Thailand To Proceed With High Speed Rail Project

[Asa]

It's to Nong Khai so that it can link up with China. China is going to build a high speed rail line in Laos that the Thai line will connect to. Lines to Chiang Mai and Rayong will be built too, but the line to China is first. There will also be a line to the Malay border and eventually you'll be able to go from Singapore to China on high speed rail

Look up a map, pal. Linking Thai to Southern China the shortest, easiest, and less steep mountain elevation is via Chiang Rai to Laung Nam Tha to Meng La if not through Myanmar's Keng Tung to Jin Hong and Kun Ming. Certainly not via Vientiene to Vang Viang to Luang Prabang and thru those mountain all the way to Meng La, idiox.

And to the why Nong Khai route, this is purely for political gain to his BJP NNE votes and fat sum money, and nothing else.

[Lakegeneve]

150 billion Baht is not US$50 billion, it is US$5 billion

Sorry, getting senile.

But with people criticising my figures, I'll rework.

>600 km overall.

So around 1250km for dual track.

9 million dollars per km (but I don't know if single or double track)(Say double track)

5,500 million for rail line (I believe that figure includes stations)

Rolling stock - I keep to my figure - 800 million per train - 8 trains. Thus 6,400 million.

Total over 12 billion, plus maintenance.

But I still cannot see that the fare-recovery will ever match up to the servicing and repayment of the debt.

I'm not going to give a detailed critique but jsut mention a few issues.

Firstly, it is initially single track not dual. (That is admittedly a problem give dual would be ideal). Secondly, your per/km costings do not I believe take into account decreased labour costs reflective of Thailand, or do they? Thirdly, the rolling stock will most likely be CNR made and cheaper than the Siemans per unit cost you mention. (I think you mentioned Siemens earlier or am I wrong?). Fourthly, you again neglected to acknowledge that the main usuage of the line will be freight. A point I made earlier. You cannot confine your basic attempt to cost this line limited to pax fare recovery when the main income source will be freight based.

Finally, I would hasten to mention that there are a range of calculable, direct and indirect financial costs which need to be included in any financial analysis. For example, they range from a reduction in traffic accidents and road maintenence costs to a decrease in pollutant related health issues (ie. respiratory incidence) to economic efficient gains whether that be speedier logistics or staff time. Another, more topical one would be reduced CO2 emissions which are increasingly being costed in the world economy.

These are only a few examples. All of these costs can be measured in a proper financial analysis of a new transport project. Even only a very small % movement of private and freight transport to rail will bring financial benefits in most transport proper financial modelling. You need to include all of the elements.

[Humphrey Bear]

I'm not going to give a detailed critique but jsut mention a few issues.

Firstly, it is initially single track not dual. (That is admittedly a problem give dual would be ideal). Secondly, your per/km costings do not I believe take into account decreased labour costs reflective of Thailand, or do they? Thirdly, the rolling stock will most likely be CNR made and cheaper than the Siemans per unit cost you mention. (I think you mentioned Siemens earlier or am I wrong?). Fourthly, you again neglected to acknowledge that the main usuage of the line will be freight. A point I made earlier. You cannot confine your basic attempt to cost this line limited to pax fare recovery when the main income source will be freight based.

Finally, I would hasten to mention that there are a range of calculable, direct and indirect financial costs which need to be included in any financial analysis. For example, they range from a reduction in traffic accidents and road maintenence costs to a decrease in pollutant related health issues (ie. respiratory incidence) to economic efficient gains whether that be speedier logistics or staff time. Another, more topical one would be reduced CO2 emissions which are increasingly being costed in the world economy.

These are only a few examples. All of these costs can be measured in a proper financial analysis of a new transport project. Even only a very small % movement of private and freight transport to rail will bring financial benefits in most transport proper financial modelling. You need to include all of the elements.

1) Single track? So trains going just one way for 12 hours, then the reverse for 12 hours, or with a few stations (say 4) along the way with passing places? This will slow things down.

