4 ms·

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 plannin

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. Finland is only connected to Sweden and Norway by land in the North so it's not really going to connect the Finnish rail network to Europe either (unless the Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel [2] gets built, but it does not seem likely at this time). [1] https://yle.fi/a/74-20161793 https://yle.fi/a/74-20161793 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helsinki%E2%80%93Tallinn_Tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helsinki%E2%80%93Tallinn_Tunne...

pjc50 1y ago
> 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".
- ExoticPearTree 1y ago
  Assuming Russia waits 30-50 years until Finland has new tracks :))
  - pjc50 1y ago
    Well, the last Russian invasion of Finland was over 80 years ago, and presumably Russia will continue to exist in some form..
  - IAmBroom 1y ago
    It will take that long for them to replace their military stockpiles. The silver lining in the horrific invasion of Ukraine is that the Russian bear's belly is not just exposed, but raw from shaving nicks. Granted, it still takes a lot to kill a bear - but the West only wants deterrence, not occupation of Russia.
- andriamanitra 1y ago
  I understand that but it is still economic: I highly doubt fixing a minor delay in material movement is the most effective use of these billions.
  - arnsholt 1y ago
    I don’t think it’s a minor delay. In other places where gauge changes are necessary, I think it typically takes on the order of an hour or a few hours, so if you need a big logistics operation across the border from Sweden into Finland, that bottleneck is going to absolutely murder your throughput.
    - andriamanitra 1y ago
      I hadn't considered throughput but that's a good point. Under normal circumstances even a few hours is meaningless but if you need to get lots of trains across the border in a short span of time it starts to accumulate.
    - bluGill 1y ago
      The land border between Sweden and Finland is in the far north where few people live. It would be preferred to not do switches there because that means you need to build/maintain a town for all the needed workers (and families), and said town won't provide much opportunities for any other jobs. In short if you must switch gauges you really want to to be in a smaller city (maybe 100k people) that has other reason to exist so you have a pool of people to hire, who have other reasons to live there and thus have family there.
  - lukan 1y ago
    It is not a minor delay and in case of war such a delay can easily cost billions. And if there isn't a war, the benefits of a interconnected and integrated european railwail network are potentially huge. 300 km/h trains connecting Finnland with Spain with no delay or bumps? That would be something.
    - pjc50 1y ago
Geee 1y ago
Estonia / Eastern Europe uses the Russian gauge.
- andriamanitra 1y ago
  Rail Baltica will connect the Baltics to European rail network using 1435mm gauge. It is scheduled to be fully operational in 2030.
- euroderf 1y ago
  The idea for the Baltics is that east-west lines can remain Russian gauge but north-south lines (esp. new ones) are European gauge. Discussions of a Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel suggest that Finland would at least lay European gauge tracks to Espoo and Helsinki-Vantaa airport, and maybe also to Tampere.
inglor_cz 1y ago
The Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel would be expensive, but in the current climate of hostilities with Russia, the EU could support it just to make a point. It would also enable high-speed services from Finland to Central Europe - Rail Baltica to Tallinn is currently being built, so Helsinki-Warsaw could be a plausible connection, doable in less than 8 hours. (More than ideal, but trains that run for 8 hours from one end of their journey to another are commonplace in Central Europe.)

pjc50 1y ago

> 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".

ExoticPearTree 1y ago
Assuming Russia waits 30-50 years until Finland has new tracks :))
- pjc50 1y ago
  Well, the last Russian invasion of Finland was over 80 years ago, and presumably Russia will continue to exist in some form..
- IAmBroom 1y ago
  It will take that long for them to replace their military stockpiles. The silver lining in the horrific invasion of Ukraine is that the Russian bear's belly is not just exposed, but raw from shaving nicks. Granted, it still takes a lot to kill a bear - but the West only wants deterrence, not occupation of Russia.
andriamanitra 1y ago
I understand that but it is still economic: I highly doubt fixing a minor delay in material movement is the most effective use of these billions.
- arnsholt 1y ago
  I don’t think it’s a minor delay. In other places where gauge changes are necessary, I think it typically takes on the order of an hour or a few hours, so if you need a big logistics operation across the border from Sweden into Finland, that bottleneck is going to absolutely murder your throughput.
  - andriamanitra 1y ago
    I hadn't considered throughput but that's a good point. Under normal circumstances even a few hours is meaningless but if you need to get lots of trains across the border in a short span of time it starts to accumulate.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    The land border between Sweden and Finland is in the far north where few people live. It would be preferred to not do switches there because that means you need to build/maintain a town for all the needed workers (and families), and said town won't provide much opportunities for any other jobs. In short if you must switch gauges you really want to to be in a smaller city (maybe 100k people) that has other reason to exist so you have a pool of people to hire, who have other reasons to live there and thus have family there.
- lukan 1y ago
  It is not a minor delay and in case of war such a delay can easily cost billions. And if there isn't a war, the benefits of a interconnected and integrated european railwail network are potentially huge. 300 km/h trains connecting Finnland with Spain with no delay or bumps? That would be something.
  - pjc50 1y ago

Geee 1y ago

Estonia / Eastern Europe uses the Russian gauge.

andriamanitra 1y ago
Rail Baltica will connect the Baltics to European rail network using 1435mm gauge. It is scheduled to be fully operational in 2030.
euroderf 1y ago
The idea for the Baltics is that east-west lines can remain Russian gauge but north-south lines (esp. new ones) are European gauge. Discussions of a Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel suggest that Finland would at least lay European gauge tracks to Espoo and Helsinki-Vantaa airport, and maybe also to Tampere.

inglor_cz 1y ago

The Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel would be expensive, but in the current climate of hostilities with Russia, the EU could support it just to make a point. It would also enable high-speed services from Finland to Central Europe - Rail Baltica to Tallinn is currently being built, so Helsinki-Warsaw could be a plausible connection, doable in less than 8 hours. (More than ideal, but trains that run for 8 hours from one end of their journey to another are commonplace in Central Europe.)