I was viewing another forum that was arguing over the merits of high-speed rail systems vs increased expenditures for existing rail and road systems, it was surprising to see how ideologically heated the discussion got. However much the setup cost may be initially, alleviating traffic by adding such rail capacity still pays major dividends in reducing congestion-related losses in productivity compared to simply adding more roads which also require much more frequent maintenance than rails systems do.
All is not what it seems within China's High Speed Rail development.
- Thread starter bladerunner
- Start date
Spartan95
Junior Member
I don't know. Although the report I quoted said:
How is a director of Wuhan's central train station able to have US$5 million in cash in his home? Is that his annual pay?
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
The problem is the widespread corruption within Chinas railways, according to Olivia Chung whose article contains very much the same info as the one you posted. So it takes "ex" President and a soon to be to be one, to have differences of opinion for the problems in China rail to be sorted out ....hopefully. LOL> Over 150,000 workers and officials of the railways , prosecuted for violations last year alone.
I cant see how HSR passenger services are really going to make much difference to the bottlenecks that are affecting the goods services in the near and imtermediate future anyway.
Last edited:
Quickie
Colonel
I suppose that figure did not come from railways services alone, but refers to all corruption cases in China. Any source for it? It seems way overboard to be accurate.
Asymptote
Banned Idiot
I think passenger railway even with HSR is a bad idea from the start anyway. Its almost always nationalized, government controlled in every country. That only leads to waste and corruption. And you can't privatize it to create competitions (you can't have more than 1 operator in the network or it is safety/coordination nightmares - imagine having just 2 rail operators offering different schedules in the same rail network - it will be train collisions EVERY HOUR). I would rather see China develop more airports - and give financial incentives to airlines so they can train up more pilots - its a cheap way for China to get more pilots in war time for the cheap!! Plus the infrastructures for airports can be dual use for military purposes.
Have a look at this :
1 United States 14,947
15 China 467
US leads the world with 14,947 airports compare to China's pitiful 467! That's why US is a global hyperpower because it has a large population of pilots, and airstrips everywhere to project that power. It also has immense support for such, with large population of highly qualified Air traffic controllers. It also has numerous Area Control Centers (24!! compare to China's 9), and these are not even including the military ones (and aircraft carriers).
The biggest advantage of having airline is of course : competition. Any corporation can start an airline and compete in the market provided they follow the regulations set out by the law. It offers competitive price to customers, and it drives down the corruptions and waste often seen in government controlled businesses.
So, dump the HSR. I think HSR is a neat idea in theory. But expensive to maintain, and prone to corruption.
Let's not forget railways are prone to sabotages, can be easily taken out in war time. its like an extended airstrip, anywhere along the line that's being disconnected, you effectively taken out the whole line, and it is extremely costly and time consuming to repair compare to airstrip or highway!
Use that money to build more highways (or widening it) is FAR CHEAPER by comparison, at the same time, you can always encourage / give incentive to bus/interstate coach businesses which is essentially offering exactly the same service as railway but with advantage of healthy competition to drive down the cost and waste/corruption.
Have a look at this :
1 United States 14,947
15 China 467
US leads the world with 14,947 airports compare to China's pitiful 467! That's why US is a global hyperpower because it has a large population of pilots, and airstrips everywhere to project that power. It also has immense support for such, with large population of highly qualified Air traffic controllers. It also has numerous Area Control Centers (24!! compare to China's 9), and these are not even including the military ones (and aircraft carriers).
The biggest advantage of having airline is of course : competition. Any corporation can start an airline and compete in the market provided they follow the regulations set out by the law. It offers competitive price to customers, and it drives down the corruptions and waste often seen in government controlled businesses.
So, dump the HSR. I think HSR is a neat idea in theory. But expensive to maintain, and prone to corruption.
Let's not forget railways are prone to sabotages, can be easily taken out in war time. its like an extended airstrip, anywhere along the line that's being disconnected, you effectively taken out the whole line, and it is extremely costly and time consuming to repair compare to airstrip or highway!
