All your station....
Best of luck with that plan. The USians have enough Chinese built railroads.
Chinese officials have outlined a massive – no, that's an understatement; make that mind-bogglingly Brobdingnagian – vision of a globe-girdling high-speed rail network that would have as one of its legs a line that would run from northern China up through Russia, under the North Pacific, through Alaska, then Canada, and finally …
Infringing on the monopoly are they?
Maybe the US rail industry will have learned from the mistakes of the car industry and pull its socks up, rather than relying on industry measures, import duties and bad-mouthing anything foreign in order to preserve market share, instead of making decent, modern products?
"Maybe the US rail industry will have learned ..."
Really? Spend much time at the casino do you?
In any case, the reference was to the Chinese labour that built the Western portion of the Yank's transcontinental railroad in the 19th century. The rest of it was built with Irish labour, and the less said about it the better.
Ryanair maybe one of the biggest sc*mbags in the universe, but even they comply with UK and EU airworthiness and air safety rules. United complies with both Eu and USA.
Compared to that Chinese rail complies with rules which it sets itself predominantly derived from corruption and vested interests. With rather obvious results:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenzhou_train_collision
Dunno, I would think not twice, but thrice before I ride such a transcontinental train.
If it is operated by German railways or TGV... That would be a different matter. Not that they do not crash - they do. They at the very least try to be safe and crash because of accidents not because of "natural corruption and mismanagement" causes.
So, yes, there was a train accident in China. Congratulations, you made a great point. May I help you out by googling other catastrophes? How about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rail_accidents_in_the_United_Kingdom
As everyone who has ever travelled on a high-speed train in China can tell you, these trains run smooth, and they are PACKED.
Let's just keep on bashing everything Chinese, while we silently allow our own infrastructure and industry to crumble and die. They will gladly take the business opportunities to fix it for us later on.
Just like that ridiculous urban legend on "ghost cities in China". I mean, consider how many people live there, and that half of the Chinese population still dwells on the countryside. There is a massive urbanization going on, where do you think will all those people be living in a couple of years?
Stan
Awesome idea if they can pull it off, but building something on that scale would have to be a multi-country effort. And aside from the engineering difficulties of tunnelling under the Bering Strait, of as much gravity perhaps are the risks of running a high-speed railway through all those countries whose names end in "-stan" - known to harbour elements with a penchant for targeting transport infrastructure to demonstrate their beliefs regarding holy retribution...
Think of it as a Chinese response to A Transatlantic Tunnel Hurrah! If powered by nuclear generated electricity it is probably worth considering as a economy stimulating activity that might be useful in reducing CO2 emissions. Not to mention dependent on whether Europe implodes economically after the Germans get sick of funding southern Europe thus removing need for goods movement in first place.
it is probably worth considering as a economy stimulating activity
Unfortunately 40 years of relentless bullshit and economic destruction (with the best yet to come) should have taught us that Keynesianism of all kinds is a pipe dream.
No such luck.
China is currently at the top of the S-curve of its building boom. It has empty cities standing around, rotting. All that energy, time, materials and lifes locked up in infrastructure never to be used and never to generate any ROI whatsoever. Lost.
It needs a new monster project fast to justify printing more money unless the whole Ponzi scheme collapses like a Universe living through its big crunch.
However, the light at the end of the transatlantic tunnel turned out to be the Horseman of Futzy Accounting.
Ron Paul Doom.jpg
Except as Steven Roper points out about the -stans. Also, most of those places have populations of critters both domestic and wild that like to wander. Keeping them off the tracks would be a major headache in itself, not to mention people hanging on the side of the railcars, stealing the rails and if electric, the copper.
True. They probably already own all the US land they need for the track path.
Charles Manning,
You do realise you've got that backwards, don't you?
China has spent the last decade selling stuff to the West and not buying as much of our stuff in exchange. To balance the books they've bought debt instead. This doesn't mean they get to take over though. As it's 'credit card debt', not 'mortgage'. It's un-secured. And there ain't no bailiffs.
Therefore they're likely not to get it all back.
Some inflation, a bit of QE, an inevitable Italian default...
