Trains.com

Interesting article on China and its High Speed Rail program

2305 views
14 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Interesting article on China and its High Speed Rail program
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 12:17 PM

Long suspected it was overbuilt and the government was not building to demand but was building as part of infrastructure stimulus......    Interesting article.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-doesnt-125-000-miles-220013013.html

 

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 2:18 PM

They are building for anticipated future demand,  not for the short term. Container transit to ports also benefits as labor costs are much lower in the interior.  Turning a profit is not required. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 4:43 PM

World domination - one rail line at a time.

China building them across the world.  The USA scraping theirs at home and hiding around the world.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 9:21 AM

BaltACD
World domination - one rail line at a time. China building them across the world.  The USA scraping theirs at home and hiding around the world.

Well I am surprised in this century how undeveloped some countries are with their rail systems.    For example, I would think we would have connected to Alaksa by rail now and that South America would have built a link North of the Panama Canal to connect with Mexico's rail system.    Imagine how much you could charge for a rail shipment to Southern Peru from Chicago......for example.    Before that could happen someone or some agency would have to streamline all the bureaucracy between state rail systems.     Though I would think that already Canada and Mexico both have their rail systems fairly well integrated with ours in the United States.     Central America could use a significant shot in the arm as far as rail development is concerned.....in my view it should serve as a rail gateway to South American instead of just a dead end.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 11:39 AM

CMStPnP
 Central America could use a significant shot in the arm as far as rail development is concerned.....in my view it should serve as a rail gateway to South American instead of just a dead end.

I believe that you really have to consider the cost/benefit curve very carefully,  to decide who would truly benefit.  With the oceans at arms distance for most of those countries, I think that their imports and exports just naturally gravitate to the sea. (low start up cost-low maintenance costs).

I know that Lyndon LaRouche wanted to build a rail line from St Louis to Patagonia, but he could never find anyone to pay for it, either.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, August 19, 2020 4:13 PM

Convicted One
 
CMStPnP
 Central America could use a significant shot in the arm as far as rail development is concerned.....in my view it should serve as a rail gateway to South American instead of just a dead end. 

I believe that you really have to consider the cost/benefit curve very carefully,  to decide who would truly benefit.  With the oceans at arms distance for most of those countries, I think that their imports and exports just naturally gravitate to the sea. (low start up cost-low maintenance costs).

I know that Lyndon LaRouche wanted to build a rail line from St Louis to Patagonia, but he could never find anyone to pay for it, either.

South and Central America have some serious geographical obstacles when compared to North America, let alone the biological obstacles.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, August 20, 2020 10:07 AM

There was a link between Mexico and Guatamala, discussed in a Trains article on Mexican railroads some 60 years ago, but I diubt it is in use tday.  

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:23 PM

Seem to recall that RRs in south Mexico are in bad shape.  Article as I recall was about the immigrants that hitched ride on mexican trains northbound ?

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:32 PM

Convicted One

 

 
CMStPnP
 Central America could use a significant shot in the arm as far as rail development is concerned.....in my view it should serve as a rail gateway to South American instead of just a dead end.

 

I believe that you really have to consider the cost/benefit curve very carefully,  to decide who would truly benefit.  With the oceans at arms distance for most of those countries, I think that their imports and exports just naturally gravitate to the sea. (low start up cost-low maintenance costs).

I know that Lyndon LaRouche wanted to build a rail line from St Louis to Patagonia, but he could never find anyone to pay for it, either.

 

Lyndon Larouche was a nutcase, conman,  cult leader and convicted felon with fascist and anti-Semitic views. 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:51 PM

daveklepper

There was a link between Mexico and Guatamala, discussed in a Trains article on Mexican railroads some 60 years ago, but I diubt it is in use tday.  

At the border with Mexico it changed from Standard Gauge to three foot gauge.    Guatamala's three foot gauge national railway system was quite extensive spanning both from the Northern to Southern border and from the East to West Coast of Guatamala.    Originally the core was built by the United Fruit Company to fairly high standards.     United Fruit turned it over to the government I think in 1968 and after that the system fell apart slowly.    Guatamala made another effort to revive it post 2000 but then got into a dispute with the private company that was attempting to bring it back.     The entire national system is shutdown now and large portions of the rail and some bridges have been stolen for scrap by thieves making any attempt at rebuilding at into the tens of millions.

Interesting item here is Guatamala had a cross border link to the El Salvador railways and they both shared the three foot gauge.    El Salvador railways is also largely shutdown now but it's early route map showed a primarily North - South system spanning from border to border.    So the rails reached all the way to the border with Honduras and a small gap away from Nicaraqua.   So sad to read about both National Systems abandonment.      So they both would have to be standard guaged at least to be a real connection to the larger grid from Mexico.    Not sure how feasible that would be.    Also, as stated in an earlier post some of the early pictures of both railway systems show very challenging topography in places.

