Looks like this idea has reared its head again… A rail Link across the Bering Straits ( Sea?) to link China via Siberia, on into Alaska, Canada and the USA…[wow]
FTA: "…In not so distant future, people can take the train from China to the US, according to Beijing Times Thursday citing Wang Mengshu, a railway expert and academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering…"
Seems like the last time there was a proposal to Bridge the Bering Straits, not a tunnel?
UPDATED to New LINK on 09/29/2014
OK, Sorry about the bad Linked article to the Bejing Times. [|(]
Went in this morning and have found a similar article but at a different site. This is the link to the Railway Technology. com ( unfortunately, it does not have the sexy illustration of a HSR Train with it. [sigh]
Never will happen, but I like folks that dream big. We were good at that at one time, now all we want to know is how much will it cost, will it raise my taxes and how many frogs, bugs and flowers will it kill. China is the US circa 1890 in attitude- anything is possible, lets try to build it.
Looking beyond that fact that it would be darn near impossible and cost several gazillion dollars to build, wouldn’t the cost for a train ticket from Beijing to New York probably cost more than a plane ticket? Who would have the money or the desire to take the train from Beijing to New York?
The link wasn’t working this morning, but it is interesting to reflect the route would have to cross what is today Russian territory, but it is historically viewed by the Chinese as their hinterlands. Given its mineral riches one wonders how long the current situation will prevail.
I would suggest that as time goes by the importance of an all weather transportation link between the two continents will grow to the point that it will be cost effective. Now? Probably not. But sometime in the next 25-50 years it will be. And the one there with the track laid and signals lit will be in charge of international trade from that time forth. This is not an idea to be sneezed at and made fun of but to be studied and taken seriously. We seem to be drifting to reliances and alliances in the Pacific Ring and away from Europe. Think and do before it’s too late.
The politics in this proposal are absolutely impossible. The proposal is probably a method of pushing China’s longstanding claims to Russian territory northeast of the Amur River.
Standard gage definitely but where Russian gage ROW has the correct compass directions just add a third rail on the present track crossties. As traffic grows then standard gage could be added side by side of the Russian gage ? Dual gage tracks have a long history of success in the US ( mainly D&RGW ). and other locations.
Question are the specifications of China locos rail cars the same as North Anerican?. Buff strength, coupler strength, same knuckle system, coupler height, air brake system, MU cables, truck designs, axel loadings, wheel profile, rail profile, car clearances, dimensions, etc ?
From this website (Gondola page, there are several other pages), which includes both Domestic (Chinese) products and Export model (of course), looks like the rolling stock superficially is compatible with North American standards. Each wagon pictured has specs, not quite sure off-hand if they are fully FRA compliant
There will be in the future be more and more international RR traffic. At present there are many RR systems world wide that are separate but barring unforeseen happenings many more will be connected.
Governing bodies of countries especially the EU, Russia, China, Canada, USA will need to come together now for world wide standards of interchange service. Already there are various trials of China = Western Europe service that will just increase over time?
The USA and Canada need to participate in writing these standards. If this Siberian - Alaska - USA rail link is ever built they might be left in a lurch ?
Other locations ------ Africa, South America, SE Asia probably would come willing or kicking and screaming ?
Australia would probably not be included barring some extreme tunneling advances ?
Another problem might be the sheer volume of traffic of this link ? Are per mile rail rates competitive with sea rates ? Since rail is faster ( ? ) a rail link might require 3 - 4 tracks to handle the load ? Just look at the Southern California traffic alone to Chicago & the east coast on UP & BNSF. .
Well, if it’s a railroad to haul mountains of freight traffic from China to the USA, why not a wide gauge? 6-7-8 feet maybe? I know what you’re saying, but consider this: To make this work, you would need an eastbound lane, a westbound lane, and a passing lane. You’d also need sidings, division point, stations, shops, MOW facilities, etc.
By the time you’ve overcome the financial, political, environmental, geological, weather, language, cultural, and seismic issues, the difficulties of wide gauge would be small potatoes. I say, by the time you have the route ready for rolling stock, you have spent more money than has ever been printed in all of history. A couple more billions for wide gauge locomotives and cars is a drop in the bucket.
The Russo-Japanese War developed out of the rivalry between Russia and Japan for dominance in Korea and Manchuria. In 1898 Russia had pressured China into granting it a lease for the strategically important port of Port Arthur (now Lü-shun), at the tip of the Liaotung Peninsula, in southern Manchuria. Russia thereby entered into occupation of the peninsula, even though, in concert with other European powers, it had forced Japan to relinquish just such a right after the latter’s decisive victory over China in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95. Moreover, in 1896 Russia had concluded an alliance with China against Japan and, in the process, had won rights to extend the Trans-Siberian Railroad across Chinese-held Manchuria to the Russian seaport of Vladivostok, thus gaining control of an important strip of Manchurian territory. However, though Russia had built the Trans-Siberian Railroad (1891-1904), it still lacked the transportation facilities necessary to reinforce its limited armed forces in Manchuria with sufficient men and supplies. Japan, by contrast, had steadily expanded its army since its war with China in 1894 and by 1904 had gained a marked superiority over Russia in the number of ground troops in the Far East. After Russia reneged in 1903 on an agreement to withdraw its troops from Manchuria, Japan decided it was time to attack.
A region rich in resources, sparsely populated and of great strategic value has conflicting border claims where major powers grate. One power builds a railroad of extreme national interest through the region.
Wide gage means heavier loads per foot of train. How can you overcome the approximately 70,000 # maximum axel load ?. Wheel sizes are almost at their maximum sizes.?
I dunno. Bigger wheels, wider wheels, more wheels? Maybe shorter, wider cars with the same wheel loading? I’m sure there would be plenty of time to develop this before the first spike is driven.
I think picking gauge, etc. is premature to begin with, but also, that with the size of this concept and project nothing should be taken for granted or assumed. A lot will depend on what is planned to be moved from one continent to the other and how frequently. After the nature of the commodities and the end points of the trips and the frequency(ies?) then the political wrangling can and will commence. Shooting for a plan by 2020 and construction start by 2025 is probably the absolute shortest time we could see something firm if what is said today is true today. While I think it is a fascinating and probably a good economic idea, I know I probably won’t get to know anything more than I know about it now in my lifetime.
Remember China right now is working on establishing a Silk Road railroad on a route that bypasses Russia. They have gotten as far west as Turkmenistan with a 4’8 1/2" railroad. (I think) . Try to also remember China uses the concept that one has to think well ahead to succeed. I read in today’s Newswire that they are starting to work on a line in Nigeria. The Chinese are also talking about railways in Ethiopia. Consider that the US has a very large naval abilities. The one way to outflank a navy is dry land. Another consideration is the ability to move large amounts of goods by rail. China is very focused on trying to generate large numbers of jobs. They have a huge population to keep busy. Idle workers are prime fodder for revolts. And one of the best ways to avoid revolt is to keep people busy at work. Thx IGN