2) Mainly freight? Containers, I assume. As another poster has pointed out, ships carry far more containers than any train. And to load/offload all these containers onto trucks in the middle of Bangkok? Better to run the line to Laem Chabang, south of ChonBuri. Who would want to pay a premium to send containers via high-speed rail, rather than ship?

3) Siemens - yes, I have several contacts there.

4) Pollution does not seem to be a consideration in Thailand yet, but I certainly take your point.

[ginjag]

Are you seriously telling me/us that all highspeed track in Asia is elevated?

I don't have any figures for the Chinese system, but the Seoul - Busan High Speed Rail is 411km of which only 119km is at-grade (ground level) the rest is either elevated or in tunnels.

It is essential to keep obstructions (noodle carts, animals, vehicles, pedestrians) off the track and the easiest means is to elevate it either on concrete structures or with steep-sided embankments (or cuttings where appropriate), this also makes it easy to do away with level-crossings which are a serious accident hotspot. Any sections not elevated must be fenced to a sufficient level to prevent access to the tracks (we're not talking 3 strands of barbed wire here), this fencing must of course be maintained (with the ongoing costs).

Picture this, Nong Khai-Bkk, one of the flattest stretches of line you'll find anywhere. The line in place covers a flat journey 90% of the section, so that is not a problem.

In my previous post I mentioned about the track being nearly always within a short distance from the A2 highway. If this is the route to be taken? and the land does not have to be aquired from other bodies.

The roads leading up to the line from the east HAVE to cross. No elevation needed to the line (only under and over.) (do you elevate 650 kilomet) Look at the road map on the entire stretch--there are a thousand roads or more. expence and time to do this. Do you elevate on flat land, and drop into stations already there==Udon-Khon Khen=Korat ?????

Edited March 23, 2011 by ginjag

[jimbeam1]

First of all, before making hasty replies,to posts made by others. I think you should go back to the very beginning of this topic. Read again and tell us where either givenall or myself mentioned anything about focusing only on road based transport. Also can you please answer I question I put to you, after another of your quotes . Which was how is the highspeed link from Bangkok to Nong Khai going to Improve Bangkok's traffic problems. If you can not come back with a straight and simple answer. Would you kindly refrain from answering, in a negative manner, posts made by myself. Thankyou.

jb1

Au contraire jb1 but it is you who have been negative from the beginning without offering discussion on the merits or otherwise of this project. Givenall posted and you replied as follows;

Instead of being worried about high speed, let's worry aboutfixing the traffic for getting some speed in the streets. It seem it gets worseand worse, and the lack of discipline on the road also makes it worse anddangerous

I agree with you. As for sure they will spend millions on the planing of this project. Announce the starting and finishing date's then put it on hold. In the mean time, there will have been some nice little earners?

jb1

You said , "I agree with you". What was givenalls main point? Improving traffic and "gettign some speed on the streets." You didn't discuss issues of road v rail transport, the merits of the project, other transport, social or economic issues or engage in any critical analysis. You just referred in a glib way to pre project costs and the inference of corruption - a fairly obvious and ubiquitous issue. No mention of anything positive or potential benefits of the project in that post or any of your subseqent posts.

Thus, my reply referring to your focus on road transport as being " stuck in a last century mentality" and I proceeded to highlight many of the postive elements of high speed rail whilst acknowledging the problems of corruption in any project in this country.

I also mentioned an urban, BKK, and intercity context as givenall used the term " streets" which suggests an urban context, he didn't say highways. But aside from that the fact is that both the urban BKK and the Intercity line are interelated. Thereafter, in your reply you erronenously stated, "Thailand does in fact already have mass transport lines covering the city." (Obviously you meant BKK but the incorrect part of the statement if that BKK does not have " mass transport lines covering the city"). No one anywhere would agree with that assertion, some 40kms of 3 lines hardly covers much of the city at all. I mentioned in my subsequent reply that there are plans for 14 metro lines by 2029 - that will be more akin to "covering the city". These proposed metro line preceed the NE high speed line proposal.