Use that money to build more highways (or widening it) is FAR CHEAPER by comparison, at the same time, you can always encourage / give incentive to bus/interstate coach businesses which is essentially offering exactly the same service as railway but with advantage of healthy competition to drive down the cost and waste/corruption.
Last edited:
Mrs Thatcher wanted to rip out the railway from London to Birmingham and replace it with asphalt carrying bus lines. It proved to be highly impracticable and wasn't proceeded with. The passenger transport by TGV between Paris and Lyon, the first high speed rail line in France, was so cheap and fast, not having to travel out to the airport and back from the airport and avoiding the hassle at the airports, that passenger flights between these cities disappeared very soon. Matters have improved for rail travel since then, and deteriorated for the poor air traveler, what with the paranoia about terrorism.
Asymptote
Banned Idiot
I have updated my previous post, and made more points to it.
Basically, no matter which way you cut it, railways are more expensive than bus-way. I know because in my city bus-ways has proven to be a big cost saver, compare to railways. The infrastructures require and involves to put into railway is inconceivably MORE expensive than bus-way. Just think about it - for a railway you need laying down the train tracks, the signal lights and barriers, overhead powerlines, electrical substations, control centers and maintaining them. Adding the cost of train sets, maintenance for it, its incomparable to the cost of bus-way. And a typical bus-way you can fit multiple buses of various competing companies in the same network and it has minimal issue of coordination (bus drivers can coordinate among themselves on the road, its not like they can't dodge other bus - same can't be said for the train driver - a collision is unavoidable especially true in high speed rail scenerio). Lastly, bus/interstate coach can run on the same network as highway, further minimizing the cost to public, and further benefitting the public if widening the highways for the use of bus/coach. And remember, bus/coach don't need to run on asphalt surface, of course its optimal to run on one, but it isn't required!!
Oh! Let's not forget, asphalt is far cheaper than train tracks considering steel price is CONTINUOUSLY GOING UP for the past 10 years, and will continue doing so in the conceivable future !!! (this is largely due to Anglo-Australian companies BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto Group continuously raising the price of raw iron ore due to asian demands)
Last edited:
In the ten years after WWII the tram networks in all Dutch towns bar four ( Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht ) and all inter local lines bar the line from The Hague to Delft were closed, as happened in many towns around the world. Rebuilding or extending has now started in many towns in the last twenty years..
To give one example, when I lived in Delft the tram line from The Hague was extended to a part of town that had been built 20 years before. People living there mostly owned cars. Even so the use made of the new line reached the break even point within two years, rather than the seven that was expected. Taking account of track, power lines, &c.
Where there are enough potential passengers rail is the way to go.
To give one example, when I lived in Delft the tram line from The Hague was extended to a part of town that had been built 20 years before. People living there mostly owned cars. Even so the use made of the new line reached the break even point within two years, rather than the seven that was expected. Taking account of track, power lines, &c.
Where there are enough potential passengers rail is the way to go.
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
It came from Olivia Chungs article. The links are in Post One
However upon a reread of the passage I think you are right
........."Sheng said corruption was a severe problem in the railway expansion program and the ministry should strengthen its resolve to fight corruption while maintaining safety.
China's railway network has a combined length of about 8,000 kilometers with a target of expanding to 25,000 kilometers by 2015, with annual investment reaching 700 billion yuan (US$106 billion).
Ministerial-level officials in China are rarely targeted in corruption crackdowns as that could damage party credibility. More common is action against lower-level officials. A total of 146,517 officials were punished for disciplinary violations in 2010, according to Xinhua, with 5,098 officials working at the county level or above.
I took it as if she was still referring to the railways. Is 150,000 misconduct cases high in a workforce of 3million. After all the misconduct could be a simple case of ticket scalping. If the mum and dads that work for the railways see an opportunity of picking up a few hundred more yuan..........
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
I have to disagree with you.IMO moving goods by rail is far more efficient if done properly. HSR is importantant, but its development shouldnt be at the large scale expense of regular rail.