Theres no doubting it is possible, theres not much new here (besides the length of undersea tunnels) but in reality it comes down to scale and economics. They can build it but will it be financially viable? Then you have the political hurdles at each border and the potential terrorist target aspect. Personally I would rather travel either fairly slowly on a train with plenty of space or very fast on a supersonic jet than the middle ground on the flying meat markets we have now but I'm probably in the minority.
I'm somewhat shocked that the Chinese haven't built a supersonic passenger jet already. The ruskies copied Concord(e), the French and British designed Concord(e) on paper and sliderules, I figured it would be a decent project for the Chinese to show off and entirely within the realms of possibility. Not sure I would fly on the first flight however :)
There is no need for such a high-speed passenger aircraft. There are so many problems with the concept itself: Very little demand for something that high-speed, extremely high maintenance costs per flight-hour compared to anything else and the cost of building runways long enough to accommodate such a craft.
Trains are the cheapest transport method in terms of capacity vs cost. Plus being able to delivering goods to market in a matter of 3-4 days (2 days trains, another 2 on the truck and loading dock) would be a major boon for the Chinese economy and the global economy as well.
BA ran their Concorde fleet at an operating profit despite being hampered by the short range (which meant the only feasible route was across the North Atlantic) and the tiny fleet which meant no economies of scale on training, maintenance, etc.
An SST which had the range to get across the Pacific could piobably sell quite well.
Range was further than you think - there was a Singapore route. But the Americans were so pissed at being beaten to supersonic commercial flight that they promptly instituted laws against supersonic commercial flight over the US, hence preventing flights to anywhere but the eastern seaboard. The Singapore route was bedevilled by India and Malaysia also having arguments about supersonic flight over their territory.
OK, I guess that is hundreds of miles south of the Bering Straight, but I wouldn't think it would take much of a shift to cause a problem. And wouldn't take much of a problem to be a major problem, given the relative lack of resources there would be on either end of that tunnel, versus the Chunnel.
But I'm sure the engineers can work that out. Be cool to see - much better use of their resources than building more ghost cities. If they follow through, it might turn out to be their equivalent of the Apollo Project.
Very interesting point! The 'ring of fire' does actually loop downwards in the shape of a crescent, following the islands which border the bottom of the Bering Sea. The distance is approximately 6-800 miles. However, earthquakes are not isolated to the edge of the ring, they can occur hundreds of miles from the edge of the ring (we get them locally in Hawai'i although they are usually M 3-5).
It will be interesting to see what their solutions are. Also if they will use different trains for different climates? It would seem sensible to use at least different engines designed to cope with the hotter countries than you would use for the Siberian > Alaska stretch. Designing 200mph train that can go from 45C to -70C would be a sizable challenge.
You have to say Wow!!
Can anyone see the US displaying this level of ambition ever again? They can't even get back to the moon! Well they could if they put Elon Musk in charge maybe. But the problem is the elite are too busy lining their own pockets and looking after corporate interests to have this class of imagination.
That said, I'll reign in my optimism here, and say that I did a spot of travelling on their-them-trains, and as we know ahem there are a few safety issues... But kudos to them. Roll on China being number one I say, its their time to shine....
So why are they proposing to lay 13,000 km of track?
THINK BIG! By the time China Global Railroad is complete, much more than 13 Megameters.
From Seattle, across the USA, and South to Latin America (via Panama)
From Beijing, through Russia to Europe, and either across the Straits of Gibraltar into Africa or possibly via Iran and Saudi. Either way, ending at Capetown.
Don't forget the branch line tunneling under the Himalayas to India.
It's not even a new idea, but its time just might be coming (ie when the oil finally starts running out). Yes, the politics is "interesting", on top of which there are a few other rather tricky bits of geology asides from the Bering Strait.
Bar a handful of cynics, seems like pretty much unanimous agreement so far that this is a fantastic ambition, motivated only by engineering achievement. It's heartening to see such unqualified support for the universal human goal of "One World, One Dream"! Sharing the benefits of scientific civilisation through railways and ship canals is symbolic of China's peaceful rise and a refreshing change from the deceitful machinations of 19th century colonialism. As Academician Wang rightfully points out, the only conceivable problem is finding enough money.
For those disheartened by the scale, the cost, or the chance that regressive elements in the societies of small intervening countries might disrupt the benevolence of Chinese engineers and Sino-Russian capital:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_Canal
Underscoring the realism and apolitical nature of these proposals: "[The technology has] already been developed and will be used to build a … tunnel between Fujian [and] Taiwan."
