Well they weren’t built there, and at least bombardier had some good track record. CRRC also had issues with boston, with trains having electrical shorts, loose bolts, etc. there was also the class 411s which CRRC refused to fix for Macedonia under warranty when they had electrical problems. It’s embarrassing.
Chinese Rail Transport Appreciation & News
- Thread starter cookiez
- Start date
broadsword
Brigadier
401km is not the tunnel but the length of the Guangzhou-Zhanjiang High-Speed Railway. Tunnel length is ,640 meters.
You should read again. "The Zhanjiang Bay Undersea Tunnel spans a total length of 9,640 meters, with a shield section measuring 7,551 meters". The 401 km is whole project including the 9,6 km tunnel.
A 401km project for just one hour reduction of travel time is still a bad project.
A one hour reduction from an existing 12 hour journey to an 11 hour journey would certainly be inefficient and questionable.
A one hour reduction from a 2.5 hour journey to a 90 minutes journey is an at least 40% reduction in transit time.
A 40% reduction in transit time seems quite a valuable proposition to me.
A reduction of 40% of a 12 hour journey makes sense that is about 5 hours. But a 401km project to reduce the travel time by just only 1 hour doesn't make sense.
Maybe we should look into perspective: the project reduced travel time by 45% so almost half of it. As well as cheaper ticket, less power usage, more trains/day capacity and so on...
And don't forget Zhanjiang is near Hainan so if in the future the island will be linked by underwater rail there will be a need for a efficient grid to connect to.
Of course, the experience in building underwater stuff will be welcomed as well.
How fast do you expect a 401km long project to be able to travel, considering this involves an underwater tunnel and other associated difficult terrain.
That's a transit speed average of 267km/hr, which when considering acceleration and deceleration seems reasonable to me for high speed rail.
If you want a 12 hour journey to be reduced by 40% the time of the journey will still be 7.2 hours, and considering the transit speeds of high speed rail (let's say averaging 267km/HR) you'll probably still need to build some 1922km of rail if it is of equivalent geological complexity to this project.
So yeah I suppose if you're reducing a 12 hour journey to a 7.2 hour journey, then that is reasonable but you'll still need to build a project over 1900km long.
You are connecting two areas. One with 19 million people, and another with 7 million people. Reducing travel time by 40%.
The reduction in travel time makes daily commuting to work between both cities possible.
I would say it is more than worthwhile.
The reduction in travel time makes daily commuting to work between both cities possible.
I would say it is more than worthwhile.