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 August 8th, 2009, 01:04 AM   #61
wonwiin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 184
Likes (Received): 28


And because Switzerland is in the Schengen area.
wonwiin no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 8th, 2009, 01:24 PM   #62
JoKo65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,111
Likes (Received): 86

Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
I'm shure the Gotthard base tunnel will have less strict rules (though being longer), because international trains will go though it.
The Gotthard is no sea tunnel, it has emergency exits that's something different.
__________________
L'Amerique? C'est l'évolution de la barbarie à la décadence, sans toucher la culture.
JoKo65 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2009, 01:28 PM   #63
JoKo65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,111
Likes (Received): 86

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonwiin View Post

And because Switzerland is in the Schengen area.
The main reason for the check-in are security checks like in an airport, not the passport inspection.
__________________
L'Amerique? C'est l'évolution de la barbarie à la décadence, sans toucher la culture.
JoKo65 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2009, 05:17 PM   #64
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,073
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoKo65 View Post
The main reason for the check-in are security checks like in an airport, not the passport inspection.
Let's be serious. All this security and safety madness in and around the
channel tunnel are pure politics. When the construction of the channel
tunnel was discussed, between the french and the british, there was a
fierce competition between them, the french pushing a railway solution,
and the british a road solution. To make the road solution look more feasable
in comparison with the railway solution, the british overloaded the project
with safety and security rules. This was in Margaret Tatcher"s times, and,
right wing like she was, she despised trains and anything that looked "public".
But despite that, the railway solution won. And since that, the british can't
admit that they were wrong and abolish all those stupid rules without loosing
their face. That's all, folks. There is nothing logic behind all those rules, just
politics.
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 17th, 2009, 04:23 PM   #65
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,433
Likes (Received): 325

Silly indeed:

__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 18th, 2009, 01:13 AM   #66
Republica
BUND
 
Republica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,036
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
Let's be serious. All this security and safety madness in and around the
channel tunnel are pure politics. When the construction of the channel
tunnel was discussed, between the french and the british, there was a
fierce competition between them, the french pushing a railway solution,
and the british a road solution. To make the road solution look more feasable
in comparison with the railway solution, the british overloaded the project
with safety and security rules. This was in Margaret Tatcher"s times, and,
right wing like she was, she despised trains and anything that looked "public".
But despite that, the railway solution won. And since that, the british can't
admit that they were wrong and abolish all those stupid rules without loosing
their face. That's all, folks. There is nothing logic behind all those rules, just
politics.
Margaret Thatcher is the ultimate in scum.

BUT, I doubt your take on things. In fact, its the first ive heard of any of it. Is it all hearsay or do you have any links to this stuff?

The reason for the security is schengen and us not signing up fully, really.

As for safety, well I dont want to sound like a bit of a twazzock, but health and safety standards are clearly higher in the UK compared with Germany, France and Spain. Take our plug design for one.
__________________
Rant
Republica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 18th, 2009, 05:20 AM   #67
metsfan
Photographer
 
metsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Newtown, PA
Posts: 661
Likes (Received): 42

Because originally the systems were developed before globalization & shipment of large quantities of rolling stock & motive power between different countries & global regions.

In the US there is a standard loading gauge called "AMTRAK" and it basically means there are specific dimensions for every part of the railcar or locomotive. Included are platform height, maximum length, maximum height, and turning radius or length between truck pivots. The AMTRAK standard is used on most transit rolling stock as well as Amtrak trains. Some rolling stock is "restricted" meaning it is restricted to certain trackage. For example, the superliners would be restricted from operation into/out of new york or connecting tracks since the loading gauge there is height sensitive from the PRR and B&O etc days.

