# INDIA | High Speed Rail



## shivy (Jun 21, 2007)

Fast move: Mumbai may get maglev trains
FE
Posted online: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 at 0000 hrs Print Email

Mumbai, December 17: Mumbaikars could soon find relief from the crowded suburban trains in the form of state-of-the-art magnetic levitation (or maglev) trains running at speeds of up to 300 kmph.

Six bidders on Monday filed expressions of interest, with the Maharashtra government, for appointment as consultants for the mega project. The bidders are: Louis Berger Group in association with Reliance Industries-promoted Urban Infrastructure Development Company, KPMG, Vossing (Germany), TÜV SÜD South Asia, Rohit Gupta & Associates, and Bhobe & Associates.

The consultants will be appointed to carry out a feasibility study and help the state government prepare the bidding document for the project, the cost for which has been varyingly estimated at Rs 8,000-30,000 crore.

A senior state government official said: “The proposed high-speed rail is for 6 routes in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, including potential maglev lines. The distances for each route would be between 20 km and 50 km. Besides, a passenger-cum-freight railway corridor between Mumbai and Nagpur is also part of the project.”

The consultants would furnish the final cost estimates and submit a feasibility report. The project will be developed on a build-operate-transfer basis. Experts say a maglev train would typically cost Rs 300 crore per km. In China, a maglev train operates on a 30-km line and achieves a top speed of 501 kmph.

In the fast lane

•Proposed high-speed rail is for 6 routes in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region.

•Distances for each route would be between 20 km and 50 km.

•A passenger-cum-freight railway corridor between Mumbai and Nagpur is also part of the project


----------



## zergcerebrates (Jan 23, 2004)

Good news, but as we all know it'll take Mumbai sometime before they actually get it built.


----------



## Yappofloyd (Jan 28, 2005)

> Mumbai may get maglev trains


 Is it end of year sillyhour? Mumbai has about as much of a chance having a Maglev line built as Tibet has of becoming independent before the Beijing Olympics! Too many of these silly Maglev fantasies pop up in places that really seems absurd.

Sounds like a big corrupt scam to waste some public money by conducting a feasibility study. Given all the trouble aquiring land for the metro lines perhaps the Maharashtra government should concentrate assisting Mumbai on the metro and then perhaps works towards a non-Maglev HSR line north and east.


----------



## pflo777 (Feb 27, 2003)

is there a more or less official website, that shows what they are planning and especially who is proposing this?

I mean a website like www.dbmagnetbahn.de or www.smtdc.com or so...


----------



## Who are you ? (Dec 3, 2007)

i think this news already appeared in indian news 2 years ago

http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=48769

they aimed to get it to 500 km/h, why scale it down now ?


Report from Guardian news


Mumbai plans prestige maglev train to combat overcrowding


Randeep Ramesh in New Delhi
Wednesday December 19, 2007
The Guardian


India's financial capital, Mumbai, is considering a £3.75bn futuristic magnetic levitation high-speed train network as a part of a radical overhaul of the infrastructure of the city whose transport system is bursting at the seams.
The Maharashtra state government wants up to six maglev routes, of between 16 to 30 miles, linking the port city to the suburbs. The role model appears to be Shanghai's maglev train, which links the Chinese city's underground with the international airport and runs at up to 268mph.

Mumbai plans prestige maglev train to combat overcrowding


Randeep Ramesh in New Delhi
Wednesday December 19, 2007
The Guardian


India's financial capital, Mumbai, is considering a £3.75bn futuristic magnetic levitation high-speed train network as a part of a radical overhaul of the infrastructure of the city whose transport system is bursting at the seams.
The Maharashtra state government wants up to six maglev routes, of between 16 to 30 miles, linking the port city to the suburbs. The role model appears to be Shanghai's maglev train, which links the Chinese city's underground with the international airport and runs at up to 268mph.


Mumbai's railways were boycotted only last week by thousands of commuters because of the "deadly" overcrowding. Passenger groups say that on average every square metre of railway carriage accommodates 17 people on each trip.
The situation is likely to worsen as Mumbai's population doubles in 10 years or so to 30 million people. Experts say the city will have to spread beyond its island.

"I think the money is not an issue, neither is the technology. The problem here is whether Mumbai is ready for the kind of expansion envisaged. Maglev is a good start but we need more innovative thinking," said Hafeez Contractor, an architect who advised the government.

Maglev trains, which are lifted by magnetism to leave a small gap between them and the elevated track, have a spotty record. In Japan the expected exorbitant costs meant plans to build a maglev line between Tokyo and Osaka hit the buffers. And critics of Shanghai's maglev train say it haemorrhages money and the high speeds cannot be justified over short distances.

In India many say the prestige project would divert precious resources. "Half of Mumbai lives in slums with no sewers," said Sheila Patel, of Sparc, a group which works with the city's poor. "The city has begun to suffer power shortages for the first time in living memory. These are base infrastructure problems that we have to deal with. I cannot see how spending money on high-speed trains is a good idea in the circumstances."


----------



## Who are you ? (Dec 3, 2007)

This news makes one wonder if india really wants to sort out the transportation problem or it just wants to follow shanghai.


----------



## pflo777 (Feb 27, 2003)

thanks for the link...but again, thats only media reports.

Isnt there something official availabe?
A website of a town/traffic planning institute, that deals with it.
Maybe a map that show the whole undertaking?

It all sounds like a huge joke to me.... something not ment serious, but to make a lot of media echo..


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Shouldn't they build a subway system first?


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

MAGLEV is way to expensive even for super-rish countries.


----------



## pflo777 (Feb 27, 2003)

if I understood it right, they would like to build it completely privately financed, like a tollway.


----------



## eomer (Nov 15, 2003)

shivy said:


> Mumbai, December 17: Mumbaikars could soon find relief from the crowded suburban trains in the form of state-of-the-art magnetic levitation (or maglev) trains running at speeds of up to 300 kmph.


That's strange: why do they need to build a Maglev (or Transrapid ?) if they wants to run up to 300 kph ? Maglev should be built to reach 450 or even 500 kph: an HSR is cheaper, use existing stations, an can run to 320/360 kph.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

Why don't they modernize their railway system and possibly create a metro first?


----------



## VikramRao (Sep 2, 2007)

Who are you ? said:


> This news makes one wonder if india really wants to sort out the transportation problem or it just wants to follow shanghai.


Why would you say that ? India and China have problems such as overcrowding which are unique to us and only us. So if China finds a solution to one of its problems which happens to be similar to ours why wouldnt we use it if it helps ease us ?


----------



## pflo777 (Feb 27, 2003)

is there something like a map with the suggested lines online?

its hard to imagine what exactly they plan over there.


----------



## UD2 (Jan 21, 2006)

VikramRao said:


> Why would you say that ? India and China have problems such as overcrowding which are unique to us and only us. So if China finds a solution to one of its problems which happens to be similar to ours why wouldnt we use it if it helps ease us ?


Because China's Maglev is a ego boosting "look at us" project to show off what the Chinese government have accomplished in the past 20 years. 

Does the Indian government want to show the world their accomplishments as well?


----------



## Shezan (Jun 21, 2007)

good news, happy for Mumbai:cheers:


----------



## drunkenmunkey888 (Aug 13, 2005)

VikramRao said:


> Why would you say that ? India and China have problems such as overcrowding which are unique to us and only us. So if China finds a solution to one of its problems which happens to be similar to ours why wouldnt we use it if it helps ease us ?


Because the maglev was a complete and utter white elephant for Shanghai. The Shanghai maglev is totally useless. It is not a solution, just an expensive, uneconomic display to show off Chinese technological capabilities. India should learn from China and avoid building maglevs for urban transport. China is not the only failure story. The low-speed linimo in Japan is a total failure too. Clearly, maglev technology has not become economically efficient yet and more research is needed before it can become a reliable mass-transit system.


----------



## 33Hz (Jul 29, 2006)

drunkenmunkey888 said:


> Because the maglev was a complete and utter white elephant for Shanghai. The Shanghai maglev is totally useless. It is not a solution, just an expensive, uneconomic display to show off Chinese technological capabilities.


ITYM German



> India should learn from China and avoid building maglevs for urban transport. China is not the only failure story. The low-speed linimo in Japan is a total failure too. Clearly, maglev technology has not become economically efficient yet and more research is needed before it can become a reliable mass-transit system.


Reliability is not the issue. It works well.

If it is such a failure, why are the opening hours continually being extended? Why do the autorities want to extend it across town?