Great! What with the short distance between those two brotherly provinces of China and the total absence of any other considerations apart from money I reckon this entirely new project must already be underway. Let's have a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Strait_Tunnel_Project
So far the work from the Taiwan side is slow, but rest assured president Ma* is working on it, even if he will have to do all the digging himself.
(* Those unfamiliar with Ma can substitute "Cameron" for very similar effect)
I'm a construction professional specialising in railways, and I don't doubt that they both can and will do this - though it may take several decades.
China has a huge network of high speed lines - as does most of the developed world. Here in the UK we have less than 70 miles of what really should be called mid-speed lines. But, we do have lorry loads of Environmental Impact Assessments and other devices for dodging decision making.
Not sure about your 220mph claim though -even as an average it seems really slow for an international line. Most countries with HSR are planning new lines to be at least 300mph, and I'd have though that for a flagship line of this ambition the objective would be at least 400mph.
"Most countries with HSR are planning new lines to be at least 300mph"
No they aren't. The fastest conventional lines are 350kph (which is what the 220mph is based on). No-one's planning anything significantly faster, because (a) the time saved for most journeys would be negligible; and (b) the power requirements (and hence cost) increase almost exponentially. 250mph is probably the practical limit* for steel-on-steel rails. Maglev runs at 250mph, but junctions are a bit of a problem, so it's only used for point-to-point.
* A specially equipped TGV did manage 350mph, but note it needed two power cars and only 3 carriages to do so.
Yes please!
It already takes me over 24 hours travel to get from home to central China, if I can spend that time peacefully on a train with my family in a 4 birth train cabin rather than hanging round airports driving and flying, I think it would be worth it.. and probably cheaper! it costs me around £1300 each for the return journey as it is!
For the length of high-speed rail lines. Too short (like London-Birmingham to pick a random example) and the time saved over conventional rail is trivial. Too far (much over 500 miles) and they take longer than air travel, even allowing for the inconvenience of getting to/from the airport and assuming our cockamamie security theatre remains in place forever.
You can already travel from London to Berlin mostly on high-speed lines (700 miles with one change, necessary because the UK isn't in Schengen), but it takes 10 hours. Who will spend two days travelling from Shanghai to London when you can fly in under 12 hours?
A direct link for container-based freight, that would otherwise travel by sea taking 25 days or so, might actually be a commercial proposition.
A one train, no changes, journey from London to Berlin is now feasible but has fallen at the hurdle of British political interferance.
After several years of lobbying and re-jigging their train layouts Deutsche Bahn's high speed trains are now approved for use in the Channel Tunnel.
However, the UK gov't is insisting that on the London bound leg of the journey passport controls be applied at Brussels, with passengers disembarking, passing thru' migration checks and then re-boarding the train. Which will add an hour to any scheduled service. Deutsche Bahn ofered to complete passport checks on the train, as was common across Europe before the expanded EU, but this was rejected.
Why the British gov't is insisting on this is not clear. There is no shortage of available time slots in the tunnel itself and the benefits such as competition to EuroStar, improved travel times etc are self-evident.
Personally, 8 hours on a train to Berlin is too much, flying would be preferable. But London to Cologne in a shade less than 3 and half hours would be fantastic.
The last time I read about the proposed DB service, the postponement was not to do with the passport controls, but with the delivery of new trains:
http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/100254/deutsche-bahn-postpones-london-rail-route
I've done London to Berlin before; leave London on the 0650, change at Koln, arrive Berlin Hbf at 1711. Very civilised (especially first class); and if you book a London Spezial fare in advance you can do it for €59 each way
That is a good link, they mention the passport issue in the sentence "Another issue, not mentioned by DB, was the fact that UK-bound passengers need UK Border Agency pre-clearance in mainland Europe." So if I get on at Aachen I would have to get off at Brussels to pass thru' passport control.
Changing trains at Brussels is frustrating but you can be quite aggressive with your timings. If you miss your EuroStar, ICE or Thales connection because of a delay on the connecting service the operators have an agreement to get you on to the next available train.
The Berlin trip does look tempting, I might have to train out/ fly back at Xmas.
