High speed rail: Pattaya to Bangkok in well under an hour - around 300 baht!

[JSixpack]

2 hours ago, essox essox said:

NOT this is thailand ....

 

A shuttle service was planned as part of the new weekend tourist train service and is presumably operating, but all we have is sneers rather than any real information. Be nice if somebody rode the train and reported about the experience. It may just mean that a bunch of baht buses converge on the station at arrival times. Might be OK if they're regulated. Funny to think of getting off high speed rail and onto a baht bus, but it's so charming, ain't it.

 

Yet given the foreign involvement, the YUGE investment, and potential tourist income if the high speed rail service proves popular, they may well have something better than baht bus shuttling.

 

Right now, it's merely a "plan" that's advanced to the approved stage in "a" government ministerial meeting. That's enough to get many of us all hot & bothered, but far from officially approving the project implementation, allocating the money, and starting work. So it's very much up in the air right now.

 

If they do get all the money lined up and begin construction then barring acts of Buddha it will likely be completed--someday. Stakeholders have learned from the Hopewell debacle.

Edited April 1, 2018 by JSixpack

[sandrabbit]

2 hours ago, JSixpack said:

 

A shuttle service was planned as part of the new weekend tourist train service and is presumably operating, but all we have is sneers rather than any real information. Be nice if somebody rode the train and reported about the experience. It may just mean that a bunch of baht buses converge on the station at arrival times. Might be OK if they're regulated. Funny to think of getting off high speed rail and onto a baht bus, but it's so charming, ain't it.

 

Yet given the foreign involvement, the YUGE investment, and potential tourist income if the high speed rail service proves popular, they may well have something better than baht bus shuttling.

 

Right now, it's merely a "plan" that's advanced to the approved stage in "a" government ministerial meeting. That's enough to get many of us all hot & bothered, but far from officially approving the project implementation, allocating the money, and starting work. So it's very much up in the air right now.

 

If they do get all the money lined up and begin construction then barring acts of Buddha it will likely be completed--someday. Stakeholders have learned from the Hopewell debacle.

sorry but it's the 5th or 6th incarnation of a high speed link which 1st started as a link between Hua Hin and Rayong which is supposed to be already started so for me it's just smoke and mirrors.  This has been going on for at least 2 yrs ......

[mbamber]

Date for opening is the same day as I get married "When Hell Freezes Over"  ie  never going to happen in the next 20 years. 

[JSixpack]

8 hours ago, sandrabbit said:

sorry but it's the 5th or 6th incarnation of a high speed link which 1st started as a link between Hua Hin and Rayong which is supposed to be already started so for me it's just smoke and mirrors.  This has been going on for at least 2 yrs ......

 

Nobody cares what it is for you, least of all a Thai gov't ministry. But no, not of the link itself but of the "plan;" hence I said merely "plan" approved by "a" government ministry. I don't know that the previous plans were "approved" at all and I doubt you do either. We know this one has been, but part of my point is that the OP is being taken too seriously. There's nothing in the least abnormal anywhere of floating ideas and approving plans in principle. I'm sure we can find plenty of examples all over the world. Nothing in the OP suggests they are actually going to implement this plan.

 

It's only on TVF that members think that if Thais float any idea or some ministry approves some plan, then they absolutely must implement it exactly as floated, immediately, with strictest adherence to a short schedule. 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by JSixpack

[LennyW]

7 hours ago, mbamber said:

Date for opening is the same day as I get married "When Hell Freezes Over"  ie  never going to happen in the next 20 years. 

Heard the same nonsense about the Sukhumvit Tunnel, the Motorway 7 extension...look how thats turned out!!

[bkk6060]

Well, I remember the BTS in Bangkok was pooh poohed and its been about 20 years now.

MRT blah blah.

Same with the Airport link.

Same BTS will never go to Don Mueang.

On and on all this would never happen.

I think the high speed rail will happen.  I know it seems like a long time, but I bet within 10 years it is going.

[mbamber]

3 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Well, I remember the BTS in Bangkok was pooh poohed and its been about 20 years now.

MRT blah blah.

Same with the Airport link.

Same BTS will never go to Don Mueang.

On and on all this would never happen.

I think the high speed rail will happen.  I know it seems like a long time, but I bet within 10 years it is going.

I will take on that bet 20 years at least.  Heard the BTS is short of trains. 

[essox essox]

On 28/03/2018 at 6:43 PM, cookieqw said:

im coming out in may where can i buy a ticket ?

when they have been printed....do you want single or return ticket??

[JSixpack]

1 hour ago, mbamber said:

Heard the BTS is short of trains. 

 

For BTS to be short of trains, there must be a BTS, right? Since you think this is a critical point of some kind (not sure what, maybe the usual "only in Thailand"), here are some other lines also short or w/ excess capacity for your edification:

 

Expo line, LA
Green and Orange lines, Boston
MTA, New York
JR and others in Tokyo, but current lines built out
LA Metro, overbuilt
 

Depends on what time you observe. If you'd been around when BTS first started running, nobody was riding it, just a few people per car. It had too many cars. I'll have to check whether our doomsters saw no need for it and predicted failure as usual. With typical shrewdness they refrained from making a killing buying real estate around the stations.

[JSixpack]

More details have been announced in the other newspaper that cannot be named and will no doubt be appearing in TV soon. In short, the gov't is looking a lot more committed. Wisely, the initial relatively small outlay will be for land appropriation. So we'll see if that happens. If so, a very good sign. That was one issue w/ the Hopewell project. 

[arithai12]

18 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Well, I remember the BTS in Bangkok was pooh poohed and its been about 20 years now.

MRT blah blah.

Same with the Airport link.

Same BTS will never go to Don Mueang.

On and on all this would never happen.

I think the high speed rail will happen.  I know it seems like a long time, but I bet within 10 years it is going.

The BTS took about 15 years from initial concepts to inauguration. But you can't compare the technology and infrastrucure behind BTS with that behind a high-speed train - assuming that we are indeed talking of a train doing 250kmh and not 150.

 

So, where do we place the bets?

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, LennyW said:

Heard the same nonsense about the Sukhumvit Tunnel, the Motorway 7 extension...look how thats turned out!!

Isn't the motorway a toll road? if so it's a profitable proposition. Railway passenger services don't make any money at all. They normally have to be subsidised as well.

 

As for the tunnel, it may be completed now, but it doesn't allow m'bikes like they do in Chiang Mai, and the construction was a disaster area for, apparently, years.

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, JSixpack said:

If you'd been around when BTS first started running, nobody was riding it, just a few people per car. It had too many cars.

I used it then, and the reason it wasn't popular was because the price was too high. Poor people take the bus.

It would have been ludicrous to have had less cars on it then.

 

As more places were built along the line, it became more popular, and it's reached the point they either have to add another car or two ( but that's as many as will fit on the stations ) or run more frequent service during rush hour, but that's hard to do when there aren't enough trains anyway.

[essox essox]

3 hours ago, arithai12 said:

The BTS took about 15 years from initial concepts to inauguration. But you can't compare the technology and infrastrucure behind BTS with that behind a high-speed train - assuming that we are indeed talking of a train doing 250kmh and not 150.

 

So, where do we place the bets?

GAMBLING is not allowed....only if you buy the lottery tickets !!!

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 10:21 PM, JSixpack said:

Be nice if somebody rode the train and reported about the experience.

From a previous thread on TVF it's always booked out, and used by locals. It may have been intended as a tourist train, but the times are inconvenient for tourists.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, arithai12 said:

The BTS took about 15 years from initial concepts to inauguration. But you can't compare the technology and infrastrucure behind BTS with that behind a high-speed train - assuming that we are indeed talking of a train doing 250kmh and not 150.

 

So, where do we place the bets?

I'm betting that it will happen, but as a fast train on the existing track, not a high speed train on all elevated track. 

Perhaps they'll improve the existing track by adding overhead/ underpass roads, so people don't get killed on level crossings, but IMO a high speed train just for passengers isn't economically viable, unless it's part of an international route to Vietnam.

[InMyShadow]

 
For BTS to be short of trains, there must be a BTS, right? Since you think this is a critical point of some kind (not sure what, maybe the usual "only in Thailand"), here are some other lines also short or w/ excess capacity for your edification:
 
Expo line, LA
Green and Orange lines, Boston
MTA, New York
JR and others in Tokyo, but current lines built out
LA Metro, overbuilt
 
Depends on what time you observe. If you'd been around when BTS first started running, nobody was riding it, just a few people per car. It had too many cars. I'll have to check whether our doomsters saw no need for it and predicted failure as usual. With typical shrewdness they refrained from making a killing buying real estate around the stations.

I bought. If you can even get your head around it the Q Condo has direct access to the BTS At 1 to 5 million USA DOLLARS! AT Nana of all places.
If anyone wants a new condo on lower Sukhumvit now they are screwed.

[Airbagwill]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm betting that it will happen, but as a fast train on the existing track, not a high speed train on all elevated track. 

Perhaps they'll improve the existing track by adding overhead/ underpass roads, so people don't get killed on level crossings, but IMO a high speed train just for passengers isn't economically viable, unless it's part of an international route to Vietnam.

One of the problems of BTS was that it was is exclusively built through an urban environment .... a lot of the hi-speed rail will be constructed across greenfield or relatively open land so comparing building rates is probably notthe that productive.

The rail system is part of the EEC project and is accompanied by a freight system which I believe may even run on the same lines?

[Airbagwill]

47 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Isn't the motorway a toll road? if so it's a profitable proposition. Railway passenger services don't make any money at all. They normally have to be subsidised as well.

 

As for the tunnel, it may be completed now, but it doesn't allow m'bikes like they do in Chiang Mai, and the construction was a disaster area for, apparently, years.

All road transport is subsidised too. The great thing for governments is that most road users are unaware of that.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Airbagwill

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Airbagwill said:

All road transport is subsidised too.

Perhaps so, but it's essential for industry to have good roads, and millions of people travel on them. 

The number of people travelling by rail is obviously smaller. 

Can you point to any high speed rail system used by freight as well? I know of none.

[Rimmer]

A post all in caps has been removed, please turn off your caps lock thank you.

[Airbagwill]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps so, but it's essential for industry to have good roads, and millions of people travel on them. 

The number of people travelling by rail is obviously smaller. 

Can you point to any high speed rail system used by freight as well? I know of none.

A rail system is part of that too. You shouldn't look at this one article as the whole picture it is part of a much bigger plan.

 

The hi-speed rail is primarily to link the 3 airports as part of the massive expansion planned as part of the EEC. This will actually industrialise most of the 3 changwats, Chachoengsao, Chonburi and Rayong. (apparently Rayong are not getting linked in after all as they are concerned about "safety".

 

The thing people overlook is that a large part of "private" transport is in fact people on business or causing business.

Pattaya is part of the tourist industry, so shipping people there is contributing to about a 20% slice of the Thai economy.

 

A lot of this is also tied into the Chinese trade expansion. THey want access through Thailand, Laos and Myanmar to open up Western China to western trade routes. At present everything from China has to be shipped east which prevents many western provinces from indus=trial and economic expansion.

 

In the end the Pattay line is just a tiny sideline on a major industrial expansion that is set to engulf the 3 Changwats.

 

.

 

[Airbagwill]

Will the Pattaya link be truly “high speed? - I would think that depends on the stops it makes.

 

Will it compete or compliment?

 

Firstly lets establish that HSTs don’t just “compete” with road transport, they compete with short and medium distance air as well.

 

Thailand is experiencing and will to continue to experience alongside freight,  a big increase in passengers through business and tourism and the current infrastructure (rail;/road/air) is unsuitable to take any significant increase.

 

HSTs usually cover distances between 150 and 800 km; above 1,000 km air transportation is considered to be better.. HSTs can of course usually get to the center of cities too.

 

However, it would appear that Pattaya is actually too close to Bangkok to make good use of an HST especially if stops are included.

 

An HST or just a good rail service for passengers can have various benefits, such as reduction of private vehicles on roads, reduction of short air flights and an improvement of availability of regular lines for freight.

 

At present hi speed rail systems have some technical problems if used together with slower traditional freight.

 

For instance, if a rail is designed exclusively for HSTs then slower trains will damage the cant required on corners and the lines will need extra regular inspection and maintenance.

However on flat terrain or with the use of tilting HSTs this problem can be mitigated.

 

Thai authorities have suggested that the hi-speed rail network could also be used for freight - technically this is possible on HSTs rails  built with a lower top speed in mind - e.g. below 250 kph it also this is quite possible given the topography of the region between Bangkok and Utapao.

 

 I doubt if the actual speeds achieved to Pattaya would mean that freight would conflict that much if the line is engineered to take this. It would be the number of services that might conflict.

 

The nature of freight would also be significant on HSTs - around Europe the services are used for various freight options, mail being the most common, but also high speed transport of small cargo and hi-value perishable goods - e.g. lobsters.

 

The Eurotunnel carries fully loaded trucks, cars and passengers on hi-speed rails.

 

Italy and Australia use tilting trains to use lower-tech lines to achieve higher speeds and share with freight.

 

China appears to be using the slower (250km) lines to transport freight too.

 

Use of double tracking will also help to allow freight and HSTs to use the same corridors.

 

So if designed from the start, high-speed lines can take freight, but the slower freight could interfere with HST schedules especially on longer distances at the higher end of speeds - I don’t see this as a problem on Pattaya to Bangkok.

The hi-speed lines in Bangkok Chonburi etc are unlikely to hit the ultra hi-speeds of the longer distance trains and the flat topography may mean that problems of cant don’t enter into it that much.

 

 

On the other hand - If the rails are only used for HSTs there can be advantages to both passengers and freight.

These exclusive rail systems rail systems free up space on existing freight tracks so improving their capacity and are usually accompanied by simultaneous development of freight services....this would be particularly important for places like nearby Laem Chabang.

The cost of building an exclusive HST line and developing existing freight services can be cheaper than building one line for both.

 

I think the main problem on this thread is that that is a “Pattaya-centric” viewpoint predominating and one needs to step back and look at the whole picture.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Airbagwill

[Airbagwill]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps so, but it's essential for industry to have good roads, and millions of people travel on them. 

The number of people travelling by rail is obviously smaller. 

Can you point to any high speed rail system used by freight as well? I know of none.

Thailand industry doesn't have "good roads" either

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Airbagwill said:

A rail system is part of that too. You shouldn't look at this one article as the whole picture it is part of a much bigger plan.

 

The hi-speed rail is primarily to link the 3 airports as part of the massive expansion planned as part of the EEC. This will actually industrialise most of the 3 changwats, Chachoengsao, Chonburi and Rayong. (apparently Rayong are not getting linked in after all as they are concerned about "safety".

 

The thing people overlook is that a large part of "private" transport is in fact people on business or causing business.

Pattaya is part of the tourist industry, so shipping people there is contributing to about a 20% slice of the Thai economy.

 

A lot of this is also tied into the Chinese trade expansion. THey want access through Thailand, Laos and Myanmar to open up Western China to western trade routes. At present everything from China has to be shipped east which prevents many western provinces from indus=trial and economic expansion.

 

In the end the Pattay line is just a tiny sideline on a major industrial expansion that is set to engulf the 3 Changwats.

 

.

 

Few points.

Real high speed railways aren't used, far as I know, for freight, so it won't make any difference far as industrialisation goes.

It's not necessary to have high speed trains to link the three airports. Even London doesn't have high speed rail linking their different airports. Fast trains running on standard tracks are all that is necessary. 

China doesn't have to ship anything through Thailand. Their rail system is planned to connect to a western sea board port in Burma.

 

it is part of a much bigger plan.

I realise that, but it still has to be economically viable. Improving the existing railway and running many more than one train a day can be done at a fraction of the cost of an all new high speed system, and is all that is necessary.

 

IMO there is no economic reason ( other than the usual ) to build a high speed railway anywhere in Thailand. I used the new fast trains in Ireland, and they are absolutely all Thailand needs.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

Thailand industry doesn't have "good roads" either

555555555555555

There are excellent roads linking Bkk and the port which are used by hundreds ( ? thousands ) of trucks every day.

I haven't been past the Pattaya turn off of the new big arterial route going to Rayong, but it looks pretty impressive and is being improved all the time.

[Airbagwill]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Few points.

Real high speed railways aren't used, far as I know, for freight, so it won't make any difference far as industrialisation goes.

It's not necessary to have high speed trains to link the three airports. Even London doesn't have high speed rail linking their different airports. Fast trains running on standard tracks are all that is necessary. 

China doesn't have to ship anything through Thailand. Their rail system is planned to connect to a western sea board port in Burma.

 

it is part of a much bigger plan.

I realise that, but it still has to be economically viable. Improving the existing railway and running many more than one train a day can be done at a fraction of the cost of an all new high speed system, and is all that is necessary.

 

IMO there is no economic reason ( other than the usual ) to build a high speed railway anywhere in Thailand. I used the new fast trains in Ireland, and they are absolutely all Thailand needs.

I think you should read my nest post.

"Real high speed railways aren't used, far as I know, for freight, so it won't make any difference far as industrialisation goes." - I disagree...

Basically HSTs affer industrialisation both directly and indirectly....as outlined in my other post.

"Fast trains running on standard tracks are all that is necessary. " -this maybe the case for Pattaya alone but there actually AREN"T ant tracks capable of this - the current line to Bangkok would need a total reengineering to take anything faster and any increased use - it isn't even 2-track all the way. Of course it isn't just a matter of a rial service to Pattaya, I i said earlier, it is almost a "sideline" - forgive the pun.