You then queried, "As far as I can see the high speed rail link is only from Bangkok to Nong Khai, not taking in the whole of City. So I fail to see how this will help to Improve Bangkok traffic." My reply (post #40) stated; "Whether or not you agree in whole or part with that sentiment, the point is that either in a BKK context with metro lines or a countrywide context with high speed intercity lines, there has been too much focus on roads to the detriment of good transport planning. And it does help BKK as you obviously don't know that hundreds of buses a day enter into and out of BKK to traverse this route. Good intergrated, mass transport with a HS line and a propoer metro network reduces the demand of car based traffic off the roads." Semeingly, in your haste you either didn't read this or neglected to respond to it.

Thus, I did reply and gave an example to you query. However, let me expand. Does it not make sense that an improved & speedy rail service will take a % of private cars, intercity buses and freight traffic off the roads ? Remembering that most of this line is about freight from the Chinese viewpoint. That is a basic concept which is accepted universally when new mass transport projects are proposed.

Thus, in the context of a proposed BKK to Nong Khai line where much of the passenger and freight traffic is originating or completing the journey in BKK it follows that whatever % of pax & freight moves from road based transport to mass transit then the consequences is a direct imoact upon BKK traffic by whatever %. Some of it will also move from air based transport if it is time efficient. Add in a large BKK metro network where people can take a metro, all or part of their journey, to Bang Sue or Makkasan for their journey to the NE and you have a further decrease, small that it will be. I would think that was fairly obvious is it not?

You have not discussed the merits of the project or critiqued various aspects of it. There are major logistical, economic, health and environmental benefits which flow from such a project and if not obvious they can be listed. There will be many shortcoming and problems and they require considered review, discussion and debate. However, that should be based on some attempted analysis, accepted principals & facts. The railways have been underfunded for the last 5 decades whilst massive amounts of money, with little comment, has gone into funding new roads. The huge increase in road traffic in BKK and Thailand has clear negative consequences in terms of economic inefficency, health and envrionmental costs just to name an obvious few..

Seemingly, underlying your negativity on this issue is a disposition that it is a waste of money. It may well be. But can you come up some decent arguments beyond the glib? Based on your disposition the new airport would not have been built, neither would most new highways, schools or the new govt complex as some examples.

There are many naysayers on forums who make glib remarks without debating the merits of a issue, discussing some of the pros & cons and who avoid engaging in some analysis. I wont ask you to refrain from posting, It is up to you how you in what manner you wish to post. However, I will invite to be more positive, consider some of the obvious benefits of this project and to take the time to critiquely analyse some of the issues being discussed.

I am sorry I didn't read all of your reply. Did you answer my question?

jb1

[Lakegeneve]

I'm not going to give a detailed critique but jsut mention a few issues.

Firstly, it is initially single track not dual. (That is admittedly a problem give dual would be ideal). Secondly, your per/km costings do not I believe take into account decreased labour costs reflective of Thailand, or do they? Thirdly, the rolling stock will most likely be CNR made and cheaper than the Siemans per unit cost you mention. (I think you mentioned Siemens earlier or am I wrong?). Fourthly, you again neglected to acknowledge that the main usuage of the line will be freight. A point I made earlier. You cannot confine your basic attempt to cost this line limited to pax fare recovery when the main income source will be freight based.

Finally, I would hasten to mention that there are a range of calculable, direct and indirect financial costs which need to be included in any financial analysis. For example, they range from a reduction in traffic accidents and road maintenence costs to a decrease in pollutant related health issues (ie. respiratory incidence) to economic efficient gains whether that be speedier logistics or staff time. Another, more topical one would be reduced CO2 emissions which are increasingly being costed in the world economy.

These are only a few examples. All of these costs can be measured in a proper financial analysis of a new transport project. Even only a very small % movement of private and freight transport to rail will bring financial benefits in most transport proper financial modelling. You need to include all of the elements.

