updated: 2004-03-18 15:56

Kazakhstan will kick off construction of a new railroad this year to link China up with Europe for facilitating transportation between Asia-Pacific and European countries, a vice-president of Kazakhstan Railway Co., Ltd announced on March 12, who was in Hong Kong raising funds for the project.

Six hours needed for changing wheels at borders

This planned railway is part of the New Eurasia Land Bridge, which got its name for differentiating itself from the Trans-Siberian Railroad liking Asian and European continents. The New Eurasia Land Bridge, starting from Lianyungang port at the western coast of the Pacific runs westward via Lanzhou and Urumqi to Alashankou Port at the western border of China, then to Druzhba Port in Kazakhstan. It is another land passage that runs through Asian and European countries and finally reaches the Atlantic coast. The New Eurasia Land Bridge is a bridge of convenience, for it links up nearly a population of 2.2 billion in more than 40 countries in Asia and Europe and dramatically shortened the land transportation distance between the two continents.

Situated at the center of Eurasia continent, Kazakhstan serves a pivot of the New Eurasia Land Bridge. Besides, as a landlocked country Kazakhstan pays high attention to developing land transportation in its economic growth. Building a railway running through its whole territory will be a means for the country to merge with international markets.

Railway lines in the former Soviet Union areas are all 1,520mm broad-gauge ones, while those in China and Europe are 1,435mm ones of international standard, the differences causing great inconvenience to cross-border traffic. At present trade exchanges between China and Kazakhstan mainly depends on railway and there is a pair of passenger trains every week. Passengers shuttling between the two countries say the most tiresome thing in their journey is to wait for six hours at the border when broad-gauge wheels on every carriage are hoisted, removed and with the standard ones to be fixed on. The lengthening time amounts to eight hours counting transit formalities. Moreover, cargo transportation will be more complicated and economic losses are bound to be cropping up during frequent loading and unloading.

New railway to carry 40 million tons of cargo annually

Goods transported via railway from Kazakhstan to China mainly include oil, cotton, nonferrous metal and steel, and those from the other way round are chiefly daily necessities. Last year saw a surge of railway cargo transportation at Alashankou Port in China's Xinjiang, which surpassed 7.5 million tons. Trade volume between China and Kazakhstan registered at 1.5 billion US dollars in 2001, 1.95 billion dollars in 2002 and leapt over 3 billion dollars in last year. Kazakhstan is not only the second largest neighbor of China, but also the second largest trading partner in the Commonwealth of Independent States.

The new railway will boast an annual carrying capacity of 40 million tons. After its completion, trains from either Hong Kong or other places of China will directly head for Europe without changing wheels at borders. The border traffic flow of commodities from China, Iran and Turkey, including daily necessities and building materials, will reach 2 billion dollars each year, and the total amount for Asian and European countries will hit 7 billion dollars. Therefore, the railway connecting China and Europe will serve as an active motive force for Chinese and Kazakh economies.

New railway to be built on stock

The planned railway runs a length of 3,083 kilometers within Kazakh territory, which costs an estimated fund of 3.5 billion dollars and will be completed in four years. This is the first time that Kazakhstan Railway Co., Ltd announces the project overseas and the company expects help from Hong Kong business community to evaluate the practicality and commercial value of the project. It is reported that construction of the railway will be funded by way of stockholding system, with Kazakhstan holding 25 percent shares and foreign investors 75 percent. The company has dispatched a delegation to Hong Kong in the hope of attracting investment, and more than 100 industry insiders and investors have shown their interest.

As a matter of fact, China has never stopped making efforts to expand Central Asia transport passages. In September 1995, China signed an agreement with the Kazakh government on using Lianyungang Port for loading, unloading and trafficking transit commodities of Kazakhstan, while Lianyungang Port is just the starting point of the New Eurasia Land Bridge. Currently China, Kyrghyzstan and Uzbekistan are cooperating on a three-partied railway project. The construction plan of the new railway is of strategic significance for economies along the New Eurasia Land Bridge, and is bound to boost economic and trade ties between China and Central Asian countries and expand China's economic and trade links with foreign countries as a whole.
greenlion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2010, 09:44 AM   #178
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
Yes, and I have serious doubts about the profitability of that line too. But OK,
this is China, and they can, if they want, build unprofitable railway lines in
their own country (more power to them, I'd say) because it is part of a
system.

