- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
Comments (46)
Print
Save/Share
It may be that—other than wanting six-weeks of vacation a year and aspiring to speak more than one language—there's no clearer sign of an un-American sissy than someone who's thrilled by high-speed trains. And if you're as big of a fan of trains as I am, the latest plans for high-speed trains probably make you drool.
London to Madrid in 8 hours? Beginning in 2012, the two cities should be linked by high-speed rail. You can already speed between London and Paris in a little more than two hours. This route will be connected to a new high-speed train to Madrid, which will be reachable within five-and-a-half hours.
But even more surprising was the news this week that China is in negotiations with 17 countries to build a high-speed rail network to Europe.
From London, you could visit Beijing in about two days' time, according to Daily Telegraph.
From Beijing, you could connect Singapore or Vietnam via planned high-speed railways.
Of course, all that is more than a decade away. But what's pretty astonishing is that the plan seems serious. China sees the rail link as a "New Silk Road," reports China's official news agency. Cargo along with passengers would be carried. But the trains in and of themselves would help China re-brand itself on the world stage as a cutting-edge technological power.
Think China isn't up to the technological challenge? Think again. In January, the country opened the world's fastest high-speed rail line between the cities of Wuhan and Guangzhou. The train travels at an average speed of 217 m.p.h. In its first months of service, the cars have been 98 percent full, suggesting that ticket prices may eventually cover the costs of operations. (See a video, here.) Another high-speed link, between Zhengzhou and Xian, home of the Terracotta Warriors, opened in February.
So what do you think? Traveling two days between London and Beijing would still be much longer than the current 11 hours of flying time between the two capitals. If it was built by 2025, would you take The Trans-Eurasian Railroad? Or would you prefer to fly?
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.
I think the Chinese are trying to figure out what they are going to do with all that money they aren't dumping into T-Bills anymore.
First, the route. The only way to run will be either through Kazakhstan/Russia with no stops or through Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey with lots of stops (and perhaps a few unintended ones along the way).
Second, the cost. Building a high-speed train route through the Urals doesn't seem like a good idea. Plus maintaining that route?
Third, ROI. We're talking $100 billion to build & run something like this. Is it really going to develop that amount of savings/investment into these areas?
I could see it as an alternative access for landlocked countries, but they really don't need "high-speed rail" to deliver their goods. Especially when I can just throw $50 million at any air carrier to have service for a few years.
Posted By Brian Wohlgemuth on March 12, 2010, 2:38 PM
Very good. And here is the map of worldwide train routes: http://nyti.ms/cJOI8x
Posted By Steve from TravelingProfessor.com on March 12, 2010, 3:07 PM
Would I take this train or would I fly? I would fly.
As a one of trip I would happily take this train, but Im pretty sure I would want to fly back rather than bother with another 2 day journey.
I dont see this happening ever. But if they made it from the levetating magnetic train system and got the trains averaging 350+ mph then the chances of people riding it are much higher. Abover 150 mph you can barely see anything through the windows so the faster the better. :)
Posted By Onlineo on March 13, 2010, 12:42 PM
Hmmm...If I was in Beijing and just needed to get to London I think I'd prob still fly. Two full days to go anywhere, even across two continents, is a long time. But if they had some kind of hop-on, hop-off pass on this new Silk Road, that could make for a pretty amazing month-long train trek.
Posted By Brendan on March 13, 2010, 1:29 PM
I'm guessing that by 2025 the costs and availability of fuel for air travel anywhere will make any but the most essential air travel journeys impractical. In theory, technological advances in all electric air craft engines will keep people and things in the air eventually but changes on that scale take so very long. I suspect, also, that the routing of that China to Europe train will be ugly no matter where they want to put it. The PRC stands a great chance of being the remaining super power with deep pockets by then and they'll be in the position to make offers few can refuse, anyway.
Our lives will be changing in ways impossible to accurately anticipate once this delicious orgy of petroleum abundance is over. Unless some new goo or concept comes along with its same versatility and affordability, making choices like "whether" to take a train or fly won't be ours to make. Oh, the very, very rich and/or powerful will be able but the rest of us poor slobs will learn to live with less and be really grateful that the Chinese were able to see far enough ahead to take the bold steps first so we can at least still dream of a great big vacation.
Posted By Julia Felix on March 13, 2010, 8:35 PM
I'm with Brendan. If there was a hop-on, hop-off rail link from China through Central Asia (the 'stans, basically), I'd be there in a heartbeat. I'm currently researching traveling through that area this time next year and it's going to be painful. A reliable rail link (high-speed or not) from Kashgar to Osh, Tashkent, Samarkand, Bukhara and north around the Caspian Sea would truly open this area up to tourism.
Posted By wandermom on March 15, 2010, 1:20 AM
I'd ride it in a New York minute!
Posted By Richard Hall on March 15, 2010, 10:44 AM
If the train makes stops in "The Stans" I would take it in a heartbeat! The two day trip is fine with me...no weather or strike delays or baggage weight limit. Living in France, I have the great good fortune to take the high speed TGV....very comfortable, scenic, center city to center city and
NOT expensive!
