7 ms·

So my grandpa was an engineer and I love railways... "different signaling systems, different voltages for electrical trains" isn't that much of a problem nowad

So my grandpa was an engineer and I love railways... "different signaling systems, different voltages for electrical trains" isn't that much of a problem nowadays. There are almost always enough multi-system engines available that can cross borders and cope with those changes. We have a jumble of voltages in Czechia and yet another voltage on our German/Austrian borders, and trains go through without a hitch, not even slowing down, full speed. A break of gauge is a different beast: a real tough problem. Even the railcars are wider on wide-gauge railways, which means that they cannot pass through some European tunnels etc. Frankly, the only solution is to re-gauge the entire Ukraine to 1435 mm and introduce a new fleet of railway vehicles there. As an added bonus, that would complicate further Russian invasions in the future, as the Russian army still heavily relies on rail for its logistics. This will be expensive, but the EU could pay for that, plus a lot of that work could be done by European contractors.

kposehn 4y ago
1. Agreed for the most part, though I think a startup could overcome the break-of-gauge limitations pretty fast with moderate investment (and less red tape). 2. There are multiple different ways of handling BofG; the holdup is just deploying it effectively. 3. For loading gauge, using EU grain hauling stock with variable gauge (or swapped) bogies would be ideal - this avoids issues with larger cars and heavier axle loads. (Edit) 4. The unit nature of grain trains makes the problem easier to solve since outside of gauge changes you deal with large cuts of cars. No need to swap couplers on every car as you only hook on the ends (Europe uses hook & buffer, while the former USSR uses SA3) 5. Brazil has the largest network of dual gauge track in the world and has optimized it quite well; 1600mm gauge engines frequently handle 1000mm with the help of idler cars that allow them to couple up. Some lessons to be learned here.
- kergonath 4y ago
  > I think a startup could overcome the break-of-gauge limitations pretty fast with moderate investment (and less red tape) I am not sure what the angle is, here. Variable-gauge trains are things we can build, and as a matter of fact there are a bunch of them crossing the French-Spanish border every day. It’s not some magical disruptive technology that boring old engineering firms could not crack. It would not solve the issues already mentioned, which is that infrastructure is built for a set gauge, and wide-gauge carriages cannot physically fit in some places in a narrow-gauge network. And the red tape is not at this level anyway, it has to do with certification, with which the startup-ness of the designer won’t help. Not everything is best solved by just setting up a startup.
  - kposehn 4y ago
    The angle is that systems to overcome this limitation have lacked for (a) economic reasons and (b) political will. Both clearly now are less of an issue due to the shortage of grain on the global market due to the war.
    - avianlyric 4y ago
      But what do either of those factors have to do with startups? If economics and politics are the primary blockers, what exactly are startups bringing to the table?
      - kposehn 4y ago
        Someone has to start it. Incumbents so far have not.
        kergonath 4y ago
        But that’s the thing, to start what? So far there has been no real need, but existing companies are perfectly able to do it once the need arises (particularly as there is bound to be some significant EU funding for this). Again, boring old companies do just that across several borders, and have been doing it for decades.
  - larusso 4y ago
    > It would not solve the issues already mentioned, which is that infrastructure is built for a set gauge, and wide-gauge carriages cannot physically fit in some places in a narrow-gauge network. My solution to this problem: Build it the other way. Use dual carriages from the EU side and add the gauge changeover at the border. I really don‘t see the reason why the wide-gauge trains have to travel over the border. Yes they can carry more load but that is simply something we have to live with. But they will try to unblock the ports before they even attempt to solve this issue.
    - kposehn 4y ago
- labster 4y ago
  Just make a startup to fix it is classic HN. Six generations of hackers have been working on the problem of track gauge, but it’s obviously going to be solved with a few million in VC funding. On the last point, some gauges are too close to run dual gauge tracks well. It’s great when you can just add a third rail, but European and Soviet standards are too close and need four rails to run on the same track.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
Guthur 4y ago
A better way to avoid conflict would be an international ban on military alliances not railway gauges. The notion that any great power would be curtailed from action by the width of train tracks is laughable.
- jacobolus 4y ago
  Whether Russia should be considered a “great power” at this point is questionable. (Though they are surely still a nuclear-weapons-armed state.) The Ukraine war has demonstrated that the Russian armed forces is barely capable of operating away from railheads. Their entire logistics system is based on rail, and they don’t have enough fuel trucks, general-purpose tactical trucks, engineering vehicles, etc. to keep their troops supplied and moving if they get too far (maybe 100–150 km at most) from the nearest railhead. They start running out of food, fuel, and ammo, and quickly get bogged down. This late-2021 analysis was prescient: https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-...
  - hinkley 4y ago
    There's a theory that the West is currently eating itself. There's a theory that the Russians are behind it. There's a separate theory that Zuckerberg is Nero, and a third theory that both are true. Gorbachev purportedly asserted that Chernobyl was the linchpin of the fall of the USSR. It's hard not to look around and at least be... concerned. Especially this week.
petre 4y ago
> As an added bonus, that would complicate further Russian invasions in the future, as the Russian army still heavily relies on rail for its logistics. To deter further invasions, they could bomb/destroy entry points from Russia, Belarus and Crimea/Donbass as well. It would be quite effective, but deter commerce with the separatist regions. The Poroshenko government bought coal from Donbass after 2014, practically sponsoring the separatists.