1) Single track? So trains going just one way for 12 hours, then the reverse for 12 hours, or with a few stations (say 4) along the way with passing places? This will slow things down.

2) Mainly freight? Containers, I assume. As another poster has pointed out, ships carry far more containers than any train. And to load/offload all these containers onto trucks in the middle of Bangkok? Better to run the line to Laem Chabang, south of ChonBuri. Who would want to pay a premium to send containers via high-speed rail, rather than ship?

3) Siemens - yes, I have several contacts there.

4) Pollution does not seem to be a consideration in Thailand yet, but I certainly take your point.

1) Yes single track is silly but it is a start. It will have passing loops and will all come down to scheduling. Most likely trains will pass each other at station etc.

2) Freight is the main point of why the Chinese want it, to provide a transport corridor to/from the SW of China. Just making the point that you need to include that revenue and not just focus on the fare side. Freight cannot run at the same high speed line as a pax train as it degrades the line too quickly given the wieght beaqring differences (all depends on how much load the line is built for). However, in a simplistic sense let's say that you run your pax trains at 250km then you may run your freight (of limited weight) at 180km. Note thaty the eastern HS line will link with Laem Chabang and the SRT plans to build a new non HS line from Chachoengsao to link with Korat for Isan-Lam Chabang freight,. Thus, freight from China could transfer to that line. Also, as part of this project the SRT is going to build a new logistics hub for freight outside BKK.

Time sensitive freight such as perishables would be the most obvious demand.

3) Not Siemens. I was suggesting your rolling stock figures will be less per unit as most likely it will be CNR made.

4) More than just about pollution and health costs. Think about reduced highway/road maintenence costs if even only 10% of frieght moves to rail and the other exampls I gave. Generally, estimates are made and costs calculated. I don't know what the final figures would be but a proper feasability study would cost of all these elements.

[Lakegeneve]

Are you seriously telling me/us that all highspeed track in Asia is elevated?

I don't have any figures for the Chinese system, but the Seoul - Busan High Speed Rail is 411km of which only 119km is at-grade (ground level) the rest is either elevated or in tunnels.

It is essential to keep obstructions (noodle carts, animals, vehicles, pedestrians) off the track and the easiest means is to elevate it either on concrete structures or with steep-sided embankments (or cuttings where appropriate), this also makes it easy to do away with level-crossings which are a serious accident hotspot. Any sections not elevated must be fenced to a sufficient level to prevent access to the tracks (we're not talking 3 strands of barbed wire here), this fencing must of course be maintained (with the ongoing costs).

Picture this, Nong Khai-Bkk, one of the flattest stretches of line you'll find anywhere. The line in place covers a flat journey 90% of the section, so that is not a problem.

In my previous post I mentioned about the track being nearly always within a short distance from the A2 highway. If this is the route to be taken? and the land does not have to be aquired from other bodies.

The roads leading up to the line from the east HAVE to cross. No elevation needed to the line (only under and over.) (do you elevate 650 kilomet) Look at the road map on the entire stretch--there are a thousand roads or more. expence and time to do this. Do you elevate on flat land, and drop into stations already there==Udon-Khon Khen=Korat ?????

If it is of any use to your discussion it is estimated that of the total distance of 650 km, around 56 km will be elevated. The remainder at grade I assume though a new 10km (?) tunnel is required before Korat through Dong Phraya Yen.

Yes, it will use the current SRT line/land (right of way) but reportedly some land aquisition is required at various locations.

[ginjag]

Are you seriously telling me/us that all highspeed track in Asia is elevated?

I don't have any figures for the Chinese system, but the Seoul - Busan High Speed Rail is 411km of which only 119km is at-grade (ground level) the rest is either elevated or in tunnels.