----------



## drunkenmunkey888 (Aug 13, 2005)

33Hz said:


> ITYM German
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Authorities want to extend it so that the airports will be connected and so that people can take the maglev to the 2010 expo site. It is geared toward tourists, not commuters. Personally, I think its a bad idea and if it were up to me, I'd have the maglev torn down and admit it was an economically bad choice. It is overpriced and useless as a commuter rail and most people take it because it is a tourist attraction in it of itself. Of course, I can't give you any hard evidence to back it up so I'll just say that this is my personal opinion.

Mumbai can do what it wants. If it can feasibly pull off a maglev dependent metro system, then more power to it. But looking at linimo and Shanghai maglev's performances, I would think its a bad idea.


----------



## stone (Jan 1, 2006)

drunkenmunkey888 said:


> It is overpriced and useless as a commuter rail and most people take it because it is a tourist attraction in it of itself. Of course, I can't give you any hard evidence to back it up so I'll just say that this is my personal opinion.


I don't think ppl take shanghai's maglev just as a tourist attraction. I personally took it as well from downtown to the airport. It's very convenient with a only 8 mininute ride at only 50 rmb (around $7). It's of course the first choice for ppl to go 2 the airport in terms of both time and expense.


----------



## chornedsnorkack (Mar 13, 2009)

antovador said:


> ^^ Not a problem with an automatic changing gauge system as the one using in Spain where there are 3 differents gauges but not recommended with full HSR.


Spain has exact same gauges as India. 1676 mm and 1000 mm. So India can import trains from Spain.


----------



## Gadiri (Oct 30, 2009)




----------



## sidney_jec (Jun 10, 2005)

^^where did you get these maps from?


----------



## Gadiri (Oct 30, 2009)

sidney_jec said:


> ^^where did you get these maps from?


Screen shot of the video ! ^^

There are some mistakes like Jaipur at the place of Armistar.


----------



## sidney_jec (Jun 10, 2005)

yepp


----------



## CityDreamer (Dec 9, 2011)

Important Memorandum of Understanding, signed between India and the Spanish companies Adif and Renfe, who will provide consultancy in the building of high speed rail in India.

http://www.track2infra.com/indian-railways-signs-mou-with-spains-adif-and-renfe-operadora/


----------



## el palmesano (May 27, 2006)

^^ oH!! great news for both countries!!

have you more info about it??


----------



## dimlys1994 (Dec 19, 2010)

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...ead-with-high-speed-projects.html?channel=542
> 
> *New Indian government to push ahead with high-speed projects*
> Wednesday, May 28, 2014
> ...


What a move:banana: I think that the government will not disappoint with the promises


----------



## dimlys1994 (Dec 19, 2010)

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...gives-high-speed-rail-a-push.html?channel=542
> 
> *New Indian government gives high-speed a push*
> Tuesday, June 10, 2014
> ...


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

*Japan, China in race to sell India their high-speed trains*
27 August 2014
The Economic Times	

NEW DELHI: China and Japan are once again in competition, this time for the lucrative high speed rail network market in India.

The Japanese are already working on a feasibility study for the Shinkansen network on the Ahmedabad-Mumbai corridor, the results of which will be shared with the Indian side in the run-up to the PM's visit to Japan this weekend. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is expected to make a strong pitch for India to buy the Shinkansen high speed network. Kyoto, where Modi lands on Saturday, has the best known Shinkansen connection with Tokyo. 

Meanwhile, China, which now has the longest high-speed rail network in the world, is keen to sell their trains to India, at a price much lower than the Japanese. The Chinese president, Xi Jinping, will arrive for his maiden visit to India in mid-September.

Japan is hardselling better quality and higher safety standards, while China is pitching lower costs.

According to officials familiar with developments, Japan, at present enjoys a slight edge largely due to its safety record. China has had at least one spectacular high speed rail accident, killing hundreds. However, the Shinkansen's cost is prohibitively high, and despite having a fail-proof safety and speed system for almost half a century, Japan has not had great success in selling it overseas.

However, a new Japanese entity, International High-Speed Rail Association, comprising all the companies that build high speed railways in Japan will try to convince India about its product in October, said officials. Given the projected cost for each train at around Rs 60,000 crore (as announced by railway minister Sadananda Gowda in his railway budget speech) officials said Japan can sweeten the offer with a better financial deal, including FDI.

China has been sounded out on upgrading India's ageing and inefficient railways infrastructure, even building new stations. But the prize is the bullet trains because they are outright buys. China, which plans to have 19,000 km under high speed rail network from its present 11,000 by 2015, is now looking for private investment into the railway sector. Thus far, it has been funded solely by the government. But Chinese premier Li Keqiang announced on Sunday that henceforth China's railway growth, which he sees as essential for China's development would have to come from private sources.

India is planning to build high speed train networks on other routes such as Delhi-Agra, Delhi-Chandigarh, Mysore-Bangalore-Chennai, Mumbai-Goa and Hyderabad-Secunderabad.


----------



## Sopomon (Oct 2, 2010)

^^ I imagine they'll be quite happy to play the Chinese and Japanese against each other in order to get the best deal. In thet regard, I wouldn't be surprised if both offered to sweeten the deal with cheap loans / PPP deals etc


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

chornedsnorkack said:


> Spain has exact same gauges as India. 1676 mm and 1000 mm. So India can import trains from Spain.


Hi! 
In Spain there never was 1,676 mm wide, there are now 1,668 on conventional lines and before had 1,674 (more in spanish).


----------



## dimlys1994 (Dec 19, 2010)

From Railway Gazette:



> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...luded-in-india-china-railway-action-plan.html
> 
> *High speed line included in India-China railway action plan*
> 22 Sep 2014
> ...


----------



## dimlys1994 (Dec 19, 2010)

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...tudy-2000km-hs-line-in-india.html?channel=542
> 
> *Chinese to study 2000km HS line in India*
> Friday, November 28, 2014
> ...


----------



## vijesh108k (Mar 7, 2015)

rajdhani express chennai to delhi is current fastest train in India


----------



## NergiZed (Jan 22, 2015)

India has a democratic government that isn't exactly known for it's speed or efficiency. Can we expect any actual construction before 2020?


----------



## kunming tiger (Jun 30, 2011)

NergiZed said:


> India has a democratic government that isn't exactly known for it's speed or efficiency. Can we expect any actual construction before 2020?


 You can have speed and efficiency or you can have democratic governace rarely can you have both.


----------



## NergiZed (Jan 22, 2015)

kunming tiger said:


> You can have speed and efficiency or you can have democratic governace rarely can you have both.


Well, both Japan and South Korea all seem to be able to build HSR with a pretty decent pace, same with Germany, France and even bankrupt Spain.

There are some dictatorships that are trying to build HSR but doing so at a terribly slow pace, and there are those dictatorships that are also doing so at a fairly decent pace. It's more of a general cultural thing, not a form of governance thing. (more about the efficient of governance I suppose)

Obviously, no one can compare to the Chinese in terms of speed and scale, that's simply on another level entirely. Something similar probably won't happen again within our lifetime.


----------



## Sopomon (Oct 2, 2010)

^^ That's certainly what the CCP would like one to believe.


----------



## kunming tiger (Jun 30, 2011)

NergiZed said:


> Well, both Japan and South Korea all seem to be able to build HSR with a pretty decent pace, same with Germany, France and even bankrupt Spain.
> 
> There are some dictatorships that are trying to build HSR but doing so at a terribly slow pace, and there are those dictatorships that are also doing so at a fairly decent pace. It's more of a general cultural thing, not a form of governance thing. (more about the efficient of governance I suppose)
> 
> Obviously, no one can compare to the Chinese in terms of speed and scale, that's simply on another level entirely. Something similar probably won't happen again within our lifetime.


 That is a valid point indeed re the cultural factor.

I was talking more in the context of the PRC .


----------



## Sunfuns (Mar 26, 2012)

US is hardly a shining example of public transportation... The appeal of HSR is not that it's necessarily cheaper than flying (it could be but not always) but that on medium distances (1-3 h travel time) it is faster than any other mode of travel including a plane.


----------



## tonii (Aug 18, 2006)

abhitej said:


> US does not have High Speed Rail & moves a large number of people by planes. More the volumes less will be the cost due to economies of scale. So as air traffic will increase in India it will be cheaper to travel by planes.


You seriously don't know what are you talking about.


----------



## abhitej (Jun 13, 2015)

Checked the price for Mumbai - Ahmadabad flight ticket. Booking one week before journey costs me 3800 for return ticket. Now with high speed train it will cost me 2800 + 2800 = 5600. Why the hell will I pay 50% more for high speed rail than plane. India has the cheapest airline service in world. We do not need high speed rail. Reality is high speed rail is expensive compared to planes. China has high speed rail but it is subsidized by government. China rail has debt of USD 500 billion. Wait for some days & see China rail get bankrupt. US does not have high speed rail. This is not because they do not have money or technology. This is because they take commercial decision & high speed railway does not make commercial sense. 