kposehn 4y ago

1. Agreed for the most part, though I think a startup could overcome the break-of-gauge limitations pretty fast with moderate investment (and less red tape). 2. There are multiple different ways of handling BofG; the holdup is just deploying it effectively. 3. For loading gauge, using EU grain hauling stock with variable gauge (or swapped) bogies would be ideal - this avoids issues with larger cars and heavier axle loads. (Edit) 4. The unit nature of grain trains makes the problem easier to solve since outside of gauge changes you deal with large cuts of cars. No need to swap couplers on every car as you only hook on the ends (Europe uses hook & buffer, while the former USSR uses SA3) 5. Brazil has the largest network of dual gauge track in the world and has optimized it quite well; 1600mm gauge engines frequently handle 1000mm with the help of idler cars that allow them to couple up. Some lessons to be learned here.

kergonath 4y ago
> I think a startup could overcome the break-of-gauge limitations pretty fast with moderate investment (and less red tape) I am not sure what the angle is, here. Variable-gauge trains are things we can build, and as a matter of fact there are a bunch of them crossing the French-Spanish border every day. It’s not some magical disruptive technology that boring old engineering firms could not crack. It would not solve the issues already mentioned, which is that infrastructure is built for a set gauge, and wide-gauge carriages cannot physically fit in some places in a narrow-gauge network. And the red tape is not at this level anyway, it has to do with certification, with which the startup-ness of the designer won’t help. Not everything is best solved by just setting up a startup.
- kposehn 4y ago
  The angle is that systems to overcome this limitation have lacked for (a) economic reasons and (b) political will. Both clearly now are less of an issue due to the shortage of grain on the global market due to the war.
  - avianlyric 4y ago
    But what do either of those factors have to do with startups? If economics and politics are the primary blockers, what exactly are startups bringing to the table?
    - kposehn 4y ago
      Someone has to start it. Incumbents so far have not.
      - kergonath 4y ago
        But that’s the thing, to start what? So far there has been no real need, but existing companies are perfectly able to do it once the need arises (particularly as there is bound to be some significant EU funding for this). Again, boring old companies do just that across several borders, and have been doing it for decades.
- larusso 4y ago
  > It would not solve the issues already mentioned, which is that infrastructure is built for a set gauge, and wide-gauge carriages cannot physically fit in some places in a narrow-gauge network. My solution to this problem: Build it the other way. Use dual carriages from the EU side and add the gauge changeover at the border. I really don‘t see the reason why the wide-gauge trains have to travel over the border. Yes they can carry more load but that is simply something we have to live with. But they will try to unblock the ports before they even attempt to solve this issue.
  - kposehn 4y ago
labster 4y ago
Just make a startup to fix it is classic HN. Six generations of hackers have been working on the problem of track gauge, but it’s obviously going to be solved with a few million in VC funding. On the last point, some gauges are too close to run dual gauge tracks well. It’s great when you can just add a third rail, but European and Soviet standards are too close and need four rails to run on the same track.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

Guthur 4y ago

A better way to avoid conflict would be an international ban on military alliances not railway gauges. The notion that any great power would be curtailed from action by the width of train tracks is laughable.

jacobolus 4y ago
Whether Russia should be considered a “great power” at this point is questionable. (Though they are surely still a nuclear-weapons-armed state.) The Ukraine war has demonstrated that the Russian armed forces is barely capable of operating away from railheads. Their entire logistics system is based on rail, and they don’t have enough fuel trucks, general-purpose tactical trucks, engineering vehicles, etc. to keep their troops supplied and moving if they get too far (maybe 100–150 km at most) from the nearest railhead. They start running out of food, fuel, and ammo, and quickly get bogged down. This late-2021 analysis was prescient: https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-...
- hinkley 4y ago
  There's a theory that the West is currently eating itself. There's a theory that the Russians are behind it. There's a separate theory that Zuckerberg is Nero, and a third theory that both are true. Gorbachev purportedly asserted that Chernobyl was the linchpin of the fall of the USSR. It's hard not to look around and at least be... concerned. Especially this week.

petre 4y ago

> As an added bonus, that would complicate further Russian invasions in the future, as the Russian army still heavily relies on rail for its logistics. To deter further invasions, they could bomb/destroy entry points from Russia, Belarus and Crimea/Donbass as well. It would be quite effective, but deter commerce with the separatist regions. The Poroshenko government bought coal from Donbass after 2014, practically sponsoring the separatists.