It is essential to keep obstructions (noodle carts, animals, vehicles, pedestrians) off the track and the easiest means is to elevate it either on concrete structures or with steep-sided embankments (or cuttings where appropriate), this also makes it easy to do away with level-crossings which are a serious accident hotspot. Any sections not elevated must be fenced to a sufficient level to prevent access to the tracks (we're not talking 3 strands of barbed wire here), this fencing must of course be maintained (with the ongoing costs).

Picture this, Nong Khai-Bkk, one of the flattest stretches of line you'll find anywhere. The line in place covers a flat journey 90% of the section, so that is not a problem.

In my previous post I mentioned about the track being nearly always within a short distance from the A2 highway. If this is the route to be taken? and the land does not have to be aquired from other bodies.

The roads leading up to the line from the east HAVE to cross. No elevation needed to the line (only under and over.) (do you elevate 650 kilomet) Look at the road map on the entire stretch--there are a thousand roads or more. expence and time to do this. Do you elevate on flat land, and drop into stations already there==Udon-Khon Khen=Korat ?????

If it is of any use to your discussion it is estimated that of the total distance of 650 km, around 56 km will be elevated. The remainder at grade I assume though a new 10km (?) tunnel is required before Korat through Dong Phraya Yen.

Yes, it will use the current SRT line/land (right of way) but reportedly some land aquisition is required at various locations.

This line is there and run offs are there ==o.k. is the said line being taken up ??? if they are to lay a new line down(wider gauge---the other line could therefore be used for existing slower trains, Or am I being stupid again...NO dont say it--I know where your cars parked.

[koratvinnie]

Seemingly, underlying your negativity on this issue is a disposition that it is a waste of money. It may well be. But can you come up some decent arguments beyond the glib? Based on your disposition the new airport would not have been built, neither would most new highways, schools or the new govt complex as some examples.

There are many naysayers on forums who make glib remarks without debating the merits of a issue, discussing some of the pros & cons and who avoid engaging in some analysis. I wont ask you to refrain from posting, It is up to you how you in what manner you wish to post. However, I will invite to be more positive, consider some of the obvious benefits of this project and to take the time to critiquely analyse some of the issues being discussed.

Well said, 'Lakegeneve'. I can't stand the never-ending negativity and cynicism on forums – particularly this one. Where every news story is followed by dozens of hackneyed, cliched, boring "this is Thailand" and "Amazing Thailand!" type comments. Maybe there's a lot to be cynical and negative about, but, as you say, the negative comments are rarely supported by an explanation or argument supporting the cynical position – just scattergun negativity. Thank you for your well-written and well-informed posts, 'Lakegeneve'.

[tombkk]

Think of it as one leg of a Shanghai to Singapore line.

Correct.

I was surprised to see the check-in for trains to Hong Kong at Shanghai's main railways station. I leanred that it's a high-speed train and apparently successfully competes with the flights.

I thought they were still building the high speed train link in Hong Kong. So if they're selling tickets, you might have to change train at the border, and switch to a slow train (for the time-being at least).

Unlike the bits that are already finished in China, the Hong Kong section had to get past planning meetings, proper compensation to people that have to move, etc. Similar to the Channel Tunnel rail link in the UK. The French side was built when the tunnel opened. The UK side got finished many years later. (Maybe the UK should do as France does - and compulsory purchases of land should be at 150% of value, not at market values just).

I don't know. I only saw the Shanghai side. And when I left Shanghai, someone at the airport told me that the train to Hong Kong is actually quite popular.

[tombkk]

It certainly won't stop in "most" Isaan provinces as one poster suggested because most Isaan provinces still don't have ANY rail service, and it's been over 100 years since the first tracks were laid in Thailand. Of the 19 Isaan provinces (20 if you count Bueng Kan) only eight have rail service: Korat, Khon Kaen, Udon, Nong Khai, Buriram, Surin, Sisaket and Ubon. Personally I'd rather see 'snail rail' introduced to every Isaan province than this high-speed link for a few. It's always struck me how the cheapest form of public transport isn't available to millions of the poorest Thais.

I think this rail project is not for the poorest of Thais, but for Chinese exports. Yunnan Province is landlocked, you see.

