French train smashes world speed record

[cacruden]

French train smashes world speed record &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
Apr 3 09:59 AM US/Eastern
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
France's TGV train smashed the world rail speed record Tuesday, providing an important image boost for French industry in an increasingly competitive world market.

An experimental version of the fast train, equipped with two supercharged locomotives and extra-large wheels, hit 574.8 kilometres per hour (357.2 miles per hour) on a specially prepared stretch of track east of Paris.

The record smashed the 515.3 kph set by a TGV (Train a Grande Vitesse or high-speed train) in 1990, but narrowly missed the overall world train speed record of 581 kph (360.8 mph) reached in 2003 by a Japanese magnetic levitation, or Maglev, train.

Manufacturer Alstom arranged the exploit in order to test its latest engineering designs in extreme conditions, and also to display the TGV's technological prowess to potential international clients.

President Jacques Chirac sent his congratulations on "this new proof of the excellence of the French rail industry."

"Economically efficient and respectful of the environment, the TGV is a major asset in efforts to ensure sustainable development in transport," Chirac said.

European Transport Commissioner Jacques Barrot said that "thanks to French engineers, Europe is the champion of the world."

Facing stiff competition from German and Japanese rivals, Alstom is angling for future bids from Argentina, China and Italy -- as well as from the US state of California which this week sent a delegation to France to study the fast train programme.

France's electrically-powered fast trains have been operating since 1981, daily reaching speeds of 320 kph over some 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) of track. The latest line -- to open in July -- reduces travel time from Paris to the eastern city of Strasbourg from four hours to two hours and 20 minutes.

It was on a section of the Paris-Strasbourg line, prepared with extra ballast and boosted overhead electric cables, that Tuesday's speed record was broken. The special train -- dubbed V150 -- was at one point travelling at more than 150 metres per second.

The train reached similar speeds in trials in recent months, but this was the first test to be officially monitored.

"What is important for us today is to prove that the TGV technology which was invented in France 30 years ago is a technology for the future," said Guillaume Pepy, director-general of the state rail company SNCF, which is TGV's main customer. Outside France only South Korea has so far bought TGV trains.

Japan's Shinkansen "bullet train" and the Inter-City Express (ICE) of the German company Siemens are the other major players in a global fast train market that has been boosted recently by environmental concerns about the impact of air transport.

Bombardier of Canada and Talgo of Spain are also manufacturers.

The Shinkansen and the ICE currently average about 300kph (186 mph) but a new version of the Japanese train, the Fastech 360Z, is expected to operate at 360kph (223.5 mph) when it enters service. Alstom is preparing a new generation of TGVs -- also capable of 360 kph -- to come on line from 2012.

 

[AlchemisTO]

The record smashed the 515.3 kph set by a TGV (Train a Grande Vitesse or high-speed train) in 1990, but narrowly missed the overall world train speed record of 581 kph (360.8 mph) reached in 2003 by a Japanese magnetic levitation, or Maglev, train

I was kind of hoping they would push it beyond the speed record of the Maglev establishing, once and for all, that magnetic levitation rail transit is white elephant technology; the ICTS of high speed rail.

 

[Admiral Beez]

An experimental version of the fast train, equipped with two supercharged locomotives and extra-large wheels, hit 574.8 kilometres per hour (357.2 miles per hour) on a specially prepared stretch of track east of Paris.

That would be amazing to have in Canada. Of course the top speeds would only be possible in non-urban areas, but you could get from Union Station to Ottawa or Montreal in under and hour, Toronto to Quebec City in less than 90 minutes, Toronto to Halifax in under 3 1/2 hours. We need to break our dependence on Air Canada, and get ourselves back into trains.

 

[bizorky]

The thing is the train is most effective in serving the smaller communities in between the major cities - far better than air service.

That being said, such high speed trains could only operate as express runs.

I'd be happy to shave an hour to an hour and a half off the exisitng routes (as much as I'd love to have a service like this).

 

[adma]

Yeah, oughta be fun

 

[prometheus the supremo]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoKGNHIc0ZE

pardon my french - ****ing amazing!

a KM in 6.26 seconds!

we need this in canada.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

It will be interesting to see if anyone, or any group, takes a lead on HSR in the Quebec-Windsor corridor in the near future. Interest in the idea seems to be gaining, which is encouraging. And kick ass videos like that of the TGV in France certainly help build interest.

I came across this the other night and thought it was interesting. It is the transcript of the Standing Committtee on Transport discussing and questioning the Lynx Consortium proposal (the HSR proposal that was presented in 1995).

cmte.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/committee/361/tran/evidence/ev1038788/tranev27-e.htm#T1839

One thought of mine it seems to reaffirm is that HSR, and rail travel in general is accepted to a greater degree than its current use would suggest and there is more than a large enough initial base of support to give HSR a very realistic chance of succeeding. I have yet to get a copy of the original Lynx proposal (according to this transcipt it covers several binders) but reading through the transcript, the concerns people had about the plan seemed to have been very logical and rational. There were 3 points of concern in particular that made a lot of sense.