Now lets take a look at economics of high speed rail. It will cost 60000 crores to construct high speed rail between Mumbai & Ahmadabad. You need to get 10% return to pay debt so you need to earn 6000 crores per year just to pay interest. 6000 crores is more than profit of entire airline industry in India. That you need to earn just from single route. For capital budget of 60,000 crores you can buy 100 airbus 320. This is more than fleet size of Indigo Airlines, the largest in India. Now return ticket will cost 6000 as per their estimate. So to recover 6000 crores to pay for interest cost on 60000 crores you need to sell 1 crore tickets every year. That is more than twice the population of Ahmadabad and I am not even considering the operating cost. All airlines together sell 60 lakhs tickets in India every year and you need to sell 1 crores tickets just on Mumbai Ahmadabad route to pay interest cost. 

Then there are operational difficulties in constructing high speed rail line. Where is the land in Mumbai to build high speed rail line. You need to build railway station at Vasai. Who will travel to Vasai to take a high speed rail. Then there is politics. Every MLA will want train to stop in his constituency. In the article it is mentioned that they will have 10 stations between Mumbai & Ahmadabad. So a stop every 50 km. High speed rail will not be able to accelerate to its full speed and we have a stop. 

We need to invest on existing railway network to improve its efficiency. Build more double tracks and complete electrification project. If we increase average speed of system to 100 kmph it is more than enough. Foreign governments will try to sell high speed rail to India as they get revenues. But our imports will increase. If any foreign government is too keen, let them build and operate the high speed rail without any financial liability on our government. We must only provide land. I am sure in such a scenario no one will invest. They just want Indian government to take financial burden so that they can sell their technology.


----------



## jaysonn341 (Mar 19, 2012)

^^ Have you never heard of the multiplier effect..... 

Some bedtime reading for you: 
http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/EAP/China/high_speed-rail-%20in-china-en.pdf


----------



## particlez (May 5, 2008)

Abhitej sounds eerily similar to the anti-HSR lobbyists in my area. The arguments always revolve around financial constraints--as if public infrastructure macroeconomics should be conflated with running a lemonade stand. The arguments don't stand up to objective criticism, but they're still spouted. And surprise surprise, the opponents of the railways tend to be airline companies, oil companies, local landlords, etc. You know, vested interests.

Sure it's expensive, but EVERY advancement in infrastructure has paid dividends. You don't have to use the Chinese example. If the US did not set up (at incredible initial costs) its railway and interstate system, could it still function? Same thing with Europe, Japan, etc.


----------



## abhitej (Jun 13, 2015)

jaysonn341 said:


> ^^ Have you never heard of the multiplier effect.....
> 
> Some bedtime reading for you:
> http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/EAP/China/high_speed-rail-%20in-china-en.pdf


We can have a far bigger multiplier effect by improving our existing railway network.


----------



## abhitej (Jun 13, 2015)

particlez said:


> Abhitej sounds eerily similar to the anti-HSR lobbyists in my area. The arguments always revolve around financial constraints--as if public infrastructure macroeconomics should be conflated with running a lemonade stand. The arguments don't stand up to objective criticism, but they're still spouted. And surprise surprise, the opponents of the railways tend to be airline companies, oil companies, local landlords, etc. You know, vested interests.
> 
> Sure it's expensive, but EVERY advancement in infrastructure has paid dividends. You don't have to use the Chinese example. If the US did not set up (at incredible initial costs) its railway and interstate system, could it still function? Same thing with Europe, Japan, etc.


Developing aviation sector is also advancement in infrastructure. You are saying that investment in High Speed Rail is advancement but investment in airports/planes is not which is a wrong argument. I am just objectively comparing planes & high speed rail. Planes have lots of advantages over high speed rail. Just because China built a high speed network does not mean everyone should.


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

Still a bit of food for thought:
A single 16-car N700a Shinkansen train can transport over 1300 persons, two E4 sets over 1600 (and there is nothing to stop you from using a even longer train. Imagine: a 24 car E4 formation would be able to carry 2450 people!) 
To transport 1300 people by plane you ether need 2 Airbus A380s with all coach seating or several more smaller planes. A380s only use major airports because of their size and were never constructed for short haul flights. Major airport construction costs are massive and take up a lot of space.
The advantage of a high speed rail line is that you could also use it for other trains and that you can branch other lines from, provided it is constructed for the same gauge as the rest of the country.


----------



## chornedsnorkack (Mar 13, 2009)

M-NL said:


> Still a bit of food for thought:
> A single 16-car N700a Shinkansen train can transport over 1300 persons, two E4 sets over 1600 (and there is nothing to stop you from using a even longer train.


Length of stations. 16 car Shinkansens are 400 m long.

How long are stations on the existing slow speed railways of India?


----------



## Vicvin86 (Oct 27, 2008)

chornedsnorkack said:


> Length of stations. 16 car Shinkansens are 400 m long.
> 
> How long are stations on the existing slow speed railways of India?


500 mts given each coach is 22-23 mts in length and long distance trains are 24 coaches long.


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

In the top 14 of longest station platforms on Wikipedia 7 are Indian and the shortest is 720 meters and the longest is a whopping 1366 meters. Very long platforms are not uncommon in India.


----------



## skyrocket2 (Jun 22, 2015)

India is both geographically and culturally more similar to Europe than it is to USA, so the comparison is a little off.

I'm awestruck at how slowly India is proceeding with HSR - it's not as if a hoard of Pakistanis are blocking a building sites or something. At this rate I would expect India to unveil a Mag-Lev network!

India needs to improve it's railway since it's so compact and dense. The USA doesn't have HSR due to political interests, a powerful car lobby (in a capitalist political culture), and a large sparse country. I'm comparison India is more liberal, dense, and culturally programmed to use trains.

Trains are easier and cheaper than planes, and are a nesecarry aspect of public transport that people expect. Especially in a country such as India, planes will never be enough to satisfy demand for seats or prices. By now I expect India to start linking second-tier cities (Pune, Madurai) to it's network, not stumbling about with it's core network!

Judging by it's speed of development, we will never see anything like small towns with modern rail infrastructure or a rail tunnel to Sri Lanka or large MRT systems. India needs to speed up if it's going to develop like China!


----------



## abhitej (Jun 13, 2015)

M-NL said:


> Still a bit of food for thought:
> A single 16-car N700a Shinkansen train can transport over 1300 persons, two E4 sets over 1600 (and there is nothing to stop you from using a even longer train. Imagine: a 24 car E4 formation would be able to carry 2450 people!)
> To transport 1300 people by plane you ether need 2 Airbus A380s with all coach seating or several more smaller planes. A380s only use major airports because of their size and were never constructed for short haul flights. Major airport construction costs are massive and take up a lot of space.
> The advantage of a high speed rail line is that you could also use it for other trains and that you can branch other lines from, provided it is constructed for the same gauge as the rest of the country.


High speed rail costs USD 50 million - 100 million per kilometer. For this you can buy one airbus 320. A 20000 kms network to cover India will cost atleast USD 2 trillion. Thats more than GDP of India. Reality is that planes are cheaper than high speed rail.


----------



## abhitej (Jun 13, 2015)

skyrocket2 said:


> India is both geographically and culturally more similar to Europe than it is to USA, so the comparison is a little off.
> 
> I'm awestruck at how slowly India is proceeding with HSR - it's not as if a hoard of Pakistanis are blocking a building sites or something. At this rate I would expect India to unveil a Mag-Lev network!
> 
> ...


Railways is cheaper than planes but high speed rail as of now is expensive than planes. You say that planes will not be able to satisfy demand for seats but thats your opinion. No reason for aviation sector not able to satisfy demand. In India plane tickets are already cheaper than high speed rail tickets in Europe or China.


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

abhitej said:


> High speed rail costs USD 50 million - 100 million per kilometer. For this you can buy one airbus 320.


Going back to my example: A 16 car N700a Shinkansen can transport up to 1300 passengers. To transport 1300 passengers you need 7 A320s. Given a 3 minute separation at the runway and a similar number of return flights, a single runway is already occupied 42 minutes an hour. 

Never mind if we would want to have more trains an hour in each direction. In Japan the Shinkansens at peak times run at 3 minute intervals in both directions, that is 20 trains an hour! That is 20x2x1300=52000 passengers an hour. If you were to use 800 seat A380s that would mean 65 planes an hour. Good luck constructing an airport for that. It would need at least 6 runways.
It would be twice as big the current busiest airport in the world and that is for one route only!