I understand that. What I'm saying is, given the choice (and I know no such choice exists) I would prefer to see a rail service, however slow, extended to all Isaan provinces as opposed to a high speed rail link which, according to many of the posts on here, mainly seems to be for the benefit of the Chinese. Does it not strike you as remarkable that it's now 111 years since Korat railway station opened and yet eleven of the nineteen Isaan provinces have never had any rail service?

Sure. But that's a completely different discussion.

[tombkk]

You snob I only had Triang....... This line runs parrallel with the Highway 2 all the way. imagine the hundreds of link roads crossing this line from the EAST side to join the A2. They will have to install gates/barriers, auto'''' wake the man up in his little box and give him a pension. What will the lady do with her washing, she will have to be an olympic sprinter to get the clothes in before the flying scotsman arrives,

HSR tracks are elevated in Asia, as far as I know. At least, I haven't seen any on ground level. I you have, please let us all know.

Is Japan part of Asia? I seem to recall the Shinkansen tracks are at ground level in many parts of Japan...

OK, you win. I meant to say: "Mainland Asia". I didn't say that this applies for HSR in general, as they are often on ground level in Europe as well.

[Sabre]

Rumor has it that Singapore has already made sure such a canal will never happen ...

Nothing to do with Singapore. The Southern Thailand Canal has been scrapped because it does not make any economic sense. However, this has nothing to do with the ASEAN rail networks, whihc are going ahead.

It seems China may disagree with you ... some interesting reading here ... http://www.pittsburg...b/s_307155.html ... but yeah, not really on topic...

Not really on topic, and the article linked dates back to 2005. My information is from a concerned Thai government official based in the Thai OTP, and as of last year. I am sure it has been in the news since, but I'm too lazy to google right now.

OK you convinced me ... The political situation in Thailand probably doesn't help either ...

[Bagwan]

Given the revelations from China about corruption in the railway world we may come to some conclusions about the tracks planned to be built through Thailand. No wonder that the politicos are all for it.

[Igor]

I would bet that the whole route is done in 10 years or less, if the Chinese have their way.

Heck, bring in enough coolies and it could be done in under five years!

Meantime, I'd like to see the definition of high speed. I don't think the terrain is really suitable for a bullet train. Would it be better to upgrade the current tracks and trains? Maybe add some express trains that don't stop at every vendor's home?

Oh, wait. Improvements are dull and sleep inducing. All bright and new and laden with troubles (just look at Swampy) is the way to go.

[Lakegeneve]

I would bet that the whole route is done in 10 years or less, if the Chinese have their way.

Heck, bring in enough coolies and it could be done in under five years!

Meantime, I'd like to see the definition of high speed. I don't think the terrain is really suitable for a bullet train. Would it be better to upgrade the current tracks and trains? Maybe add some express trains that don't stop at every vendor's home?

Oh, wait. Improvements are dull and sleep inducing. All bright and new and laden with troubles (just look at Swampy) is the way to go.

HS was previosuly regarded as allowing operating speeds over 200kmh but these days for passenger lines 250kmh is considered the absolute minimum and in most places higher considering that for some HS networks 300-330kmh is the norm. I understand this line would be built for 250kmh.

As mentioned before, the network has been run into the ground with no real capital works and improvements for the last 5 decades. Only 60% of locomotives work due ot a lack of new rolling stock and pare parts, there are 3000 accidents a year (most minor that you don't hear about) as the network has a crossing on average, every 2 km. The SRT has been neglected, poorly managed and abused (for example, it owns the Chatujuck market land which is leased to the BMA for only B24m a year! Now the SRT does not want to renew the lease so that is can pocket the estimate B1 billion+ the BMA currently earns from the market.)