The stated reason both shut down was inability to compete with trucks but I think that has to do with the slower speed of the railway as it was in fairly disused condition once parallel roadways were built.    So who knows.    Guatamalas second shutdown I suspect had more to do with government corruption than a real dispute.

Interesting side note is Brazil, Peru and Boliva are building a transcontinental railroad now with the help of Europe.      Costa Rica is restarting it's old 3 foot gauge electric system with the help of the Chinese I believe but the Costa Rican system I think is primarily around San Jose and not really Nationwide.

Also there was a project called International Railways of Central America to link the gap between El Salvador across Honduras and connect with Nicaraqua's North South System.    It also had line straightening projects proposed for Guatamala.   So eventually the rails would have reached Costa Rica and possibly into Costa Rica had that project ever got off the ground.    Nicaraqua sold it's railway system for scrap under President Chommorro.    It was three foot plus so many inches gauge and I don't think it was compatible gauge wise with the system in El Salvador and Guatemala.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, August 20, 2020 10:57 PM

Had business several times near the San Jose Costa Rico airport.  Firt time there was soon aggter the rail line still went by the airport to the rain fotest.  However was already out of service for what I believe was an earthquake.  Over several years the track structure slowly became fouled and I believe that only downtown had a few miles of track in use for what unknown reasons.

At first there was  much talk of restoring service but CR failed in attempt to get a heritage grant for restoration.  Have no idea present status.  Also never could confirm that track appeared to be standard guage ?  Rail I saw was over 100# RE.

EDIT.  Just checked open railway map and it still shows the lines in place ?  Actually from Salinas on west coast to Liimon on carribean ?  Even showed a grade crossing that I  observed in my earlier travels.  I am really having my doubts.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Sterling Heights, Michigan
  • 1,691 posts
Posted by SD60MAC9500 on Thursday, August 20, 2020 11:42 PM

CMStPnP

Well I am surprised in this century how undeveloped some countries are with their rail systems.    For example, I would think we would have connected to Alaksa by rail now and that South America would have built a link North of the Panama Canal to connect with Mexico's rail system.    Imagine how much you could charge for a rail shipment to Southern Peru from Chicago......for example.    Before that could happen someone or some agency would have to streamline all the bureaucracy between state rail systems.     Though I would think that already Canada and Mexico both have their rail systems fairly well integrated with ours in the United States.    Central America could use a significant shot in the arm as far as rail development is concerned.....in my view it should serve as a rail gateway to South American instead of just a dead end.

The Darien Gap is holding up any infrastrucutre project to connect the Americas. A very dangerous area as well. Many insurgents routinely patrol the area, and have been known to capture and sometimes kill those traveling through. The Serranía del Darién Range is notorious for floods and mudslides, in addition to being a highly seismic area. A large swamp occupies the Colombian portion of the Gap. The Gap is a engineering challenge at this point and will be for the foreseeable future.

  
 
Rahhhhhhhhh!!!!
  • Member since
    August 2020
  • 2 posts
Posted by FormD on Friday, August 21, 2020 12:26 PM

I belive that the Chinese rail system is for military purposes much like the Roman Road system. Anywhere there is a hot spot in the Chinese Empire troops and tanks can be sent in quickly to put down a insurection. The Roman Road system was what tied the empire together and anytime that the incence went out in the Shrine to the Ceaser it was time to send in extra troops. Here in the USA the idea for the Eisenhower Expressway System was that large tanks and miltary equipement could be moved over long distances in case of a invasion or domestic disturbance. As far as China again look at all the trouble they went to put in a railroad to Tibet. Very few people in Tibet have the income to afford a high speed train ticket but without the railroad mainline China could not be assured of securing Tibet and its stratigic minerals that are located there.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, August 21, 2020 8:29 PM

FormD
I believe that the Chinese rail system is for military purposes much like the Roman Road system.

The problem is that 220mph HSR main lines truly suck at transporting heavy military equipment, but are extraordinarily susceptible to even simple sabotage.  
Now, a different paradigm of rapid response is, assuredly, facilitated by a network of HSR: troops largely armed with smart PGM, the equivalent of the 'bicycle troops' Wells imagined would revolutionize warfare, could be rapidly transferred as a force in being just as large numbers of men with carried equipment.  But that is not the support in depth that would be required with any particularly armored force, or normal methods of asserting (rather than blocking or denying) air superiority.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, August 21, 2020 10:27 PM

The OP has made so many assumptions and factual errors as to make a response rather pointless. 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy