London to Tokyo by Train

The journey was just a dream – until last week, when a delegation of officials from Russia and Japan met to finalise the plan.

The scheme involves extending the existing Trans Siberian railway, with a bridge from the Russian mainland to the island of Sakhalin. The new train route will then continue south for 380 miles across the Russian island, before reaching the coast. A 25-mile tunnel will be constructed under the Soya Strait, taking the train onto Japanese territory.

It will enable direct rail transport from London to Tokyo in around two weeks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/journeysbyrail/great-train-journeys/10106222/Wheels-set-in-motion-for-London-Tokyo-train-link.html

Would coach class the entire distance with no lay over be considered a form of endurance testing?

I can’t see why this would be worth the effort. The price seems to be a bargain. A cross-ocean bridge, 380 miles of railroad tracks (or more, the article is a little fuzzy), and 25 miles of tunnel under the sea tunnel all for $6.4 billion.

6.4 Billion what a bargin…hey what about earthquakes and moving tectnoc plates

If a tectonic plate shifted, whose fault would that be?

Once saw a documentry about a trip on the Tran-Siberia Railroad. Actually didn’t see the whole thing at one sitting. It was at least 6-hours long. Seemed to be mainlly video of very bored passengers get drunk.

How will they handle gauge changes.

England and Western Europe - standard gauge, 4-'8 1/2". Eastern Europe - standard gauge, Russia and former Soviet Republics - 5 'gauge. Japan - High speed rail standard gauge other lines mostly narrow gauge.

In the documentry the train went to Manchuria & China - standard gauge. They changed the trucks at Manchurian border.

Most of the existing London to Tokyo rail 5’ gauge.

This project has about as much chance of being built as the on-again, off-again railroad connecting Alaska to Russia through the Bering Strait.

Certainly not in my lifetime.

The question I have is “How much freight wants to go to London from Tokyo or vice versa ?” I wouldn’t just dismiss it out if hand if there is a large enough group shipper/recievers that want it, then it could be economical.

In reading into this, I found that in 2001, the estimated cost was about $50 billion. In 2008, the cost was estimated at $92 billion to $101 billion, to do the bridge, tunnel, and rebuild & extending track. Now, in 2013, the cost is estimated at $6.4 billion. Kind of makes you wonder who anyone can use the $7 billion figure and keep a straight face.

Well, the key component is the new rail connection from Russia to Japan via Sakhalin that has to be build - the remaining Russian/European/Japanese rail segments already exist (regardless of gauge).
The article already mentioned Japan’s desire to access natural gas and other Russian resources, and besides the UK, there certainly is trade between Japan and Germany, Poland, France and so on.

I can’t picture Japan accessing Russian natural gas by rail.

A pipeline would be the normal way to deliver. Or maybe LNG tankers?

Kind of what I was thinking. It would seem that a natural gas pipeline would be a lot more useful than an undersea tunnel.

If you can get from Russia to Japan, you can tie into the rail network of China. How much trade would move between Japan and Asia outside of Siberia?

If you want to reach China from Japan, the logical route would be rather farther to the south. Of course, there are two minor obstacles in the way, a rather wide strait and North Korea.

I know we all love railroads, but sometimes they AREN’T the best way to move people (TWO WEEKS, for a 15 hour flight?) or things (one containership = <3500 wells.) With LNG tankers available, even the Russia-Japan pipeline would be economically questionable.

As for the <$7 billion, that MIGHT pay for the preliminary survey - in a tectonically active area where winter comes but once a year (and stays for seven< months.)

Not to be overly skeptical, but I suspect humans will be mining asteroids and launching interstellar probes before there’s a direct rail connection from London to Tokyo.

Chuck (sometimes Science Fiction author)

Memo to MidlandMike: Your use of words leaves me quaking with laughter…

Bingo. Heck, for the price of this “plan”…I’ve got some real cheap land in FL and some bridges to sell ya too.

Japan has handled those concerns quite handily. The Japanese high speed rail travels between islands in a tunnel designed to withstand very severe earthquakes.

The planned tunnel would be shorter than the already completed Seikan Tunnel between Honshu and Hokkaido in Japan which already crosses a deep strait, and is in a geologically active area.

And how much did the Seikan Tunnel cost? How many years were required for construction? Not to mention that the Seikan tunnel was intended to supersede a very active water route where several ferries had met with high loss of life disasters. Is there a ferry between Hokkaido and Sakhalin? How many vehicles/passengers/tons of cargo does it move in a year?

My take on the practicality of this problem involves the economics, not the engineering. Sure, it can be built. So can the Alaska - Siberia link. In both cases, the cost-benefit ratio is lopsidedly cost heavy and benefit light - and the Japanese are NOT stupid when it comes to money.

Chuck (former Tokyo resident).

If Containerships were the be all end all, for freight from Asia to Western Europe, there would not be as much airfreight as there is between the two regions. Rail Container trains fill the gap between the two services, faster than the Containerships and Cheaper than airfreight.