 

"Even London doesn't have high speed rail linking their different airports. Fast trains running on standard tracks are all that is necessary. " quite honestly that is a totally facile comment. You simply can't compare the topographies of the two countries for a start and thence the dissimilarities proliferate add infinitum.

 

You don't also seem to be taking into account the massive CROSSRAIL project that is nearing completion that is about to rip hours off journey times across the UK capital. - a completely different problem with a totally different solution.

 

"China doesn't have to ship anything through Thailand. Their rail system is planned to connect to a western sea board port in Burma." - they most certainly do - China what s to open as many deep sea ports and markets as possible this includes Thailand Malaysia and Indonesia,  who are also populaous markets for their goods. It was China who offered to back the hi-speed rail system knowing the benefits it will accrue - remember they have extensive experience of this in China itself.

 

" but it still has to be economically viable" - China's Belt road is running into difficulties wit h loans and finance, but this is not something that won't be overcome - at the end of the day infrastructure for transport is not a simple matter of balance sheets, it is the industry and accompanying developments In the EU no rail systems make money yet they are and integral part of one of the world's largest economies. It's one of the things governments do whether road rail shipping or whatever the infrastructure comes from governments directly or indirectly.

[Airbagwill]

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

555555555555555

There are excellent roads linking Bkk and the port which are used by hundreds ( ? thousands ) of trucks every day.

I haven't been past the Pattaya turn off of the new big arterial route going to Rayong, but it looks pretty impressive and is being improved all the time.

Sorry the road system around Thailand especially in Chonburi and Rayong is dreadful

It is poorly designed and seldom up to carry either weight or volume and they are positively dangerous.

i drive them everyday in Chonburi and Rayong - about 40000 km per year for 15 years

 

Many roads on industrial estates are privately owned and poorly maintained

 

A good way of seeing how corrupt a country is, is to look at the roads, the more wobbly and pitted through subsidence the cheaper the junctions poor drainage are all signs of people taking money out of the pot that should have been used for foundations etc...

One of the main reasons for Thailand's poor showings in road safety is the pitiful standard of design of their highway system.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Airbagwill

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Airbagwill said:

Sorry the road system around Thailand especially in Chonburi and Rayong is dreadful

It is poorly designed and seldom up to carry either weight or volume and they are positively dangerous.

i drive them everyday in Chonburi and Rayong - about 45,000 km per year.

 

Many roads on industrial estates are privately owned and poorly maintained

 

A good way of seeing how corrupt a country is, is to look at the roads, the more wobbly and pitted through subsidence the cheaper the junctions poor drainage are all signs of people taking money out of the pot that should have been used for foundations etc...

One of the main reasons for Thailand's poor showings in road safety is the pitiful standard of design of their highway system.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I've done my share of bus trips between Bkk and Pattaya, and they seem fine to me. I guess if one is in a town car it might seem rougher.

[Airbagwill]

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I've done my share of bus trips between Bkk and Pattaya, and they seem fine to me. I guess if one is in a town car it might seem rougher.

Not really, to take traffic off these roads by using rail would be a boon.

 

 It is fairly obvious to anyone who takes the time to observe .... Overly straight roads that encourage speeding, flash flooding from poor drainage - this also pollutes local farmland - the hard shoulders are insufficient and there are chaotic entrances and exits and insufficient service stations with limited access.and take a look at the nex construction site you pass too, you can see how the road are built and how corners can be cut.

 

I travelled every day up the & motorway when it was being built, the day week it was opened the first shower of rain completely flooded the entire carriageway in one direction and due to the fact that lightning of Thai roads is inappropriate and intermittent it wasn't visible until the cars in from hit it and came to a grinding halt from 120 km.

 

The 331 is another example - this road has just "fully" opened again after several years of upgrading - the bridges are uneven and being repaired already, there is insufficient lighting and the crash barriers separating the flows of traffic are concrete and of dubious height. this means that in the event of a crash large goods vehicles are still likely to cross into oncoming traffic, and smaller vehicles and passengers will suffer damage and injury caused by ploughing into concrete rather than armco barriers.

 

The road system in Thailand is done on the cheap and riddles with "shortages" presumably caused by graft and corruption.

If the rail system comes into being with Chinese or German design there could be a viable and safe altenative for te millions of people who will be visiting the region in te next 5 to 10 years or so.