But please remember that they did not propose to build all this eurasian
network at their own expense, but rather to be paid for this construction
in raw materials from the countries traversed. I doubt very much, political
problems put aside, that all those neighbours of China can afford to pay,
even in raw materials, for an unprofitable high-speed railway.
I have no doubt that most (if not all ) of the HSR lines in China would NOT be profitable on a standalone basis. However, the profitability calculation takes into account the fact that there are old conventional lines that are all running at capacity.

On these old lines, they remove passenger services and can turn these into low-speed freight lines that have many times the capacity.

So at the end of the day, the profitability analysis works because the loss on the HSR line is balanced by a larger increase in freight profits.

The Asian Development Bank was invited to review these plans and they agreed that it could work.
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2010, 12:25 PM   #179
greenlion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 374
Likes (Received): 30

http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/278806...ailway-planned

Trans-Asian Railway Planned

By PETER JANSSEN September 24, 2010, 5:48pm

BANGKOK, Thailand (dpa) — Plans to link mainland Asia by railway have been around for decades. In 1960, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia Pacific (ESCAP) initiated the Trans-Asian Railway project to establish a 114,000-kilometer rail network between Asia and Europe.

The project was derailed by wars in Indochina, the Cultural Revolution in China, and a lack of finance for Asian mega-projects. The scheme was given a new shot in the arm, on paper anyway, in 2006 when 22 Asian governments signed a deal to cooperate on the rail link. That agreement finally went into effect in June last year after China ratified it.

More significant than the agreement itself has been China’s push to turn the rail network dream into reality, especially in Southeast Asia, which accounts for the lion’s share of the 8,000 kilometers of “missing links.

Thailand and China this year started talks about constructing a high-speed standard-gauge 850-kilometer new rail link from Nong Khai, on the Thai-Lao border, to Bangkok. A second 1,000-kilometer line, between Bangkok and Padang Besar, on the Thai-Malaysian border, would be built later.

The two lines would cost an estimated 300 billion baht (9.7 billion dollars). “The Chinese government believes this can be implemented within three years,’’ Thai Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanich said. “If there is any delay, I suspect it will be at our end, not theirs,’’ he said.

One foreseeable obstacle is the State Railways of Thailand (SRT), which runs the country’s existing rail network at a massive loss. It is highly politicized, prone to strikes, and historically opposed to any attempts at privatization. “If the SRT is given no role in the project, I will oppose it as an advisor to the SRT labor union and the head of the New Politics Party,’’ said Somsak Kosaisuk, a politician who formerly headed the SRT’s labour union.

Another likely problem for the Thai-China rail project is the Lao link. Having a high-speed rail link between Nong Khai and Bangkok makes little economic sense unless there is a similar link between Laos and southern China. Such a link is under discussion.

In August, senior railway officials from China visited Vientiane to discuss the project with the Lao Railway Authority, which manages the country’s current rail network – a 3.5-kilometer link between the Thai-Laos Friendship Bridge and Dongphosy town, outside Vientiane. China and Laos have signed an agreement to conduct a feasibility study on a medium high-speed (200-kilometer-per-hour) rail link between Boten, Luang Namtha province, and Vientiane, a distance of about 400 kilometers. The link would provide a connection for freight and passengers with Kunming, the capital of China’s Yunnan province.

The cost of construction would be prohibitive. “I understand they are looking at three different routes but all of them would be mountainous, and potentially very expensive,’’ said one Vientiane-based aid expert. “But the Lao government is taking the project extremely seriously, as part of their aim to turn Laos from a landlocked to land-linked country,’’ he added.

A lot will depend on whether Laos sees sufficient economic returns from the railway for providing the link between its two economically much more active neighbors, China and Thailand. “Laos is the weakest but most important link,’’ said Nipon Poapongsakorn, president of the Thailand Development Research Institute, a think tank. “Unless there is a benefit for Laos it will just become a transit for goods and passengers. What will they get from this programme other than pollution?’’
greenlion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2010, 01:23 PM   #180
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,973
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlion View Post
http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/278806...ailway-planned

A lot will depend on whether Laos sees sufficient economic returns from the railway for providing the link between its two economically much more active neighbors, China and Thailand. “Laos is the weakest but most important link,’’ said Nipon Poapongsakorn, president of the Thailand Development Research Institute, a think tank. “Unless there is a benefit for Laos it will just become a transit for goods and passengers. What will they get from this programme other than pollution?’’
What pollution? Chinese high-speed railways are electric, not steam or even diesel.

Having a high-speed through train means that Laotians can get on the train and travel to Thailand and China even though building the railway would not have made sense for Laos alone. That is the big advantage of high speed rail. It can make intermediate stops.
chornedsnorkack 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 02:05 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