- A
__________________
Lets Go Mets!
metsfan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 18th, 2009, 10:02 PM   #68
perdurabo
Silesian InExile
 
perdurabo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lublin
Posts: 2,710
Likes (Received): 4754

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoKo65 View Post
How often railcorridors are upgraded and modernised? Once in 100 years? Do you know how old are many lines and stations in Germany?
mainlines prabably around 20 years get main modernisation, local lines prabably around 40 years.
Tough ETCS will be implemented for sure in Poland around 2010-2012 on one or two corridors (CMK and prabably E-30 and maybe E-65)
Also EU is promoting idea of one current with modernization of lines. IMHO in next 50 or so there will be more and more unification and going into one standard in gauges, current and menagment systems.
Stations while modernization of lines get new platforms:

like this small station on E-30 line beatwin Opola and Wrocław, basicly eatch station on this modernized line (from Zgorzelec up to Opole, apart from Wroclaw and Opole stations) is modernised and has platforms like this one.
perdurabo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2009, 09:24 PM   #69
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,610
Likes (Received): 5972

Quote:
Originally Posted by gramercy View Post
lets start with the obvious: over 30 countries!?!, that have (had, and still do) not much in common, not even the gauge is the same everywhere...

not even within individual countries is the rail infrastructure uniform


lets pick switzerland:
- at least 4 different gauges that i know of
- at least 3 different electrification voltage that i know of
- security systems from 50 years variety
- station platforms are between 0-100 years old

but this is why we like the swiss
Well if we take the EU at least, there are a number of very complex undertakings to cut down the differences and incompatibilities. I think that can only be compared in scale with the time back when the chaos within the nation states was slowly transformed into a more coherent national system.

Progress is slow but at insanely complex and difficult things like the speed control and signalling standards used all over Europe even that little progress is a step forward. New tracks as well as modernized ones often are compatible to the new Europe wide standard ETCS. There exists a European railways agency and there are lots of attempts of making the railway system increasingly compatible.

I don't know if the question of platform heights is addressed already, but I would not wonder if it would be eventually. Of course as with all things with such a long life time as railways, any change can only happen very slow.

PS:
Even the non member state Switzerland takes part in that effort, they have already an ETCS track operational. Operational ETCS tracks can already be found furthermore in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain and Hungary.


Belgien, Deutschland, Italien, Luxemburg, Österreich, den Niederlanden, der Schweiz, Schweden, Spanien und Ungarn
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK

Last edited by Slartibartfas; August 20th, 2009 at 09:32 PM.
Slartibartfas está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2009, 09:36 PM   #70
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,610
Likes (Received): 5972

Quote:
Originally Posted by Republica View Post
Margaret Thatcher is the ultimate in scum.

BUT, I doubt your take on things. In fact, its the first ive heard of any of it. Is it all hearsay or do you have any links to this stuff?

The reason for the security is schengen and us not signing up fully, really.

As for safety, well I dont want to sound like a bit of a twazzock, but health and safety standards are clearly higher in the UK compared with Germany, France and Spain. Take our plug design for one.
That can't be the only reason. When I travelled to Switzerland while it still wasn't part of Schengen, I was not even always controlled and if, it was simply someone going through the train during the journey and controlling only the passports. No x-ray something whatsoever. That means so much less hassles than the tiring security checks. But then I think they have security checks also on the Spanish high speed system I think, even within the country.
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK
Slartibartfas está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2009, 09:39 PM   #71
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,610
Likes (Received): 5972

Quote:
Originally Posted by metsfan View Post
Because originally the systems were developed before globalization & shipment of large quantities of rolling stock & motive power between different countries & global regions.

In the US there is a standard loading gauge called "AMTRAK" and it basically means there are specific dimensions for every part of the railcar or locomotive. Included are platform height, maximum length, maximum height, and turning radius or length between truck pivots. The AMTRAK standard is used on most transit rolling stock as well as Amtrak trains. Some rolling stock is "restricted" meaning it is restricted to certain trackage. For example, the superliners would be restricted from operation into/out of new york or connecting tracks since the loading gauge there is height sensitive from the PRR and B&O etc days.

