3 ms·

A minor nitpick: > The biggest required investments for this are electrification and level boarding. Both have many benefits other than schedule reliability, a

by sofixa 4y ago

A minor nitpick: > The biggest required investments for this are electrification and level boarding. Both have many benefits other than schedule reliability, and are underrated in Europe and even more underrated in the United States. Neither is underrated in Europe. Both are the norm on new projects, and almost all heavy duty old lines have been upgraded to at least be electrified. However the costs associated are often astronomical ( and might require closing the line for extended periods of time) so for some of the rest it's done piecemeal.

ssl232 4y ago
In Scotland the electrification of part of the (200 year old) network involved rebuilding every car and foot bridge and tunnel along the route to add enough spare height for the overhead wires. It's one downside to being "first" to build widespread railways - with the initial huge investment made in Victorian era when trains were single decked and run on coal, the room for expansion was limited. The good fortune Britain has had in avoiding real destruction of infrastructure in war has also meant there hasn't been much opportunity to rebuild having learned lessons since the Victorian era (separate cycle lanes? Hah). Meanwhile, in Hannover for instance, U-Bahn stations were built in the bomb craters in the city center - making use of the "free" excavation. Obviously not saying war or coming later to the party are good things, but it's one of those ironies of humanity.
- CalRobert 4y ago
  Funny you should mention cycle lanes - in the 1930's Britain had a fantastic network of cycle highways, which they let fall in to disrepair https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/britain-forgotten-1930s-bike-network https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/britain-forgotten-1930...
- steve_gh 4y ago
  There is an interesting development going on to electrify some of the UK rail lines - an OverHead Line (OHL) - battery hybrid system. The idea is that you have a standard electrified OHL system where it is easy and cheap (!!!) to install. Places whee you can't put it easily, such as under bridges, through tunnels etc, you don't. You have some (small-ish) battery capability in the train which recharges from the OHL system, and use that in the areas where the OHL hasn't been installed.
kuschku 4y ago
Considering DB just ordered ICE 3 neo of the Velaro D series without level boarding, ICE 4 is also without level boarding, and the only new train will level boarding will be the Talgo ECx, at least in Germany it’s quite underrated.
- iggldiggl 4y ago
  The problem is that for high-speed trains you're limited in how small you can make the wheels (that is, even more limited than with other trains – even urban railways with more modest top speeds need a floor height of approximately 0.9 - 1.0 m for level boarding without having to compromise on the number and location of doors, though with some compromises you can nowadays get down to roughly 0.6 m), and with conventional bogies (and both wheels linked by a fixed axle, which is you how you classically get the wheels to self-steer themselves around curves) it means you need a floor height > 1.1 m for a level interior and level boarding. Conversely for historical reasons however in Germany 0.76 m is the highest platform height that doesn't conflict with the loading gauge of "regular" exceptional loads on freight trains (on a very few selected routes intended for the transport of extra large transformators and similar loads actually anything higher than 0.55 m already causes problems). If you're building a pure high-speed network from scratch without any compatibility constraints (like Japan did with the Shinkansen) you can just choose a platform height of something around 1.1 – 1.25 m and be done with it, but if you're starting with an incrementally upgraded mixed-traffic network as is more common in Europe, you now have a problem… (Talgo sidesteps this problem because of the unconventional bogie design, where the two wheels aren't linked by a fixed axle and steering is assured by the interaction of neighbouring carriages instead, so even with a lower floor height the floor can simply pass between the wheels without necessitating any steps.)
  - kuschku 4y ago
    That'd make sense, if trains like the RRX didn't support 220km/h at an entry height of 520mm and long-distance platforms didn't have a height of 960mm already.
    - 4y ago
johannes1234321 4y ago
If somebody wonders why costs are high: It's not only about putting a few masts and a cable up. Aside from sub stations etc to actually provide the power the big things are bridges and tunnels. If a train goes below a highway bridge it's probably too low for the wire, thus the highway bridge has to be replaced (or tracks be lowered) If there happens to be a tunnel the diameter has to be increased.
- bombcar 4y ago
  You could do "third rail" at those points (or the whole line) but that has other safety issues.
  - johannes1234321 4y ago
    .. and incompatible with existing train systems in most regions. In many systems you currently have a central hub which is overhead wired. If you then have a unwired branch line installing a third-rail-system there would require vehicles which can use both. Such systems exist, like the underground in Nuremberg, Germany, which operates with a third rail on tracks, but in the maintenance area has overhead power to make work safer. However that increases cost by requiring custom vehicles etc.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Yeah upgrading the lines is way more complicated than "stick a self-contained diesel electric on the front of the train".