1. The lose of VIA service in smaller towns and cities. Essentially the HSR line would have eliminated VIA and its service to smaller communities and cities. Most committee members indicated this was a negative aspect of the project and wanted to see service to all those communities remain.

2. The lack of service to Dorval Airport and Pearson Airport. The Lynx proposal did not include direct connections with the airports and thought shuttles would be sufficient. Most of the members expressed concern over this part of the plan or made it known they would prefer stations right on site at the airports.

3. Probably the most often repeated concern was the use of public money for financing a project that would by and large only bring windfalls to private companies. I don't need too say much else on that. It makes total sense that spending $7.5 billion in public money on a project that for the most part excludes the government from the revenues it would raise should be questioned and rejected.

All of these objections are totally reasonable and understandable. And the good thing is that there are relatively easy too deal with. The first 2 points have obvious solutions that would easily solve those problems. The third point, is somewhat more difficult too deal with. It necessarily has to involve politicians and business people getting together and working in a cooperative manner. But the government could benefit by retaining a large portion of control of VIA and its High Speed service and bringing business support on board with limited partenership in the consortium as well as the prospect of rolling stock and infrastructure contracts. Basically, let the government (through its crown corporation) make money as well as private businesses who will need to be included in the project too some degree too at the very least keep lobbyists from flooding Ottawa.

After reading more and more about the Lynx proposal, and other rather silly ones like the Bombardier JetTrain, I don't see it as a bad thing that there is not an HSR network in place yet. None of the proposals were really all that great and if someone went through them point by point and addressed the totally realistic and logical concerns that were expressed over the projects (ignoring the silly political and reactionary comments), it wouldn't take much to put together something that would actually be worth building and that could easily gain public support.

 

[bizorky]

I think this will be a long time coming - if ever. The Windsor Quebec corridor is actually the Toronto-Montreal-Ottawa corridor, as this is where most of the passenger traffic is concentrated. There are many communities along this route that very much count on rail travel. Since VIA is government operated, they have a responsibility to serve those communities as best as possible.

The infrastructure cost of building such a system would be quite high, and would open many questions up that need to be answered. For example, would such a system be competitive with existing rail service in terms of cost? Would it be competitive with air travel? Would the lack of service to airports be a major problem? Would over-coming this problem itself become a major issue? Can a corridor for high speed rail through residential areas be secured? Is the system actually better served by pursuing a higher speed alternative, but not as high a speed as the trains featured in this article?

I am not sure super high speed trains are the way to go, but then the status quo is not particularly useful for this corridor, either.

Thanks for the link Antiloop, I have not read it yet so pardon me if I've raised questions already covered in the document.

 

[ganjavih]

Yeah, if any country needs this, it's ours. Imagine downtown Toronto to downtown Montreal in an hour? That would be f*cking incredible.

 

[spmarshall]

I am not sure super high speed trains are the way to go, but then the status quo is not particularly useful for this corridor, either.

I wouldn't push TGV-service yet on Ottawa/Montreal-Toronto. Currently the highest speeds are 100 MPH with the LRC coaches, 85-90 MPH with regular coaches.

I would, right now, put enough upgrades for more consistant 110-125 MPH speeds. Coteau-Junction to just east of Brockville and Lyn (just west of Brockville) to just east of Kingston are nice, straight, unpopulated parts of track, partly thanks to the St. Lawrence Seaway of all things, and would easily go to 125MPH. It would mean a few additional grade separations, light and gate protection of all remaining crossings, signal improvements and a few station modifications and track improvements. Electrification would not be required for this level of service.

Trenton-Cobourg could also be easily done, as would just west of Port Hope-Pickering. Also Brockville-Smiths Falls and Smiths Falls-Fallowfield.

Montreal-Toronto becomes 3.5 hours if trains only stop in Dorval and/or Kingston. Ottawa-Toronto, 3 hours. That becomes even more comparable with flying.

VIA would have to divert travellers between local milk runs (making the stops like Cobourg, Belleville, Brockville, Cornwall that are still busy) and expresses, that might only stop in Kingston.

 

[bizorky]

^I would agree. Knocking off one and a half hours would do wonders for the service and probably attract more business travellers who would otherwise be flying.

Regardless, anyone who goes between Toronto and Ottawa has encountered the Smith's Falls bottle-neck. I don't know how many times the train has sat there waiting for the Ottawa-bound train to pass through. Solving things like this are much needed improvements that could be fixed now.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

Bizorky: The link does answer those questions too some extent and is worth checking out (at least from my nerdy point of view). I will go through your points regardless since some cannot necessarily be answered just be reading through the transcript.

Since VIA is government operated, they have a responsibility to serve those communities as best as possible.

It is worth repeating I totally agree with that point, as did all the committee members, and any future rail service will have to respect this fact without question.