- A
The unified nature is great, sadly however some of the regulations are so terribly outdated that one has to ask oneself how the hell this could happen. Some safety regulations are like using regulations for horse carriages on modern cars. Everyone would call that insane, but with trains it seems to be perfectly fine it seems. Take the Acela train, because of completely irrational outdated regulations it has to have double the weight of the French TGV even though it bases on the TGV. Its like a tank on rails.
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK
Slartibartfas está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2009, 12:03 AM   #72
MarcVD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brussels
Posts: 1,073
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas View Post
The unified nature is great, sadly however some of the regulations are so terribly outdated that one has to ask oneself how the hell this could happen. Some safety regulations are like using regulations for horse carriages on modern cars. Everyone would call that insane, but with trains it seems to be perfectly fine it seems. Take the Acela train, because of completely irrational outdated regulations it has to have double the weight of the French TGV even though it bases on the TGV. Its like a tank on rails.
Do not forget also that very often, those pretended "security regulations" are
nothing else than disguised protectionism. If you are in a big market with a
prosperous rolling stock building industry, putting in place rules that are not
applied anywhere else in the world will almost forbid any foreign competitor to
bid efficiently in your market. Disguising it as security measures will ensure that world trade organisation and the like do not complain. I won't cite examples but those to which the above applies will easily recognize...
MarcVD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2009, 08:42 AM   #73
dl3000
Registered User
 
dl3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 418
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
Do not forget also that very often, those pretended "security regulations" are
nothing else than disguised protectionism. If you are in a big market with a
prosperous rolling stock building industry, putting in place rules that are not
applied anywhere else in the world will almost forbid any foreign competitor to
bid efficiently in your market. Disguising it as security measures will ensure that world trade organisation and the like do not complain. I won't cite examples but those to which the above applies will easily recognize...
That sounds really logical, but the USA doesn't have a rolling stock manufacturer. Isn't Bombardier Canadian? Other companies like Siemens have operations in the US, I think giving them contracts can still make American jobs and other benefits. The system is just outdated anyway because its all about crash survival rather than prevention since all kinds of positioning and signaling technology has come out since then.
__________________
"San Diego...drink it in, it always goes down smooth" - Ron Burgundy

Last edited by dl3000; August 22nd, 2009 at 08:48 AM.
dl3000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2009, 09:24 AM   #74
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,278
Likes (Received): 63123

The locomotives are mostly from American companies like EMD and GE Transportation.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2009, 02:40 PM   #75
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,610
Likes (Received): 5972

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
Do not forget also that very often, those pretended "security regulations" are
nothing else than disguised protectionism. If you are in a big market with a
prosperous rolling stock building industry, putting in place rules that are not
applied anywhere else in the world will almost forbid any foreign competitor to
bid efficiently in your market. Disguising it as security measures will ensure that world trade organisation and the like do not complain. I won't cite examples but those to which the above applies will easily recognize...
Well if its there for the sake of protectionism it sucks anyway. ACELA wasn't built by an US company, was it? Nonetheless these standards did not only succeed in inflating the costs for the trains tremendously while making their operation considerably less efficient and considerably more energy consuming as much as more harmful to the tracks they run on.

Next time the US wants to try out some hidden protectionism it maybe should choose some which is not backfiring so terribly.
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK

Last edited by Slartibartfas; August 22nd, 2009 at 02:47 PM.
Slartibartfas está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2009, 04:26 PM   #76
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,094
Likes (Received): 292

Something that I have noticed is that all the platforms in England are high level. But not in France, Spain and Italy etc...Russia has loads of very low platforms
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 23rd, 2009, 08:51 AM   #77
dl3000
Registered User
 
dl3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 418
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas View Post
Well if its there for the sake of protectionism it sucks anyway. ACELA wasn't built by an US company, was it? Nonetheless these standards did not only succeed in inflating the costs for the trains tremendously while making their operation considerably less efficient and considerably more energy consuming as much as more harmful to the tracks they run on.

Next time the US wants to try out some hidden protectionism it maybe should choose some which is not backfiring so terribly.
Acela came from a joint venture between Alstom who makes TGV's and Bombardier.