I'm booked to go in July (return journey from Han(n)over) - but that's for holiday, not business. I've used the train for business to go to Düsseldorf, though, and a friend regularly uses it from Bielefeld. But you need to be flexible enough to travel the day before, which (being self-employed) I can.
Who will spend two days travelling from Shanghai to London when you can fly in under 12 hours?
Someone deeply air-travel-phobic?
By 2100, with an optimist's perspective, it's probable that we'll be back to the 1920s with only the very rich or very important people flying, and everyone else using electrically-powered trains. (And quite possibly sail-powered ships, unless they allow ships to burn coal, or build nuclear-powered mega-ships. )
The Bering Strait crossing has been an Alfa Romeo (could be glorious if it ever starts) for many many years.
True, that now we are at a stage where rail travel could conceivably be advanced enough to make this trip worthwhile but only at a freight level. Having done the vodka express myself, there's plenty of interesting places to stop along the way, but there's also an awful lot of nothing in those necks of woods that I wouldn't make it my mode of transport if I wanted to get from Asia to the US in a hurry.
Dammn.
I was going to mention something about Dylan Hunt needing this to bring back civilisation, but some AC got in before me... At least I won't have to explain that I meant the old Dylan Hunt, not the new one...
It was goig to be quite funny, if anybody got the reference and didn't think I meant Andromeda and thought I was insane or drunk already.
Can't quite remember the details now, perhaps I am drunk already.
especially from next Jan, when Southeastern have conspired with Network Rail to steal our train services, without providing an acceptable alternative (yet still charging the same for the journey, of course).
Sorry, it's a sore point ;-) I have this old-fashioned view that if you are taking someone's money for providing a service you should actually provide that service, and that if you don't provide the service you should not charge for it. Weird, I know.
A tunnel between Mainland China and Taiwan? Didn't Napoleon consider digging a tunnel under the Channel to invade Britain?
Back to the long haul plans: besides the purely engineering fascination with a project of this scale I am curious about business aspects:
1) IMHO, for passengers such a trip (London to Beijing or whatever) would be attractive only if it is made significantly cheaper than flights. Even a high speed train will be slower than flying long distances, and I expect the arrival/departure and the associated procedures, including security, to be essentially the same.
2) For cargo it will make sense only if there is enough demand for 2-4 day delivery of massive quantities of stuff, so that planes are not feasible and ships (or slow trains) are too slow. A side question: is it feasible to transport standard cargo containers on 350km/h trains?
Any pointers to a business analysis of question above will be followed with interest.
Who the hell bases their entire knowledge of a technology from a single episode of a bloody cartoon?
Besides, that episode was not about the merits or otherwise of the specific technology chosen – they had to pick *something* to focus on and monorails just pulled the short straw. It could have been anything – high-speed rail, a new airport, a tunnelled urban metro, Zeppelins, you name it.
The POINT was the wilful ignorance of the townsfolk and their utter failure to think for themselves. This was a common thread back then, and still is: pretty much anyone can win over the town if they have sufficient charm and the gift of the gab. The monorail was merely the McGuffin. (Ironically, given the visual punchline in that episode, selling a used monorail system is actually not that unusual.)
Go visit Japan, China and other part of Asia – hell, even some places in Germany – and you'll find "monorails" (a rather vague term, but "prefabricated modular guideway system" is a bit of a mouthful) in regular, everyday public transit use. There's nothing inherently wrong with the technology.
<Sigh> I'm gonna have to stop relying on the intelligence of some of our readers.
"Who the hell bases their entire knowledge of a technology from a single episode of a bloody cartoon?...." Er, who said they were? The joke is not about the tech, it is the idea of people desperately investing in a technological white elephant, and this scheme looks like one of truly mammoth proportions. Please do try and develop a sense of humour before you next weigh in with a rabid defence of your fave trainspotter tech.
".....It could have been anything – high-speed rail, a new airport, a tunnelled urban metro, Zeppelins, you name it....." EXACTLY - this is just an harebrained investment scheme floated on some wide-eyed sci-fi tech by a flash salesman, when the reality is it is politically unfeasible even before you look at the practical difficulties of completing the actual project. I'd feel quite comfortable in wandering down to my local bookie and making a bet against this scheme ever reaching fruition.