The SRT is currently implementing a 30 year program to duplicate the network (4,346 kilometres of track, 93% of it single line), then standardise it and then electrify it. Rather than undertaking all three programs in one, coordinated process - with transition dual gauge routes- and saving money in the long term, the SRT plans to implement all 3 programs seperately. The first phase of rebuiling and duplicating lines would still only bring 100-120kmh av speeds on the network from the current 60-80kmh - in some places speeds now are actually slower than 80yrs ago! The govt last year approved B170billion through to 2014 to purchase new rolling stock, build flyovers, improve track & signalling etc, etc. All of this is playing catch up for the last 5 decades of neglect.

More recently in 2010, as the current govt said they wanted to modernise the network quickly, (the BJT love transport projects to inflate their wallets and electoral appeal), the OTP (MOT) & SRT formulated a 14 year plan to build high speed lines as the below map indicates. A total of 3,039km of rail to 2024 with three stages;

"The first phase of development from 2010-2014 covers 767km of tracks for 120km-per-hour trains. Among the proposed routes are Bangkok-Khon Kaen, Bangkok-Nakhon Sawan, Bangkok-Rayong and Bangkok-Hua Hin.

In the second stage from 2015-2019, 1,025km of rail will be built on longer routes for high-speed trains travelling at 120-250kph.

In the third and last stage from 2020-2024, 1,247km of tracks will be added."

No one expected that this would be achieved in the time frame but even if half of it was built it would represent a sigificant improvement.

Cabinet in principle subsequently approved proceeding ahead with this plan and approved the Rayong HS line as the first line - still subject to an EIA.

Whilst this was taking place, China finalised with Laos that they would fund and build a high speed line through Laos to facilitate trade from SW China and as part of opening up western china. (Laos then cancelled the 9km ext of the from the current 3km from the Friendship bridge.Thailand was going to fund line ). China then approached Thailand offered to loan money and expertise to build a NE HS line and a southern HS line obviously to then go to Malaysia & Singapore.

(As an aside there has been a program auspiced by the UN through the regional office in Bangkok (UNESCAP) for the last 10 yrs to encourage states to build a Trans-Asia rail network, 114 000 km of rail routes across 28 countries. Essentially linking up various central and SE asian countries. However, not much has occured at the SE asian end with most new lines being built in central asia. The ASEAN process mentioned in other posts above is the attempt to implement this plan).

Thus, China will fund the NE and South lines and Thailand, the East and North lines. The Chinese wants to move quickly but there are requirements in Thai law regarding the China & Thai mix of the holding company which will build and run the line, obviously it needs to be Thai majority, which are currently delaying final approval. The Abhisit govt is pushing ahead with the eastern line (using the new Makkasan station & airport line) and that may gain final approval later this year assuming the govt is re-elected.

Had the SRT not been neglected and allowed to run down for so many decades, I would agree with you regarding improving the network gradually and incrementally. However, even if all of the non- HS plans were implemented in the next 20 years it will probably still only bring the network to a point where it should have been in the late 90s had it been funded appropriately (remember 100-120 av speeds when complete). The result, a network in 2030 would only be where it should have been in the 90s!

Thus, the current plans to moderise and build the basis of a HS network offers the opportunity to achieve a generational upgrade in a relatively short space of time. The projects will have problems, there will be corruption, delays & disappointments as with any other major project in Thailand. However, it is a required infastructure project for Thailands economic future with many social, health and environmental gains which do not come with wasting money on new, expensive intercity highways (the cost of which no one ever seems to question though they are generally more costly per km than a railway ).

Edited March 25, 2011 by Lakegeneve

[Lakegeneve]

I am sorry I didn't read all of your reply. Did you answer my question?

jb1

Sorry but I didn't know that you had any relevent, lucid questions. I thought that you were just posting nonsensical assertions.

We all know that Thailand does in fact already have mass transport lines covering the city.

jb1

[jimbeam1]

I am sorry I didn't read all of your reply. Did you answer my question?

jb1

Sorry but I didn't know that you had any relevent, lucid questions. I thought that you were just posting nonsensical assertions.

We all know that Thailand does in fact already have mass transport lines covering the city.

jb1

Oh dear no one listening to your waffle anymore.