The infrastructure cost of building such a system would be quite high, and would open many questions up that need to be answered. For example, would such a system be competitive with existing rail service in terms of cost?

This is somewhat hard to answer but a simple answer would be yes. The best way to view a high speed network is not one that would replace VIA. According to most data I have seen VIA accounts for 2% - 3% of traffic in the corridor. A high speed service would in about 20 years time would capture around 15% of this share. Basically what will happen is in large markets such as Toronto or Montreal new customers will be created while in smaller cities and communities, much will stay the same or only marginally increase. It is important too note that there will be a small price premium for high speed service to cover the slightly higher cost. But if you exclude infrastructure costs, operating costs do not seem to be all that much higher than what they are now (though this is based on what I have read of other systems since I have yet to see a report or study done on that specific issue for the corridor). In essence you would create two levels of rail service with existing rail services remaining the same and a slightly more expensive, but faster high speed service.

This might not be the clearest answer but if I find more data and research on specific costs than I will try to post it. I would add one other interesting note. The Lynx proposal was a private initiative. The reason it was completed is because if the infrastructure where in place, high speed rail service would be something that the companies saw as being very profitable.

Would it be competitive with air travel?

Yes. In fact it could reduce passenger loads on airlines operating flights within the corridor by as much as 50 percent (which is what happened when the Channel Tunnel opened between Paris and London). This is basically undisputed and it is because of this that airlines have, and will, do whatever it takes to oppose high speed rail (unless of course you let them in on the fun which would be a politically challenging arrangement to make but one that is almost necessary too ensure HSR would get off the ground).

Would the lack of service to airports be a major problem? Would over-coming this problem itself become a major issue?

Lack of service would be an issue from an overall view of the transportation network. Airports are critical transportation hubs. Pearson now has over 30 million people who travel through the airport each year. Not connecting a high speed rail system too airports really makes no sense what so ever. If you are going to make a major investment in a new rail network, it should be done right.

Over coming it is no problem. All you have to do is build stations at the airports. Dorval and the Quebec government already have plans to do just that and it will probably (though now who knows) start in a year or two. Pearson already had this idea somewhat explored with the Blue 22 proposal so it is not new to that airport either. Technically it is quite easy too do, it is just the small factor of added costs.

Can a corridor for high speed rail through residential areas be secured?

Yes, but in most cases it is not necessary. The best way to think of how the high speed network would most likely be constructed is to think of the right of ways being just like the 401. Basically most of the network will be run on new right of ways that will avoid most small towns and cities (just as the 401 did when it was built, and in fact, the right of ways for a high speed line may in many cases be along side the 401).

In major cities like Montreal and Toronto the high speed trains will share the same tracks as other commuter and regional services until it leaves city limits and can head off in its own direction.

So of course what happens to smaller towns and cities? Basically the existing corridors that run through the cities can be used and upgraded for better Basic VIA service. In between cities Basic VIA service trains can just hop on and off the new high speed right of way (which will never be that far from these cities and towns). It means that there will not be new right of ways required, directly within the towns and cities, since much of their service can be handled on existing ones with only small two or three kilometer long segments needed to connect it to the main high speed right of way when needed.

And also, since local service to smaller cities will not run a great number of trains (perhaps a dozen at the very most outside of the high speed stations) it should not be difficult to find space on the high speed line for them too operate.

Is the system actually better served by pursuing a higher speed alternative, but not as high a speed as the trains featured in this article?

Running trains at 500 km/h is probably not necessary. But, as the Lynx proposal stated, and it makes sense, since you have to build new infrastructure anyways, it should be built too the highest possible standards. The higher the speeds, the less time it takes, the more attractive the service, and the more profitable it becomes. So while it doesn't make much sense to invest massive sums just to reach 500 km/h, it does make sense that the right of way you build can accommodate still relatively fast speeds of 300km/h, which is still a totally reasonable and exceptional speed. So you are right, the status quo is not acceptable, but as soon as you want to run trains over 160 km/h, it means all new tracks and right of ways and once that happens, build for as fast as is economically sound.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

I wouldn't push TGV-service yet on Ottawa/Montreal-Toronto.

Why not? Why waste time trying to struggle just getting minuscule funding from the government. If you started today it is going to take no less than 5 or 10 years before a shovel would even hit the ground on a HSR system. Why waste time and energy on minor upgrades and getting down on your hands a knees every couple of years for what amounts just a slight improvement of the status quo when it could be put towards something substantial that would actual result in real change. Maybe we just share different points of view but I say now is as good a time as any to go big or go home.

 

[prometheus the supremo]

imagine a "blue 2.5"

union to pearson = 2.5 min* :lol





*obviously impossible.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

^ Why impossible?

If the train became this popular:

it wouldn't need to stop and people could just jump off at the airport.

edit - Actually, this train would be hilarious...every level crossing for dozens of kms would need to have its gates down at the same time.