Railroad Forums 

  • Beijing to Shanghai rail link enters final trials

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #930697  by Chafford1
 
From the UK Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... rials.html


A new 200mph high-speed rail line that will link China's two most important cities, Beijing and Shanghai, in just five hours will begin its final trials today, according to Chinese railway ministry officials in Beijing.

The 820-mile fast-line connecting China's political and commercial capitals is scheduled to open by the end of June and is the latest example of China's astonishing drive to modernise and expand its railway infrastructure.
In a testament to China's ability to drive through infrastructure projects, the Beijing-Shanghai line will have been completed in just three years.
Ticket prices have yet to be announced, but estimates based on fare prices for similar high-speed lines suggest the standard class journey could cost between £50 and £100 one-way, or slightly cheaper than the average air fare.
China already boasts the world's largest high-speed rail network with 5,193 miles of high-speed track laid by the end of 2010. However that total will reach 8,123 miles by the end of this year and should exceed 9,940 miles by 2015, according to rail ministry figures.
Britain is currently in the consultation phase for its High Speed 2 rail project, a two-pronged track that will link London to Leeds and Manchester via the West Midlands at a cost of £32bn. If approved, the project is expected to take 20 years to compete.

Diplomatic sources also say that China - which has already signed railway co-operation agreements with 30 countries, including the US, Russia, Poland and India - is showing 'great interest' in investing in UK railways and infrastructure.
However China's hyper-rapid rail expansion, while still the envy of much of the world, has not been without its recent problems.
With investment levels running at almost £70bn a year, there have been allegations of widespread corruption, leading to the sacking and detention last February of the railways minister Liu Zhijun on suspicion of taking payouts in exchange for awarding contracts.
Questions have also been raised about the long-term solvency of China's railways ministry which showed a £350m pre-tax loss for the first quarter of 2010 and has run up mountainous debts of almost £200bn – equivalent of 58 per cent of its total assets - a figure some analysts warn is dangerously high.
The safety of the rapidly laid tracks was also questioned after the ministry announced it was reducing speeds of trains from 220mph to 185mph earlier this month, although officials said the reduction was aimed at cutting running costs and offering the public cheaper fares.
Some economists have also warned that China's rail-building spree is creating unwanted levels of excess capacity, which is being duplicated by the expansion of gleaming new provincial airports which are mushrooming across China.
Others disagree, arguing that the extra capacity will be soaked up in future years by China's development and that China's rail and road investment is by many measures equivalent to that of the United States at a similar period of economic development.
However despite the recent difficulties, much of China's public are happy to embrace the new railways as a symbol of the nation's rapid economic development, with railway staff reporting they had been inundated with enquiries of how to buy tickets on the inaugural service.


Also from the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... facts.html

Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway: key facts

A new 200mph high-speed rail line that will link China's two most important cities, Beijing and Shanghai, in just five hours is now in the final phase of testing. Here are some key facts about the project:

Speed

The Beijing-Shanghai high speed train will run at speeds between 155mph - 185mph and provide three services: "non-stop" (which actually will stop in the old imperial capital of Nanjing), a medium-fast service stopping in provincial capitals and a "full service" stopping in 24 stations along the line.

Price

Officially ticket prices have not been announced. However based on the fare prices of the existing 665-mile Wuhan-Guangzhou high speed railway, the standard-class fares on the 820-mile Beijing to Shanghai line will range from £50 to £100, depending on the speed of service booked.

Competition from the air

Previous experience shows that airlines will suffer. After the Wuhan-Guangzhou line opened in December 2009 nearly two-thirds of flights within a 370-mile radius of Wuhan were cancelled. As with the Beijing-Shanghai line, the running time was almost double the flight time, but passengers preferred to avoid the stress of airport check-in and security. Currently there are 30-40 flights a day between Beijing and Shanghai, costing £80-£130 one way.

Which will be faster, train or plane?

High speed train: less than five hours for nonstop train, using the fast 185mph service which is nearly half the current train journey of 9hrs and 49m. The high speed train's terminal station is at the more centrally located in Hongqiao station.

Flight: 2hrs and 10m, but allowing for check-in, security clearances and the now-inevitable air-traffic control delays, the flight can take up to 3 hrs 30 mins, not including the journey to and from the airport. Most flights also land at Shanghai's Pudong airport which is further away from the centre of the city.
 #930754  by george matthews
 
Britain is currently in the consultation phase for its High Speed 2 rail project, a two-pronged track that will link London to Leeds and Manchester via the West Midlands at a cost of £32bn. If approved, the project is expected to take 20 years to compete.
One of the advantages (for the rulers) of an authoritarian state is that people can be turfed off their land to build such projects with no nonsense about court cases or compensation.
 #930960  by djlong
 
Actually the Chinese state HAS had to go to court - albeit a highly slanted and biased court - to move towns for the Three Gorges Dam project. It's not as easy as a simple decree, though not nearly as difficult as with American NIMBYism.
 #931073  by jstolberg
 
The 820 miles is approximately the distance from New York to Chicago. Under 5 hours would be a big improvement from the 19 hours it currently takes. Of course, in the US, 820 miles is considered to be too long for a high-speed corridor.
 #944694  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Reportage appearing in Today's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/busin ... 3rail.html

Brief passage:

  • CHANGSHA, China — Even as China prepares to open bullet train service from Beijing to Shanghai by July 1, this nation’s steadily expanding high-speed rail network is being pilloried on a scale rare among Chinese citizens and news media.