And GE does not make High Speed trainsets.
__________________
"San Diego...drink it in, it always goes down smooth" - Ron Burgundy
dl3000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 23rd, 2009, 01:48 PM   #78
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,215
Likes (Received): 1782

On the point of standardisation, I think it has to be the way forward. This doesn't mean everything having to change over-night, but when rolling-stock replacements and station refurbishment take place they should be carried out using standard dimentions. In the interim stage discrepancies will occur but I doubt things would be more than 2 steps up or down.
NCT no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 23rd, 2009, 03:15 PM   #79
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,610
Likes (Received): 5972

Quote:
Originally Posted by dl3000 View Post
Acela came from a joint venture between Alstom who makes TGV's and Bombardier.

And GE does not make High Speed trainsets.
Indeed, so it was produced by two non US companies. It still had to cope with terrible regulations that do nothing except for making passenger rail considerably less efficient, more energy wasting and more expensive.

Whats the point of it other than obviously the aim to make successful passenger rail harder - simply for the sake of it?
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK
Slartibartfas está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2009, 02:08 AM   #80
metsfan
Photographer
 
metsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Newtown, PA
Posts: 661
Likes (Received): 42

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas View Post
The unified nature is great, sadly however some of the regulations are so terribly outdated that one has to ask oneself how the hell this could happen. Some safety regulations are like using regulations for horse carriages on modern cars. Everyone would call that insane, but with trains it seems to be perfectly fine it seems. Take the Acela train, because of completely irrational outdated regulations it has to have double the weight of the French TGV even though it bases on the TGV. Its like a tank on rails.
I agree, trains should be light so they use less electricity/diesel to move, and can go faster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcVD View Post
Do not forget also that very often, those pretended "security regulations" are
nothing else than disguised protectionism. If you are in a big market with a
prosperous rolling stock building industry, putting in place rules that are not
applied anywhere else in the world will almost forbid any foreign competitor to
bid efficiently in your market. Disguising it as security measures will ensure that world trade organisation and the like do not complain. I won't cite examples but those to which the above applies will easily recognize...
True to an extent sadly. There are so many rolling stock manufacturers that cannot make anything for usa's rails.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dl3000 View Post
That sounds really logical, but the USA doesn't have a rolling stock manufacturer. Isn't Bombardier Canadian? Other companies like Siemens have operations in the US, I think giving them contracts can still make American jobs and other benefits. The system is just outdated anyway because its all about crash survival rather than prevention since all kinds of positioning and signaling technology has come out since then.
We have Brookville Equipment. Colorado Railcar recently went bust, GE and EMD only make EMU and locomotive, not push/pull cars. What we really need is another brookville type company, and for brookville to expand. MNRR and SIR recently took delivery and started running brookville BL20GH, and the MNRR units are not only popular, but after "teething" they seem to be quite reliable and met or surpass expectations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
The locomotives are mostly from American companies like EMD and GE Transportation.
Correct. EMD, GE, Brookville, Alstom, Bombardier all make locomotives for use in the usa. The last 2 being foreign owned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas View Post
Well if its there for the sake of protectionism it sucks anyway. ACELA wasn't built by an US company, was it? Nonetheless these standards did not only succeed in inflating the costs for the trains tremendously while making their operation considerably less efficient and considerably more energy consuming as much as more harmful to the tracks they run on.

Next time the US wants to try out some hidden protectionism it maybe should choose some which is not backfiring so terribly.
Actually, the thing preventing Acela from reaching its full potential, are old overhead line, and outdated FRA safety regulations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dl3000 View Post
Acela came from a joint venture between Alstom who makes TGV's and Bombardier.


And GE does not make High Speed trainsets.
No, but they are a solid performer in the powered market (locomotive, EMU).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas View Post
Indeed, so it was produced by two non US companies. It still had to cope with terrible regulations that do nothing except for making passenger rail considerably less efficient, more energy wasting and more expensive.

Whats the point of it other than obviously the aim to make successful passenger rail harder - simply for the sake of it?
Welcome to the usa, where trains have been looked down upon since 1946.

- A
__________________
Lets Go Mets!
metsfan 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 09:10 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