61–70 of 465 posts
Conversion to a narrower gauge should be a fairly straightforward process, unless concrete sleepers are in use. New axles or outright replacement of trucks shouldn't take multiple years of effort. We did such things in the US in month long long ago.
I wonder if there will be measures for backwards compatibility in the transition period. Like having dual track widths.
Maybe they would choose to downgrade a single track where there's two, and half of each station's lines, but that would make it very difficult to schedule trains in both directions on a single track. So, they're probably not going to do that either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Was there a comparable large scale rail infrastructure change in some other country? Baltic states attempted this (project Rail Baltica). Lots of EU money were spent with no visible result. I guess, several people in Baltic states became super rich, but in terms of rail infrastructure nothing was done.
This is an ongoing project, not a past project though ? I thought this is a project for a new railway, not reguaging existing track ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's only the main tracks. There's a huge amount not seen on that map.
Scroll in.
Though I have to say, that's not exactly the best UI. Not sure what the solution is OTOH, it's certainly not useful to clutter up the map when zoomed out either.
> will cost billions of euros, affect more than 9,200 km of track, and take decades How is a change like this going to be implemented? E.g. are they going to mainly update some tracks everywhere (and have two systems running in parallel), or all tracks in selected areas (and have passengers change), or something else? Was there a comparable large scale rail infrastructure change in some other country?
In 1886 the USA switched the rail gauge of the southern states to standard gauge. Most of the work was done over two days. http://southern.railfan.net/ties/1966/66-8/gauge.html Obviously doing this today would be a much more complicated affair, considering the much higher speeds and weights of contemporary trains.
> will cost billions of euros, affect more than 9,200 km of track, and take decades How is a change like this going to be implemented? E.g. are they going to mainly update some tracks everywhere (and have two systems running in parallel), or all tracks in selected areas (and have passengers change), or something else? Was there a comparable large scale rail infrastructure change in some other country?
In Spain it's ongoing, very slowly, since the first international gauge high-speed rail line started operation in 1992. It's a slow and quite annoying process. For example, to reach my region, trains from Madrid have to change gauge because my region still has the old one. Apart from spending around 10 minutes doing this, this has caused a lot of problems because it essentially means there is a single model of 300 km…
Meanwhile here in Australia our “fast rail” trains go 160km/h. Unless it’s over 32 degrees, then they slow down. And if it hits 36 degrees they slow down even more (90km/h)
And it gets that hot here a lot…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Was there a comparable large scale rail infrastructure change in some other country? Baltic states attempted this (project Rail Baltica). Lots of EU money were spent with no visible result. I guess, several people in Baltic states became super rich, but in terms of rail infrastructure nothing was done.
No visible result is the goal. The change is minimal but makes the system compatible with other EU carriages. Did the Baltics attempt this or succeed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently the leading plan is to build another narrower track alongside the existing ones (so the old trains can keep operating), but it is still in the planning phase. [1] I am not convinced this project is ever going to pay for itself. I feel like you could move cargo from one train to another somewhere near the border for quite a long time with the money it is going to take to convert the entire rail network. Finl…
> I am not convinced this project is ever going to pay for itself. The subtext is not economic: it's "in the event of being invaded by Russia, can we minimize the delays in moving NATO materiel by rail to the front while denying Russia equally easy access to the rails".
Note that the proposal for this came from the EU Commission over the last few years - the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T). Initially Finland pushed back on it as being too expensive. https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes/infrastructu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently the leading plan is to build another narrower track alongside the existing ones (so the old trains can keep operating), but it is still in the planning phase. [1] I am not convinced this project is ever going to pay for itself. I feel like you could move cargo from one train to another somewhere near the border for quite a long time with the money it is going to take to convert the entire rail network. Finl…
> I am not convinced this project is ever going to pay for itself. The subtext is not economic: it's "in the event of being invaded by Russia, can we minimize the delays in moving NATO materiel by rail to the front while denying Russia equally easy access to the rails".