Posted By marylouise on March 15, 2010, 12:18 PM
I would take it one way with hop-on and off just to visit the stops in between and experience the railway, but then I will fly back. This will be like Amtrak in the U.S. and Eurail in Europe which are all great ways to travel. There was a reason these rails were built back in their days.
Posted By janet on March 15, 2010, 12:51 PM
I would ride it in a heartbeat. What a great trip that would be from China to Europe. And to think the US can only sit around with the totally dysfunctional Amtrak low speed rail!
Posted By Geoffrey Burton on March 15, 2010, 1:26 PM
My gosh, without a moment's hesitation: the train. Get weaned off aircraft. RP
Posted By ripper on March 15, 2010, 1:59 PM
Train travel with the possibility of stops along the way. Comfort in travel and no worry about lost luggage You bet I would take it. Cattle car travel is not my style and airplanes are that way now.
Posted By Dick on March 15, 2010, 2:21 PM
High speed train in China is a lot more comfortable than flying. The plane ride from NJ to Beijing over the North pole was very long and cramped. Would I prefer a two day trip by high speed train to flying in 1/3 that time like a sardine in a can. Unless I had to get there on a tight schedule, unequivocally yes.
Posted By Francis (Ottawa) on March 15, 2010, 2:22 PM
Definitely the train. It is the only civilised way to travel overland.
Especially if at European levels of food, service, and maintenance.
AMTRAK is an embarrassment. Also, a train is difficult to hijack.
Posted By capnDave on March 15, 2010, 2:24 PM
I'd love to take a train, see the countryside, be able to get off at stops in between. What a wonderful idea!
Posted By Isobel on March 15, 2010, 2:27 PM
Train for sure. less energy is used for train travel over air. no worry of falling from the sky :) cheaper travel.
Posted By Lisa W on March 15, 2010, 3:27 PM
I would give the train a try - hope it will have compartments!
Posted By Bob McShea on March 15, 2010, 3:44 PM
While I was studying in Grenoble during the summer of 1968, I saw posters advertising a trip from Paris to Beijing and back via the Transsiberian Express. Since at that time China and the US didn't recognize each other, even that seemed but a remote possibility for me. However, I'm sure that today thousands of Americans make this trip. I think that a high-speed train between China and Europe would be very popular, at least with the younger travelers.
Posted By George on March 15, 2010, 3:45 PM
My wife and I would very definitely take tha train. Our only lament is that it might not be completed until 2025! One stop flight to London, then on the train!
Posted By Jim and Pat on March 15, 2010, 3:52 PM
After having used the TGV in France a number of times, I would opt for the train. The lack of all the security nonsense plus the much more comfortable seats and the ability to walk around freely would more than compensate for the extra day of travel.
Posted By Mike on March 15, 2010, 4:12 PM
Wow, I do hope they plan for some sort of Trans-Rail pass. This would have to be an amazing trip, and I am now looking forward to taking it! I could care less about flying, unless I'm in the cockpit!
Posted By JK on March 15, 2010, 4:19 PM
If the train tracks are built with the same inferior Chinese steel that crumbled during the earthquake; the same steel the USA is using for bridges, etc. because it's less expensive, then I'd rather fly...or swim!!!
Posted By cindy on March 15, 2010, 4:38 PM
Stop thinking about cost and imagine that the Chinese will route the train so as to attract passengers with a thrill ride through the hot spots of human history. We are now in the "China Century" and if any nation can accomplish this, it's the Chinese. Of course they're going to ram it through hesitant nations with their newfound political muscle. Only hope I'm alive to make the trip. A high speed train from Paris to Shanghai for about 3K bucks will be be as thrilling as a trip to the space station.
Posted By G.P.Richards on March 15, 2010, 4:56 PM
Have sold travel for 30+ years.
WILL NOT SELL China under any circumstances.
China is trying to wipe out Tibetian civilization forever! Tibetians are some of the sweetest and most peaceful people in the world!
SHAME ON YOU, CHINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted By Ron on March 15, 2010, 5:11 PM
Think of the scenery and the places most of us have never visited. I love that hop-on, hop-off idea to sample the great variety of cultures on that route. And I wouldn't vote for TOO high speed, I want to see the countryside. Sign me up ! !
Posted By Ramblin Man on March 15, 2010, 5:30 PM
Would love it. Possibly my only chance to ever get to see China, however, 2025 a long time off. Not sure if I'll still be up to traveling at that time.
Posted By Syl on March 15, 2010, 6:22 PM
It may not be a practical solution for someone living in London and conducting business in China, however, anyone else interested in adventure travel and foreign cultures would very likely enjoy it. It could also benefit the environment, assuming these trains will be powered by electricity. As to their speed, 160-200 mph would be ideal, one could still enjoy the scenery.
Posted By Paul on March 15, 2010, 6:29 PM
Yes, I would love to visit China by train from London.