by sofixa 4y ago

ssl232 4y ago

In Scotland the electrification of part of the (200 year old) network involved rebuilding every car and foot bridge and tunnel along the route to add enough spare height for the overhead wires. It's one downside to being "first" to build widespread railways - with the initial huge investment made in Victorian era when trains were single decked and run on coal, the room for expansion was limited. The good fortune Britain has had in avoiding real destruction of infrastructure in war has also meant there hasn't been much opportunity to rebuild having learned lessons since the Victorian era (separate cycle lanes? Hah). Meanwhile, in Hannover for instance, U-Bahn stations were built in the bomb craters in the city center - making use of the "free" excavation. Obviously not saying war or coming later to the party are good things, but it's one of those ironies of humanity.

CalRobert 4y ago
Funny you should mention cycle lanes - in the 1930's Britain had a fantastic network of cycle highways, which they let fall in to disrepair https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/britain-forgotten-1930s-bike-network https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/britain-forgotten-1930...
steve_gh 4y ago
There is an interesting development going on to electrify some of the UK rail lines - an OverHead Line (OHL) - battery hybrid system. The idea is that you have a standard electrified OHL system where it is easy and cheap (!!!) to install. Places whee you can't put it easily, such as under bridges, through tunnels etc, you don't. You have some (small-ish) battery capability in the train which recharges from the OHL system, and use that in the areas where the OHL hasn't been installed.

kuschku 4y ago

Considering DB just ordered ICE 3 neo of the Velaro D series without level boarding, ICE 4 is also without level boarding, and the only new train will level boarding will be the Talgo ECx, at least in Germany it’s quite underrated.

iggldiggl 4y ago
The problem is that for high-speed trains you're limited in how small you can make the wheels (that is, even more limited than with other trains – even urban railways with more modest top speeds need a floor height of approximately 0.9 - 1.0 m for level boarding without having to compromise on the number and location of doors, though with some compromises you can nowadays get down to roughly 0.6 m), and with conventional bogies (and both wheels linked by a fixed axle, which is you how you classically get the wheels to self-steer themselves around curves) it means you need a floor height > 1.1 m for a level interior and level boarding. Conversely for historical reasons however in Germany 0.76 m is the highest platform height that doesn't conflict with the loading gauge of "regular" exceptional loads on freight trains (on a very few selected routes intended for the transport of extra large transformators and similar loads actually anything higher than 0.55 m already causes problems). If you're building a pure high-speed network from scratch without any compatibility constraints (like Japan did with the Shinkansen) you can just choose a platform height of something around 1.1 – 1.25 m and be done with it, but if you're starting with an incrementally upgraded mixed-traffic network as is more common in Europe, you now have a problem… (Talgo sidesteps this problem because of the unconventional bogie design, where the two wheels aren't linked by a fixed axle and steering is assured by the interaction of neighbouring carriages instead, so even with a lower floor height the floor can simply pass between the wheels without necessitating any steps.)
- kuschku 4y ago
  That'd make sense, if trains like the RRX didn't support 220km/h at an entry height of 520mm and long-distance platforms didn't have a height of 960mm already.
  - 4y ago

johannes1234321 4y ago

If somebody wonders why costs are high: It's not only about putting a few masts and a cable up. Aside from sub stations etc to actually provide the power the big things are bridges and tunnels. If a train goes below a highway bridge it's probably too low for the wire, thus the highway bridge has to be replaced (or tracks be lowered) If there happens to be a tunnel the diameter has to be increased.

bombcar 4y ago
You could do "third rail" at those points (or the whole line) but that has other safety issues.
- johannes1234321 4y ago
  .. and incompatible with existing train systems in most regions. In many systems you currently have a central hub which is overhead wired. If you then have a unwired branch line installing a third-rail-system there would require vehicles which can use both. Such systems exist, like the underground in Nuremberg, Germany, which operates with a third rail on tracks, but in the maintenance area has overhead power to make work safer. However that increases cost by requiring custom vehicles etc.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Yeah upgrading the lines is way more complicated than "stick a self-contained diesel electric on the front of the train".