    Complaints include the system’s high costs and pricey fares, the quality of construction and the allegation of self-dealing by a rail minister who was fired earlier this year on corruption grounds.

    But often overlooked, amid all the controversy, are the very real economic benefits that the world’s most advanced fast rail system is bringing to China — and the competitive challenges it poses for the United States and Europe.

    Just as building the interstate highway system a half-century ago made modern, national commerce more feasible in the United States, China’s ambitious rail rollout is helping integrate the economy of this sprawling, populous nation — though on a much faster construction timetable and at significantly higher travel speeds than anything envisioned by the Eisenhower administration.
While hardly all of the Reader's Comments rise to the standard of maturity and respect that is expected of members here at Railroad Net, some are thoughtful. They are worthy of your review.
 #944922  by amtrakowitz
 
While hardly all of the Reader's Comments rise to the standard of maturity and respect that is expected of members here at Railroad Net, some are thoughtful
What the Grey Lady panders to, she must herself deal with.

This technology is quite often stolen by China. I suppose that's what we get for supporting the second rise of the Second World.

BTW, 820 miles in five hours is an average speed of 164 mph. What with the many speed restrictions that are resulting from the lower-quality construction, it'd be miraculous if any trains do run that fast.
 #945030  by David Benton
 
Most of those comments makes you wonder about the I.q of the average NYT times reader .

but this is a very positive step for hsr worldwide , well apart from the USA , where it is apparently seen as a communist ploy .
 #945057  by kaitoku
 
I agree that HSR in the long run will be beneficial for China, but I get tired of the constant comparisons publications like the NYT (which btw definitely has a pro-China bias, including columnist Nicholas D. Kristof) and others makes between China's system and the potential for one in the States. It is an apples to oranges comparison- instead, we should be looking comparatively at systems that are running in democratic, truly free market economies, i.e. France, Spain, Germany or Japan.
 #945107  by george matthews
 
kaitoku wrote:I agree that HSR in the long run will be beneficial for China, but I get tired of the constant comparisons publications like the NYT (which btw definitely has a pro-China bias, including columnist Nicholas D. Kristof) and others makes between China's system and the potential for one in the States. It is an apples to oranges comparison- instead, we should be looking comparatively at systems that are running in democratic, truly free market economies, i.e. France, Spain, Germany or Japan.
In France one of these "Grands Projets" can be designated "d'interest nationale" which over-rules local planning objections, while at the same time offering people whose land and property are affected a higher than the market price.
 #945119  by electricron
 
george matthews wrote:In France one of these "Grands Projets" can be designated "d'interest nationale" which over-rules local planning objections, while at the same time offering people whose land and property are affected a higher than the market price.
Which is great for France. But the United States purposely separated powers of it's national government, included property, civil, and human rights within it's Constitution, and is made-up of 50 sovereign states. What France can do may never be allowed in America.
 #947304  by Gilbert B Norman
 
NBC Nightly News this evening had two segments comprising some five minutes of airtime regarding China v. US HSR initiatives:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/ ... /#43600792

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/ns/ ... /#43600805

Suffice to say, this is simply another "they can do it; why can't we" moment.
Last edited by Gilbert B Norman on Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
 #947439  by David Benton
 
electricron wrote:
george matthews wrote:In France one of these "Grands Projets" can be designated "d'interest nationale" which over-rules local planning objections, while at the same time offering people whose land and property are affected a higher than the market price.
Which is great for France. But the United States purposely separated powers of it's national government, included property, civil, and human rights within it's Constitution, and is made-up of 50 sovereign states. What France can do may never be allowed in America.
How did they build the interstate highway system then ??? I think the reality is , if govt wants your property ,your SOOL , no matter what country your in , mine included .
 #948514  by electricron
 
David Benton wrote:How did they build the interstate highway system then ??? I think the reality is , if govt wants your property ,your SOOL , no matter what country your in , mine included .
True, government can buy your property. But there's a difference between the Federal government and local governments doing so. I can name a few places in America where Interstate highways weren't built because the locals objected and defeated the highways in court. Look at I-40 in Memphis, I-70 in Baltimore, and I-95 in New Jersey as three of the major examples. There were probably others. Government doesn't always win in America.