It would be far more enjoyable than flying, and hopefully less expensive.
Thank you,
Luis Cartaya
Posted By LUIS CARTAYA on March 15, 2010, 6:29 PM
I'd be scared to death to get on a train that China made. As we have seen in floods and earthquakes, their building codes aren't made for safety but for money saving. And we think we've seen bad high-speed train crashes before...just wait. And if there were a crash in the middle of Siberia, or Afghanistan......where's the medical and emergency equipment coming from?
Posted By Jez on March 15, 2010, 6:33 PM
I would definately use it for both travel and business
Posted By Ana on March 15, 2010, 6:57 PM
We would take the train, at least once, it is a pain to fly and we have been on the fastest train in the World in China from Shanghai to Shanghai airport, the speed was 437 km or about 280 miles.
Hoy Holm
Posted By Hoy & Nancy on March 15, 2010, 7:06 PM
So much more to see at ground level than at 30,000 feet . 2025 too far away , China should start planning in 2010 .
Posted By Witold on March 15, 2010, 7:09 PM
I would take the train, hands down! Hop-on/Hop-off and see the sights of all the countries in between!
Posted By Carol Gortler on March 15, 2010, 9:09 PM
Love the idea, problems:
Materials to make RR track & train.
terrorisim along Silk Road
cost to build.
Link to TGV line in France.
Price to compete with airlines.
Food service.
Schedule.
Global trained RR crews.
Service depots for trains.
Security
Otherwise
Yes
One could leave Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Venice Italy, Croatia, Moscow to Beijing & Shanghai alone.
How Radical
& at 400 mph speeds.
Posted By Stephen Russell on March 15, 2010, 9:10 PM
I'd definitely ride it - am trying to figure out how old I'll be when it's done.
Posted By Somara on March 15, 2010, 9:36 PM
wake up, America!!!!
Posted By 7league on March 15, 2010, 9:36 PM
This is a very BAD idea!! Do yu really want Europe to turn into China town...with all it's ugly buildings and Chinese writing everywhere? The city I grew up in was you very average middle America kind of town. Slowly the Chinese came into the city and starting buying up all the businesses. Today I don't even recognize most of the placed I went as a child. It's really discusting!!!
Please DO NOT do this!!!!
Posted By Brenda on March 15, 2010, 10:52 PM
Roads built in peace time can be useful in wartime.
and the ancient wisdom is known to chinese rulers.
china has few openings of sea port that easily links her to European countries.
China is the powerful economically country.
China wants to capture the markets of Europe and cater to European people be it goods, services or tourist industry.
And this is the best way to fulfill Chinese Dream.
If world takes china as friendly country, china responds to it.
and if world sees china an enemy country, then also china responds too well. choice is ours.
Posted By kishor on March 15, 2010, 11:03 PM
The train connection will be competitive and acceptable for the europeans only if will have the features of the transsiberian rail, that is will allow travellers to stop, visiting freely and restart after a few days from the same station.
Posted By Guglielmo Mariani on March 16, 2010, 4:30 AM
I'd be on that train from London to Beijing. And then on down to Saigon after a stay in Beijing. Trains versus flying? Absolutely!
Posted By Bill in Hawaii on March 16, 2010, 8:05 AM
I did take a railway tour from London to Hong Kong in 1983 with Voyages Jules Verne, a British travel group. It was swell, six weeks long, mostly in Russia, Mongolia and China. If they speed it up, it would also make a nice trip visually, but wow, would you miss some beautiful stuff if you don't stop. Gotta do it both ways, I guess.
Posted By cp on March 16, 2010, 11:40 AM
Great idea, I'll be dead by then but good luck to those who can do it.
Posted By Audrey on March 16, 2010, 3:32 PM
Fuel savings. Seriously, that's out the window. You are going to use more electricity/fuel to drive that route than you would flying. Also, instead of carrying a meal or two on the plane you will have all the amenities for a two/three day trip. More weight, more fuel, less savings.
The TGV beats out airplanes since they are more convenient and timely than going through the airport. A rail network in the US will only make sense if it is better/cheaper/faster than air or car travel.
I could still see it happening, but it will require massive subsidies to build and operate. In order to compete, it will need to not only be cheaper than air travel, but also be cheaper to carry cargo as well.
One more thing, with this political environment, do you really want to ride a high speed train through Afghanistan or Pakistan or Iran? Or Russia?
Posted By Brian Wohlgemuth on March 17, 2010, 7:21 AM
Great way to send out all their spies, undocumented workers (1.3 billion pop.) across the world for the price of a caboose!
Posted By mac on March 17, 2010, 10:15 PM
Yes I would use it over flying any time. Flying is a miserable experience that makes train travel very desirable. I have ridden the French and Japanese high speed rail and they are great. Wish we had high speed rail travel in this country.
Posted By Ken on March 19, 2010, 4:46 PM
Has anyone considered what one RPG would do to such a train? It seems that derailing a train like this would have substantial PR benefits to a terrorist organization.
Posted By Doug on March 25, 2010, 11:33 PM