----------



## xjtyou (Apr 22, 2015)

abhitej said:


> High speed rail costs USD 50 million - 100 million per kilometer. For this you can buy one airbus 320. A 20000 kms network to cover India will cost atleast USD 2 trillion. Thats more than GDP of India. Reality is that planes are cheaper than high speed rail.


the cost of high speed rail is $ 50 million to 100 million per km? Do you mean in Europe? Do you think the construction cost in India will be as high as Europe?
Secondly, buying airbus or Boing, India has to pay the European or Americans. But manufacturing the track, cement, the train within India will be beneficial for the industry of India


----------



## Sunfuns (Mar 26, 2012)

Even in Europe it doesn't cost that much (ca 20 million euros per km in France, possibly less than that in Spain), maybe in US with their crazy jacked-up prices on all construction.


----------



## Stainless (Jun 7, 2009)

abhitej said:


> Checked the price for Mumbai - Ahmadabad flight ticket. Booking one week before journey costs me 3800 for return ticket. Now with high speed train it will cost me 2800 + 2800 = 5600. Why the hell will I pay 50% more for high speed rail than plane. India has the cheapest airline service in world. We do not need high speed rail. Reality is high speed rail is expensive compared to planes. China has high speed rail but it is subsidized by government. China rail has debt of USD 500 billion. Wait for some days & see China rail get bankrupt. US does not have high speed rail. This is not because they do not have money or technology. This is because they take commercial decision & high speed railway does not make commercial sense.


This is ludicrously short sighted. Plane fares at this moment in time are a little bit cheaper than a hypothetical future fare on a high speed rail that hasn't even been built yet. 

With the density of population in India you really need to be going for the 'all of the above' approach to transportation. China is building railways, airports and freeways. They all have their pros and cons so just thinking 'why build a railway when I can fly' is not really solving anything. Airports will reach capacity and freeways will get full of people going medium distances. 

India should be investing in railways now, before land and labour get too expensive. Otherwise in 30 years or so you will have loads of airports everywhere with overcrowded skies and the same creaking overcrowded slow trains you have today.


----------



## invincibletiger (Oct 6, 2010)

vijesh108k said:


> rajdhani express chennai to delhi is current fastest train in India





sourierservice said:


> what is the avg speed and highest speed??


Chennai Rajdhani is perhaps not even in the top 15. If we consider the average speed for the entire journey, the fastest trains are the Rajdhanis and Durontos in the Delhi-Mumbai and Delhi-Kolkata (Howrah/Sealdah) line. The average speed is 85/86 km/h. 

New Delhi - Sealdah Duronto
1459 km in 16h 55m. Avg Speed 86. Stops in between - 3.

Mumbai - Delhi Rajdhani
1386 km in 16h. Avg Speed 86. Stops in between - 5.

The fastest if we exclude the halt times is the Bhopal Shatabdi.
707 km in 8h 25m. Stops - 8. Avg Speed (excluding the halts) - 89 km/h.

This Bhopal Shatabdi reaches about 155 km/h in the stretch between Delhi and Agra which is perhaps the highest speed of all Indian Railways trains.


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*Japan offers to fund Mumbai-Ahmedabad high speed rail corridor*



> India’s ambitious plan to construct the Mumbai-Ahmedabad high speed rail corridor reached a decisive stage on Tuesday, following the Japanese government’s offer to fund the Rs 988,050 million project at a low interest rate of 0.25% at Tuesday’s meeting of the Indo-Japan Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC).
> 
> The Japanese government’s loan offer comes with the rider that 30% of the rolling stock for the project would be sourced from Japanese firms, sources said.
> 
> A financial rate of return (RoR) of 4% and an economic RoR of 12% has been projected on what will be India’s first high-speed rail line, which is estimated to have a daily ridership of 40,000 passengers.


http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...igh-speed-rail-corridor/article1-1362086.aspx


----------



## Bbbut (Aug 23, 2014)

What a strange reason to argue for a foreign gauge.

There is no point in even thinking about what kind of trains are run in Russia or China or Europe, no point in looking to 'link up' countries. You know why? Because HSR beyond 5h of travel time becomes economically unviable against air travel!
No HSR service will ever sell a ticket from Mumbai to Moscow, end of argument.

To quote myself from above:

The initial purchase of rolling stock would be slightly cheaper and tunnels could be smaller in diameter. But does that really outweigh the fact that it would make HSR forever unable to be linked to any existing system?

Also, from the viewpoint of an Indian industry orientated politician, is it really that desirable, to make your country ideal for foreign cooperations to sell to you?
Given the size of India and the potential of the market, surely you would want to build and produce native HSR in the long term (just like the Chinese did).
So keeping a certain 'entry barrier' up could help domestic solutions.


----------



## Rayancito (Oct 18, 2012)

skyridgeline said:


> ^^It will cost _*at least*_ twice as much as the ones built in China.


 I have no details about this matter, the point is that in China land is government owned while in India the government has to pay for the land. California HSR is very expensive because the land is extremely expensive.


----------



## stingstingsting (Jun 5, 2010)

^^



Bbbut said:


> What a strange reason to argue for a foreign gauge.
> 
> There is no point in even thinking about what kind of trains are run in Russia or China or Europe, no point in looking to 'link up' countries. You know why? Because HSR beyond 5h of travel time becomes economically unviable against air travel!
> No HSR service will ever sell a ticket from Mumbai to Moscow, end of argument.


Standard gauge is no more "foreign" than broad gauge. 

Yes, India has been using broad gauge on its rail lines for a very long time. To argue for interoperability with broad gauge, being the "standard" most-widely used gauge in India has obvious merit, but to say that standard gauge is "foreign" only brings a nationalistic angle to this issue which should simply be social, technical and economical. That's not saying that politics will not get in the way, as it usually does.

Australia had an unfortunate series of decisions made more than a century ago that meant the separate colonies adopted different gauges, widely described as broad, standard and narrow. When Australia decided to develop a national network, a lot of unneccessary work had to be done with interfacing and laying down of new sections of both standard gauge and dual-gauge track. 

A closer case-in-point would be the Delhi Metro, which is of course not a high-speed system but Indian Railways was adamant in having it developed in broad gauge. They had their way for the first line but later lines were built at standard gauge, as are all other metro lines in India. Funnily enough, much of the rolling stock for both gauges has been manufactured locally by BEML albeit through technology-transfer agreements. A bigger point is that there is not much difference in the capacities of either type of trainset, axle load being the issue it seems.

Travelling Moscow to Mumbai by HSR is a red herring. HSR was not started for capital-to-capital travel, but to link major urban areas. That is still the case. Capitals tend to be major urban areas anyway. And travelling this gargantuan journey by HSR instead of by plane would indeed be uneconomical but who is arguing for this? Mentioning India and Russia as examples does not equate to travelling *from* India *to* Russia. My point is that a limiting the HSR network to broad gauge due to a short-term outlook would be a bad idea as history has shown.




Bbbut said:


> The initial purchase of rolling stock would be slightly cheaper and tunnels could be smaller in diameter. But does that really outweigh the fact that it would make HSR forever unable to be linked to any existing system?
> 
> Also, from the viewpoint of an Indian industry orientated politician, is it really that desirable, to make your country ideal for foreign cooperations to sell to you?
> Given the size of India and the potential of the market, surely you would want to build and produce native HSR in the long term (just like the Chinese did).
> So keeping a certain 'entry barrier' up could help domestic solutions.


Track gauge ≠ loading gauge. 

The Indian railway system, and by extension those of Pakistan and parts of Bangladesh, have a much larger loading gauge, which is great for capacity. But as I have stated, standard gauge does not limit capacity. However, the loading gauge does. Furthermore, loading gauge involves a lot more factors including the structure gauge and the dynamic and kinematic envelopes, which would be less of an issue for high-speed rail lines using wider curve radii. For comparison, India's passenger lines have a loading gauge of 3.7m x 5.3m while that of Japan's Shinkansen network is 3.4m x 4.5m (correct me if I am wrong). There's not much difference in the width but they do have different track gauges. Other important factors to consider are the axle limits and more importantly, the signalling system.

The impact of choosing broad gauge to create an "entry barrier", giving a boost to local industry, is questionable. Foreign manufacturers can easily adapt their models to different gauges, both for track and loading gauge. Japan has sold high speed trains to the UK. And as I mentioned, the Siemens Velaro model has been adapted across a variety of systems. Russia chose the Siemens Velaro to run on its upgraded high-speed broad gauge line between Moscow and St Petersburg, instead of developing their own trainsets. There are other factors that can much better assist the local industry get on board with this HSR opportunity.

Its unfortunately ironic to state that choosing standard gauge "would make HSR forever unable to be linked to any existing system". Spain has shown that gauge transfer on this scale is feasible, what with 8mm in difference between the Iberian and Indian gauges. 




Bbbut said:


> end of argument.