Well answer my question.

jb1

[tombkk]

I would bet that the whole route is done in 10 years or less, if the Chinese have their way.

Heck, bring in enough coolies and it could be done in under five years!

Meantime, I'd like to see the definition of high speed. I don't think the terrain is really suitable for a bullet train. Would it be better to upgrade the current tracks and trains? Maybe add some express trains that don't stop at every vendor's home?

Oh, wait. Improvements are dull and sleep inducing. All bright and new and laden with troubles (just look at Swampy) is the way to go.

While lakegeneva already replied to your posting, it is really cheaper to build a new system for the HS trains rather than trying to improve the existing tracks to accommodate for HS trains. There are different concepts in the planning department of OTP, which employs some well-educated and really smart people who know their stuff.

I understand that final decisions will be made by politicians, though. Which does not exclude that some smart decisions have already been made.

[Bagwan]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12828057

The future?

[ginjag]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...acific-12828057

The future?

I do hope the Chinese get their signaling system sorted before they build here, World news tells us many heads to roll in China following the recent incident.

[Beetlejuice]

The new Bangkok-Nong Khai, 25 mph bullet train.

[dcutman]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...acific-12828057

The future?

I do hope the Chinese get their signaling system sorted before they build here, World news tells us many heads to roll in China following the recent incident.

One would think, they would fix these problems. However there are two very corrupt governments and many many more construction companies getting together on this. It is a scarry thought with all the kilometers of track to be built. It only take's a small piece, that sombody negotiated a under the table payment on, to cause a total disaster.

Scares the hell out of me.

Edited July 29, 2011 by dcutman

[apetley]

Chinese premier on BBC news right now saying that if it was management problem or equipment failure then they would sort it out. Seems they have stopped using the lightening strike theory now.

[Ricardo]

The new Bangkok-Nong Khai, 25 mph bullet train.

The return of steam-power to Thailand's railways might actually benefit tourism ?

And use Thai-sourced coal/wood as fuel, or perhaps even 100% bio-fuel, rather than (party imported) diesel-fuel ? Thailand might then become the 'Hub of Green Trains' ! I would be well-chuffed ! Choo-Choo !!

[Nacho]

I hope that the long term plan would include a Bangkok to Chiang Mai path. Given that Chiang Mai is a top tourist location for Thailand - #2 best place to visit in the world - it would seem to be short-sighted to not consider it in any long term planning.

Had a friend from The Netherlands visiting in Bangkok. She wanted to come up but didn't want to fly - and wasn't up to a train trip given the time involved. A great high-speed train would be a great tourist draw. (Especially if cheaper than air-fare.)

But I'm a realist: doubt if Burma would help fund that line.

I wouldn't count on Burma. I read an article about Asian nations trying to develop the infrustructure in South East Asia. Every country completed their projects while Burma's never even got started. Not much of a suprise really.

http://lexens.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10&Itemid=12

[who]

. But where do most of Bangkok's elite originally come from.

jb1

---- I give up. Where do Bangkok's elite come from. (my wild guess would be: BANGKOK ----

[who]

.

---- Beware of China building roads in your direction ! ----

[tw25rw]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...acific-12828057

The future?

I do hope the Chinese get their signaling system sorted before they build here, World news tells us many heads to roll in China following the recent incident.

One would think, they would fix these problems. However there are two very corrupt governments and many many more construction companies getting together on this. It is a scarry thought with all the kilometers of track to be built. It only take's a small piece, that sombody negotiated a under the table payment on, to cause a total disaster.

Scares the hell out of me.

The trouble is that they use cheap unskilled labour and build to a tight schedule while completely disregarding the input of the specialist rail engineers that come in from overseas to oversee the installations of these expensive track systems. Any time these foreign specialists try to intervene, the Chinese management dismiss them and insist on going directly to the labourers to urge them to work faster even if it means an amateurish job.

These accidents will keep on happening, as will enforced speed restrictions.