One should not be so easy to stymie this debate on one's own accord. hno:

Both sides have pros and cons but I am unfortunately inclined to this view that it would actually impact India more if broad gauge was chosen. No one wants to be lumped with a hodge-podge of gauges for wrongly-held reasons, but it cuts both ways, for India and for the World. Besides, we're only providing commentary and whatever we say here will probably have no effect on the decisions made.


----------



## skyridgeline (Dec 7, 2008)

Rayancito said:


> I have no details about this matter, the point is that in *China land is government owned *while in India the government has to pay for the land. California HSR is very expensive because the land is extremely expensive.



And therefore, belong to the people (PRC). They are very likely compensated. Most of the mass protests in China are land related - but rarely are they connected to railways.

Just ~6% of the total projected cost for California HSR ( source: http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/about/business_plans/BPlan_2012Ch3_Cap_Cost.pdf ).

http://peopleus.blogspot.ca/2012/12/chinese-architecture-old-and-new.html


----------



## Bbbut (Aug 23, 2014)

@stingstingsting
Again what a strange kind of comment.
You confirm everything I said, acknowledge the pros of *not *changing the gauge and then arrive at the opposite conclusion for no reasons given. 


stingstingsting said:


> ... unfortunately inclined to this view that it would actually impact India more if broad gauge was chosen.


Why? 


Also, your examples do not apply, because Australia is a single country and a lot of trains do cross the state borders (so there was a need to harmonize internally). But as a whole, Australia has no need to coordinate with anyone outside, they could have made up their very own gauge and neither them or the rest of the world would have cared. You hopefully realize that is an argument for keeping the Indian gauge.
Dito with Metro trains, they are almost always not compatible with the main line railways anyway (yes I know some very few are, spare me the 'lecture'). They might as well be monorails or whatever, they do not affect main line train systems.


PS:
I really do not like to be quoted out of context, especially when you hold the exact same view, thank you very much.


> > end of argument.
> 
> 
> One should not be so easy to stymie this debate on one's own accord. hno:


----------



## Chota_Shakeel (May 22, 2015)

Bbbut said:


> Also, from the viewpoint of an Indian industry orientated politician, is it really that desirable, to make your country ideal for foreign cooperations to sell to you?
> Given the size of India and the potential of the market, surely you would want to build and produce native HSR in the long term (just like the Chinese did).
> So keeping a certain 'entry barrier' up could help domestic solutions.


Japan is providing 100% Transfer-of-Technology for their bullet train.80% of the components will be made by Indian companies in India and the rest 20% by Japanese companies in India.


----------



## stingstingsting (Jun 5, 2010)

^^
What.

1. I am not commenting nor am I out to make 'strange comments'. I have not confirmed everything you've said. I have argued your points. I even quoted your entire "to quote myself from below...". Please pay the courtesy to retort each point sans characterisation.

2. When have I ever stated that broad gauge was a better choice for HSR? Did you not read everything I wrote? I have gone at lengths to argue against broad gauge on each of your points yet all you do is simply brush it all off hno: 

3. I did say that it cuts both ways. I acknowledge that there are pros and and cons with choosing either broad or standard. You either adopt the Indian standard of broad gauge or you adopt the HSR standard which, being the most commonly used, is standard gauge. I have indeed (lo and behold) acknowledged the pros of not changing the gauge - the HSR gauge. So I've come to the conclusion that standard gauge has more benefits for India's HSR on balance.

4.


Bbbut said:


> You hopefully realize that is an argument for keeping the Indian gauge.


You hopefully realise that the fact that India is connected by land to pretty much *the rest of the World* (whereas Australia is separated by oceans and seas) is an argument for using standard gauge. Yeah who cares what Australia chose, but hey it chose standard gauge. Who cares what Japan chose, being an island, but hey it chose standard gauge. WHO CARES :nuts:

5.


Bbbut said:


> Dito with Metro trains, they are almost always not compatible with the main line railways anyway (yes I know some very few are, spare me the 'lecture'). They might as well be monorails or whatever, they do not affect main line train systems.


If you cared to delve more a little more into my original 'lecture' (LOL very kind of you thank you), you would have realised that I was specifically referring to the Delhi Metro example, not all metro systems. Indian Railways was making exactly the same reasons that you have made for pushing for broad gauge for the Delhi Metro, but in the end they were wrong and it didn't matter anyway. And like you state, since the metro operations do not affect the main line train systems, what's the point then of having broad gauge? Following *your* own line of argument, what's the point of having HSR in broad gauge then?

6.


Bbbut said:


> I really do not like to be quoted out of context, especially when you hold the exact same view, thank you very much.


Oh I don't like to be misrepresented either. Have I ever mentioned travelling from Mumbai to Moscow (quite catchy actually)? I don't care what you like and I don't hold your "exact same view" :lol: So stop painting it like I was bulldozing you (and broad gauge) and maybe you could stop doing the same too THANK YOU VERY VERY MUCH for the patron(ising)age :banana:


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

stingstingsting said:


> Its unfortunately ironic to state that choosing standard gauge "would make HSR forever unable to be linked to any existing system". Spain has shown that gauge transfer on this scale is feasible, what with 8mm in difference between the Iberian and Indian gauges.


But the Indian rail network doesn't need interoperability with other countries: its network by itself is likely bigger than the entire European network together. Most trains will never even get close to a border, let alone cross it.

Anyway, widening trains is technically easy, narrowing is not. Velaro RUS, all Chinese HSTs and all Shinkansen are already 3,4 m wide (that's +45 cm over standard European models). Adding an extra 20 cm will not be any problem at all, in fact it is less then the width difference between a Shinkansen and a mini Shinkansen.


----------



## stingstingsting (Jun 5, 2010)

M-NL said:


> But the Indian rail network doesn't need interoperability with other countries: its network by itself is likely bigger than the entire European network together. Most trains will never even get close to a border, let alone cross it.


I acknowledge that this is the current situation. But can anyone say what will happen in 5 years or in a decade, or twenty years? I will not be surprised once a standard gauge high speed rail spine gets built from Southern China to Southeast Asia and through to Singapore. Neither will I be surprised if China decides to drill through Everest. I mean yes it is wacko. But think how far China's rail network has come through the past decade alone. Ten years back, I would have thought it was wacko for China to build a 2000km line almost to Kazakhstan, but it has.

I agree there are issues. I acknowledge it was not as difficult within China. As an example, China's short HSR link with Hong Kong has encountered considerable delays and Hong Kong is not a separate country so who knows what more delays can happen with other countries. This is not about China alone, but how HSR is becoming increasingly more prevalent worldwide. So my point is why restrict this HSR Quadrilateral-to-be to broad gauge? I have already dismissed capacity and loading gauge to be an issue. If you are talking about running HS trains off the quadrilateral onto the current Indian Railways network, gauge changers are an established technology. Otherwise, dual-gauging or regauging are options that are feasible.



M-NL said:


> Anyway, widening trains is technically easy, narrowing is not. Velaro RUS, all Chinese HSTs and all Shinkansen are already 3,4 m wide (that's +45 cm over standard European models). Adding an extra 20 cm will not be any problem at all, in fact it is less then the width difference between a Shinkansen and a mini Shinkansen.


Narrowing a trainset would be harder than widening one. So why not run these now off-the-shelf widened trainsets, already in use overseas, on the current Indian Railways broad gauge network, with gauge change wheelsets? Capacity will not be impacted. I don't even think it would be much of an issue to increase the loading gauge of HSR to fit the Indian Railways width. (+30cm) but why would you need to? Extendable footsteps at egress points is an established technology, that can be used at current Indian Railways platform.

This seems complicated because the arguments for standard gauge can be similar to the arguments for broad gauge. The big driver has to be, what's better for India, both in the short run and in the long run.


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train to navigate 21 km tunnel under sea*



> Passengers will get the thrill of riding under the sea while travelling between Mumbai and Ahmedabad in the first bullet train of the country.
> The 508 km long Mumbai-Ahmedabad high speed rail corridor will have a 21 km long tunnel under the sea, said a senior Railway Ministry official involved with the public transporter’s ambitious bullet train project.
> While most part of the corridor is proposed to be on the elevated track, there will be a stretch after Thane creek towards Virar which will go under the sea as per the detailed project report by JICA.


http://indianexpress.com/article/in...in-mumbai-ahmedabad-under-sea-tunnel-2762716/


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

A couple of opinions (already published in this thread) from spanish experience. 



Gusiluz said:


> It seems that Japan's commitment to offer the installation of standard gauge, although 90% of the Indian network has a gauge of 1,676 mm.
> 
> From the Spanish experience of adopting the standard gauge for high-speed network with 90% of Iberian network (1,668 mm) wide, I can only give you a tip: *not moving the external borders within the country*, there will be more domestic traffic out.
> 
> ...





Gusiluz said:


> Well, I'm glad it has started a debate. In Spain politicians said the standard gauge (1435 mm) was the modernity, which would repair the historic mistake of 1844 and that Poland would join us.
> However, no train can travel between Spain and Germany, Switzerland and Italy by various technical problems that have no relation to the gauge. There are trains could run between Madrid and Paris, not circulate because it is not profitable, and the daily train from Madrid to Toulouse and Marseille is maintained by internal traffic in Spain and France.
> 
> There is no technical problem for any manufacturer to trains make any gauge, trains are made to order with different characteristics for each operator.
> ...


Passengers and Passengers-kilometers world data, and explanation of the fact that the operators and the UIC count -in some cases- the number of passengers on high-speed trains, not on high-speed lines.


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*Joint committee to meet in Tokyo on high speed rail project*



> To take forward the ambitious Mumbai-Ahmedabad high speed rail project announced by the government in December last year in partnership with Japan, a high-level Indian delegation led by Niti Aayog vice-chairman Arvind Panagariya and Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar will attend a joint committee meeting on the project in Tokyo on Monday.


http://www.thehindu.com/business/In...on-high-speed-rail-project/article8604145.ece

also:
http://www.asianage.com/mumbai/team-tokyo-bullet-train-plan-721


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*New HSR route may be mainly elevated*



> Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ambitious bullet train project between Mumbai and Ahmedabad, may take the elevated route. That is if the Japanese consultants give a go-ahead to Rail Bhavan's request for a route review before the execution stage.
> 
> Top Rail Bhavan officials confirmed that the Indian government wants the entire 508-km corridor to be built on an elevated stretch to avoid any legal and environmental hurdles regarding land acquisition. PM Modi, who has been pushing his ministers to speed up the big-ticket projects, has often encountered legal barriers in several states.


http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...ns-between-mumbai-and-ahmedabad/1/681328.html


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*Germany to study HSR route*



> NEW DELHI: Speed seems to be the latest mantra for Railways as it has roped in Germany to undertake feasibility study for running high speed trains on the southern corridor.
> 
> "It was decided at a meeting today with the high level German delegation that Germany will conduct feasibility study on Chennai-Bangalore-Mysore section for running high speed train. Germany will also bear the expenditure for the study," said a senior Railway Ministry official.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ngalore-mysore-route/articleshow/52525878.cms


----------



## kunming tiger (Jun 30, 2011)

Rayancito said:


> I have no details about this matter, the point is that in China land is government owned while in India the government has to pay for the land. California HSR is very expensive because the land is extremely expensive.


 Techinically speaking you are right the government does own the land however farmers who lease the land and houseowners who own their own property on government land are entitled to compensation. There is still considerable cost involved.


----------



## kunming tiger (Jun 30, 2011)

Bbbut said:


> What a strange reason to argue for a foreign gauge.
> 
> There is no point in even thinking about what kind of trains are run in Russia or China or Europe, no point in looking to 'link up' countries. You know why? Because HSR beyond 5h of travel time becomes economically unviable against air travel!
> No HSR service will ever sell a ticket from Mumbai to Moscow, end of argument.
> ...


 You don't have a logical argument in so far as the Delhi to Moscow Line is concerned. There are not just two stations on that line there would be dozens many of them located in places not served by an airport. Most HSR journeys are not end to end destination wise but from one point along the line to another. For example not every passenger on the Beijing to Shanghai HSR is travelling only between those two points. Large HSR networks form a criss cross pattern so multiple destinations via multiple lines would be possible a much more flexible form of travelling not to mention more affordable over the short haul for the working class.


----------



## dimlys1994 (Dec 19, 2010)

From Rail Journal:



> http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...ted-for-mumbai-ahmedabad-hsl.html?channel=523
> 
> A tripartite agreement to formalise the deal was signed this week by Indian Railways (IR), NHSRC and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (Jica).
> 
> ...


----------



## k.k.jetcar (Jul 17, 2008)

*Test drills begin for undersea HSR route*



> NEW DELHI: Drilling of the seven-km undersea route of the Mumbai-Ahmedabad rail corridor is underway to ascertain soil condition of India's first bullet train path.
> 
> Passengers will get the thrill of riding under the sea, a first in the country, near Thane at a maximum speed of 350 km per hour in the upcoming high speed train project connecting two major metropolis.
> 
> "Soil and rocks below the 70-metre-deep see are being tested as part of the geo-technical and geo-physical investigation undertaken for the entire project," said a senior Railway Ministry official, adding "the test will also cover the 21-km-long underground tunnel between Thane and Virar."


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...roject-at-full-swing/articleshow/57232725.cms


----------



## Qtya (Aug 31, 2006)

*Indian Railways to order 25 high speed trains*

INDIA: A 10-car variant of JR East’s Series E5 Shinkansen trainset has been selected to operate the country’s first high speed line between Mumbai and Ahmedabad, according to the Ministry of Railways. Indian Railways is expected to order an initial build of 25 trains at an estimated cost Rs50bn.

...

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...n-railways-to-order-25-high-speed-trains.html


----------



## Qtya (Aug 31, 2006)

*PM Modi, Shinzo Abe To Perform Groundbreaking Ceremony Of India's Bullet Train Project
*
The groundbreaking ceremony (bhoomi-pujan) for Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Rail Project, commonly referred to as the bullet train project, will be performed in Ahmedabad on September 14.

...

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pm-m...remony-of-indias-bullet-train-project-1744525


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

^^ In effect, the Spanish government initially opted for the Iberian gauge and 3 kV, and in that gauge the various consortia submitted their first offers.
Of the adjudication:


> The Japanese consortium offered at a meeting from October 19 to 26 a unit price per train of approximately 1,520,000 million pesetas (9.135 M €). On November 15, 1988, and due to the necessary adaptation of its trains to the gauge of the European track that had been agreed by the Spanish Government and the 25 kV current, it increased to 1,634,000,000 pesetas (9.821 M €).


The surprising list of bidders:

1º Alsthom, Ateinsa and Maquinistas
2º Eurotren Monoviga S. A. (80% FEVE, and CAF)
3º Fiat, Ansaldo and Breda
4º Mitsubishi, Kawasaki and Hitachi
5º Siemens, Brown Boveri, Thyssen-Henschel, Macosa and Kraus Maffei
6º Skoda Export (in 1988!!!!)


----------



## davide84 (Jun 8, 2008)

I am a fan of standard gauge, but introducing SG for high speed in India isn't clashing with Project Unigauge?


----------



## Khaul (Sep 8, 2009)

Gusiluz said:


> The surprising list of bidders:
> 
> 1º Alsthom, Ateinsa and Maquinistas
> 2º Eurotren Monoviga S. A. (80% FEVE, and CAF)
> ...


Wow!


----------



## Stuu (Feb 7, 2007)

Gusiluz said:


> 6º Skoda Export (in 1988!!!!)


I would like to know what they were proposing!


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

^^ Unfortunately, I do not have any more details because the High Speed Train offers were only valid, fulfilling all the requirements of mandatory specifications, those of the groups lead by:

-Mitsubishi
-Siemens
-Alsthom (in 1988 it was still called that; originally Als-Thom, then Alsthom in 1932, then Alsthom Atlantique in 1976, in 1989 the merger of Alsthom and GEC Power Systems was made and the creation of GEC-Alsthom, which in 1998 became Alstom)


----------



## davide84 (Jun 8, 2008)

...Then Alstom bought FIAT Ferroviaria, inventor of the Pendolino tilting technology, and now is merging with Siemens...

...in the meantime Ansaldo merged with Breda forming AnsaldoBreda, recently bought by Hitachi...

...that list would have half the items with today's company layouts


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

... Ateinsa is now part of Alstom
... MACOSA is now part of Stadler
... Thyssen-Henschel is now part of Bombardier
... Kraus-Maffei is now Siemens
... Mitsubishi and ABB do not produce complete trains anymore, only components

In the past you had several small train manufacturers. Some of them survive up to this day, but realise that when you take Alstom, Siemens, Bombardier and CRRC you already have over 80% of the worldwide train market covered.


----------



## cheehg (Jan 5, 2018)

davide84 said:


> I am a fan of standard gauge, but introducing SG for high speed in India isn't clashing with Project Unigauge?


Yes it may have the problem as Japanese and Spain, they have to spend more try to extend the service where building a new HSR line is out of the question.
Countries with uni gauge have less problem doing so. TGV, ICE and CRH can run on conventional railways. CRH even run night trains use part HSR and part legacy railway to avoid maintenance windows in HSR line. Spain has to make an expensive gauge change train to do so.


diversity is great for the railway fans but a nightmare for railway companies.


----------



## dyonisien (Aug 30, 2010)

High speed is technically not possible on metric or Cape gauges, 160 km/h being already "high" speed. For really 'high' speeds you need standard or broad gauge.
So in Cape gauge Japan, you HAD to build a new network with a new gauge, the easiest option being standard.
In India, the broad gauge allows for any needed high speed. Using the existing gauge offers compatibility with an immense network and through high speed trains will bring the benefits further than the initial high speed lines to millions and millions of travellers.
The long distances to any neighbouring (?) standard gauge network make international high speed relations from India no match to the huge internal benefits. The situation cannot be compared with that of Spain, where the discussion about gauge change of the network existed well before the arrival of high speed and distances to the border are much shorter.


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

^^ The problem of having two gauges is that it is not enough to finish a line, but the trains that take advantage of part of it will also have to change in gauge.

For example, the Madrid-Barcelona line was built in phases: first to Lleida (where a gauge changer was placed), then to Tarragona (where another one was placed, and then the Lleida one was dismantled, since they are reusable), and finally it arrived until Barcelona (and the one of Tarragona was dismantled).
But the line is used by Madrid-Basque Country trains, so there is another gauge changer in Plasencia de Jalón, near Zaragoza, and by Barcelona-Basque Country (and others all the way northwest) trains, so there is another one in Zaragoza. And so it will be until a new standard gauge line is installed between Vitoria and Zaragoza (2025).









We changed two railway borders with France (Hendaye and Cervere, with two gauge changers) in 1992 for 15 operational gauge changers, 4 without current use, 5 under construction and 8 for workshops.
Only 5 (x2) daily trains circulate between Spain and France, but each day of 2017 92.4 steps were carried out per gauge changer (46x2 trains).


----------



## cheehg (Jan 5, 2018)

dyonisien said:


> High speed is technically not possible on metric or Cape gauges, 160 km/h being already "high" speed. For really 'high' speeds you need standard or broad gauge.
> So in Cape gauge Japan, you HAD to build a new network with a new gauge, the easiest option being standard.
> In India, the broad gauge allows for any needed high speed. Using the existing gauge offers compatibility with an immense network and through high speed trains will bring the benefits further than the initial high speed lines to millions and millions of travellers.
> The long distances to any neighbouring (?) standard gauge network make international high speed relations from India no match to the huge internal benefits. The situation cannot be compared with that of Spain, where the discussion about gauge change of the network existed well before the arrival of high speed and distances to the border are much shorter.


We are not talking about to run the trains from India to other countries with different gauge. We are talking India will have HSR in SG and conventional railway mainly in BG. so when you have the some trunk HSR lines and want to run direct service to some cities without HSR, you would have to change the gauge. Germany already suggest that India build the HSR in BG because they already made trains for Russia. But India is doing a SG HSR with Japanese.


----------



## M-NL (Sep 18, 2012)

dyonisien said:


> The long distances to any neighbouring (?) standard gauge network make international high speed relations from India no match to the huge internal benefits.


Not only does the size of Indias network probably rival the entire European continents network, also most if not all the neighbouring countries operate on the same Indian gauge. Using anything else just doesn't make sense.


cheehg said:


> Germany already suggest that India build the HSR in BG because they already made trains for Russia. But India is doing a SG HSR with Japanese.


And the Japanese couldn't build Indian gauge trains? Afaik Velaro RUS also was Siemens first attempt at a wide gauge high speed train. The real 'problem', if you can call it that, is that Shinkansen is an integrated concept, that doesn't allow for mixed traffic to fully work. The easiest way to prevent mixed traffic is to use a different track and loading gauge.


----------



## cheehg (Jan 5, 2018)

M-NL said:


> Not only does the size of Indias network probably rival the entire European continents network, also most if not all the neighbouring countries operate on the same Indian gauge. Using anything else just doesn't make sense.
> 
> And the Japanese couldn't build Indian gauge trains? Afaik Velaro RUS also was Siemens first attempt at a wide gauge high speed train. The real 'problem', if you can call it that, is that Shinkansen is an integrated concept, that doesn't allow for mixed traffic to fully work. The easiest way to prevent mixed traffic is to use a different track and loading gauge.


Japanese chose SG for Shinkansen because the narrow gauge cannot run fast enough. It is not they want to have a separated system to prevent mixed traffic. They actually extend the Shinkansen service to cities without Shinkansen by adding a third rail to narrow gauge.

SNCF and DB also extend TGV and ICE to the cities without HSR lines. Chinese even run conventional trains to Lanzhou -Urumqi HSR. And many other lines with 200km/h speed limits have mixed traffic too. But they don't allowed slow trains mix with 300km/h trains, for safety reason.


----------



## Gusiluz (Apr 4, 2013)

^^ Only through the Seikan tunnel; mini-Shinkansen are old lines with narrow gauge changed to the standard. 
Also are doing tests with a prototype (variable gauge change train) in Kyushu and maybe in the Hokuriku Shinkansen.

As explained the Japanese presented a proposal of HST in Iberian gauge to Spain.


----------



## SSCwarrior (Aug 7, 2016)

*61 Maharashtra villages agree to give land for bullet train project: Officials
*



> In a major boost to the bullet train project between Mumbai and Ahmedabad, 61 out of 104 villages along the proposed route have given consent for land acquisition.
> 
> Sushma Gaur, spokesperson of National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) confirmed this and said the process of land acquisition for the bullet train project was expected to be completed by mid 2019.
> 
> ...


Finally. Hope all land gets acquired by this June:banana:


----------



## vin_hyd (Jun 18, 2010)

SSCwarrior said:


> *61 Maharashtra villages agree to give land for bullet train project: Officials
> *
> 
> 
> ...


Why don't they just upgrade the existing rail network and scrap out all that old trains? Yes, I am talking about replacing the existing trains with these modern ones.


----------



## TER200 (Jan 27, 2019)

vin_hyd said:


> Why don't they just upgrade the existing rail network and scrap out all that old trains? Yes, I am talking about replacing the existing trains with these modern ones.


 Building a new line fulfills 3 goals :
1) Increase capacity on the corridor, by separating fast from slow trains
2) Reduce travel time
3) Look sexy to politicians


Replacing the trains only achieves the third, most of the time. Capacity or speed improvements are often non existant.

It can also increase comfort of course (I guess this is your point), but right now this does not seem to be the problem : if the trains are overcrowded, fix that before making them look good.


----------



## psychedelic (Sep 8, 2010)

vin_hyd said:


> Why don't they just upgrade the existing rail network and scrap out all that old trains? Yes, I am talking about replacing the existing trains with these modern ones.


Building new conventional lines would require more land to be acquired than for elevated/underground corridors. They could theoretically modernise tracks to run faster trains, but that would lead to more pressure on already saturated lines during construction. The replacement of old rolling stock and building of new lines has gained steam under the current government, but the pace still continues to be way slower than what is required. Cutting red tape in the railways is an ongoing process but can only happen as fast as bureaucratic inertia allows. Any attempt to privatise the railways would ruffle labour union feathers, and certainly lead to a massive political storm. All things considered, the approach now being taken appears to be quite pragmatic.


----------



## The Polwoman (Feb 21, 2016)

^^ about the busy existing railways: the same can be said in many countries, and if there are long-distance trains on it, it is the most sensible option. Here some examples of saturated lines with a faster alternative on a new line:

- Amsterdam-Rotterdam (part of HST to Antwerp): the old line still sees increasing service until 20tph with two to locally four tracks, the HST now serves up to 13tph in both directions, with two tracks. Here it's not just the interfering with local trains, the whole line is filled to the max as if it were a metro line.

- Jakarta-Bandung, ID, U/C: more than 300 trains/day and still not satisfying Bekasi/Cikarang and Bandung demand, saturated because local and express trains interfere but even if they weren't and it was four tracks until Cikampek at the change to Cirebon, there would still be saturation and long travel times to Bandung.
- Cologne-Frankfurt: the old stretch was too curvy because of the river and hilly landscape, but was quite busy as well, especially since local and express trains interfered: now serves ~6tph in both directions.


----------



## cheehg (Jan 5, 2018)

The Polman said:


> ^^ about the busy existing railways: the same can be said in many countries, and if there are long-distance trains on it, it is the most sensible option. Here some examples of saturated lines with a faster alternative on a new line:
> 
> - Amsterdam-Rotterdam (part of HST to Antwerp): the old line still sees increasing service until 20tph with two to locally four tracks, the HST now serves up to 13tph in both directions, with two tracks. Here it's not just the interfering with local trains, the whole line is filled to the max as if it were a metro line.
> 
> ...


All the busy corridors in India can easily fill 6 track railways with freight, local, express and high speed.


----------



## fanboy111 (Jul 7, 2013)

It's not just the banks, India (and for that matter pretty much any other emerging market) does not have the same capacity to borrow and absorb debt the way China does. US could potentially expand it's HSR very aggressively if there is political will to do so, though it would be very expensive.


----------



## Stuu (Feb 7, 2007)

sponge_bob said:


> India is still too poor to afford HSR, it would start to make sense if they were a fair bit richer overall. There are only around 1-200m people who can afford it and they are quite scattered. This looks like the government keeping up with the Joneses in Korea or China rather than a plan.
> 
> If you had a city pair with c.20m affluents between them and separated by perhaps 500km then that is where I would start. The main Indian cities are all 1000km from each other. Bangalore to Chennai perhaps starts to make sense but not Delhi to Calcutta or Mumbai as they are all too far apart.


It's linking Mumbai with Gujarat, which is one of the wealthiest areas of India. Surat, Vadodara and Ahmedabad are very large cities, and the line is 500km long. If India is going to have HSR then it's as good a location as any other


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

Update on the first box girder.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454113675380281345


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

Bids have been invited the underground section starting from BKC, Mumbai.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454021666804174851


----------



## Qtya (Aug 31, 2006)

Tender launched to construct tunnel for Indian high-speed line


India's NHSRCL has launched a tender to construct a 21km tunnel as part of the Mumbai - Ahmedabad high-speed corridor.




www.railjournal.com


----------



## Sunfuns (Mar 26, 2012)

In the link below one can find a map with an exact route and locations of all stations. I'm guessing here that the tunnel being tendered takes that north easterly direction instead of straight north because they're think of an eventual extension to Pune (great idea). 

Mumbai - Ahmedabad High Speed Rail - Information, Route Map, Fares, Tenders & Updates


From the same source:

*Mumbai – Ahmedabad HSR Operational Plan*
The line’s Operational Control Centre (OCC) will be located at Sabarmati. Trains will be operated with 2 types of services for riders –

*High Speed (2.58 hour journey):* Ahmedabad (Sabarmati) – Ahmedabad (Kalupur) – Anand – Vadodara – Bharuch – Surat – Bilimora – Vapi – Boisar – Virar – Thane – Mumbai (Bandra Kurla Complex)
*Rapid High Speed (2.07 hour journey): *Ahmedabad (Sabarmati) – Vadodara – Surat – Mumbai (Bandra Kurla Complex)

I'm not quite sure why the second station in Ahmedabad (Sabarmati) north of the central one (Kalapur) is needed and why the fastest service would stop only there, but that perhaps is just me not knowing where most business people (tickets will be 1.5x current AC first class) would like to go. 

These travel times if realized will blow any other land based travel form out of the water (7-9 h). In facet flying would make no sense either except if it's a lot cheaper which is unlikely.


----------



## cheehg (Jan 5, 2018)

Sunfuns said:


> I'm not quite sure why the second station in Ahmedabad (Sabarmati) north of the central one (Kalapur) is needed and why the fastest service would stop only there, but that perhaps is just me not knowing where most business people (tickets will be 1.5x current AC first class) would like to go.


Ahmedabad and Sabarmati are both stations for all trains. I think the reason they want Sabarmati is Ahmedabad station is small (only 4 platforms) for a regular terminal becasue the space. Sabarmati is also where the main depot is. So they use it as a terminal.


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

That's it! First full span box girder!


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

More of them being put into the mould.

































All images from NHSRCL


----------



## SBC-YPR (Jan 18, 2010)

Sunfuns said:


> I'm not quite sure why the second station in Ahmedabad (Sabarmati) north of the central one (Kalapur) is needed and why the fastest service would stop only there, but that perhaps is just me not knowing where most business people (tickets will be 1.5x current AC first class) would like to go.


Actually it is the central station that makes less sense. The area is congested AF and most of the new development and $$$ is happening on the other side of the river. Would have made more sense to only have Sabarmati as the sole terminal for Ahmedabad.


----------



## SSCwarrior (Aug 7, 2016)

*MAHSR updates in Gujarat*
































































__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1489857209802817538
According to L&T, the current pillar construction rate is only 5km a month, which will be increased to 10km a month soon. Honestly this is still too low as at this rate it will take between 4-8 years to complete all the pillars since the entire 500km+ length is on elevated viaducts. Construction pace in Gujarat is ramping up though. An ideal pace would be ~15km a month allowing the entire line to be complete in 4 years


----------



## gandhi.rushabh1992 (Dec 10, 2010)

Very insightful


----------



## gandhi.rushabh1992 (Dec 10, 2010)

cheehg said:


> Ahmedabad and Sabarmati are both stations for all trains. I think the reason they want Sabarmati is Ahmedabad station is small (only 4 platforms) for a regular terminal becasue the space. Sabarmati is also where the main depot is. So they use it as a terminal.


Ahmedabad Central is quite big (12 platforms) + it has Metro rail and BRT connectivity. It's simple, Central will be used by people of east Ahmedabad and Sabarmati by west Ahmedabad. Both stations are only 7 km apart so the train will anyway not be accelerating anywhere near its top speed.

Indicative arrangement at Ahmedabad Central:









Sabarmati Terminal:


----------



## The Wild Boy (Apr 5, 2020)

Are both stations at Mumbai and Ahmedabad projected for expansion, once the high speed rail line expands towards Delhi?


----------



## 33Hz (Jul 29, 2006)

SSCwarrior said:


> Honestly this is still too low as at this rate it will take between 4-8 years to complete all the pillars since the entire 500km+ length is on elevated viaducts.


So huge amounts of unnecessary concrete and steel with associated carbon emissions?


----------



## keber (Nov 8, 2006)

Such 500 km long viaduct would "cost" about 15 million tons of CO2 emissions for concrete and steel, but then it would stand there for 100 or more years. That is about two weeks of CO2 emissions in UK.


----------



## 2mchris (Jun 18, 2016)

That's maybe right, but I can follow 33Hz' thoughts. It would be much less input if you build the rail on the ground and add smaller bridges or tunnels to cross the tracks. And in 100 years (that's optimistic)? You have to replace the 500 km again... would be easiert without it.


----------



## Stuu (Feb 7, 2007)

2mchris said:


> That's maybe right, but I can follow 33Hz' thoughts. It would be much less input if you build the rail on the ground and add smaller bridges or tunnels to cross the tracks. And in 100 years (that's optimistic)? You have to replace the 500 km again... would be easiert without it.


They have serious issues with land acquisition and farmers holding small plots of land which can be badly separated by a ground-level or embankment route. Elevating the route avoids a lot of the political issues


----------



## 33Hz (Jul 29, 2006)

keber said:


> Such 500 km long viaduct would "cost" about 15 million tons of CO2 emissions for concrete and steel, but then it would stand there for 100 or more years. That is about two weeks of CO2 emissions in UK.


15,000,000 tons of CO2 is about the same as 300 million individuals flying that distance. That's before you factor in the other material used to build the railway and the emissions from the grid, which isn't the cleanest in India yet. So that's 3 million additional air trips a year for example that have to switch that otherwise wouldn't, to cancel the construction out. Building large bridges or tunnels just to make the construction more politically acceptable is not the way to make HSR green.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

*Slow progress for India's high-speed rail revolution *
_Excerpt_
Mar 2, 2022

(CNN) — From Mumbai's packed commuter trains to overnight express mail trains akin to a city on wheels, and the astonishing Darjeeling & Himalayan "Toy Train," railways are one of India's most recognizable features.

Without them, it's unlikely the country would have developed into the economic superpower we see today.

However, as the country evolves, its railways are under increasing pressure to move with the times, deliver faster journeys and more freight capacity to serve India's expanding industries.

Traditional systems, some dating back to the days of the British Empire, might have served India well but they're increasingly outdated, especially when viewed against the rapid progress being made by India's neighbor and rival for regional supremacy -- China.

Serving every level of society and communities from the smallest rural village to some of the world's most densely populated cities, the network faces an almost endless set of conflicting demands to keep the country moving.

More : Slow progress for India's high-speed rail revolution


----------



## VITORIA MAN (Jan 31, 2013)

It looks a good progress for me


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)




----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)




----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)




----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

October update


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)




----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

A great article on the progress. The speed at which it is being built is very encouraging after the delayed start!









Pier by pier, girder by girder, how bullet train project’s 348-km Gujarat leg is gathering speed


After years of delay, Gujarat stretch of India’s 1st high-speed bullet train project is on track, with workers and engineers working 24x7 at casting yards and construction sites.




theprint.in


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

December update!


----------



## avishar (Oct 3, 2008)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613069941972008962


----------



## Sunfuns (Mar 26, 2012)

What exactly has been done on the ground in Maharashtra? I was under impression it's still in the planning and tendering stage there...


----------

