Thai Govt's Train Project ' Will Only Benefit The Rich'

[rametindallas]

It will benefit my company as well, so I can't complain ( and I ain't rich).

It will hurt my company. Fun game when you can say anything and don't have to explain anything, no?

[rametindallas]

I'm starting a pool, How Long Will it Take to Build the HSR?

I'm putting 500b on 20 years.

And they will spend 8 trillion, not 2 trillion, and the train will only extend half way from BKK to Chang Mai. The Thai's will build massive concourses that can hold thousands of people with only 1 garbage can 2 squat toliets and 10 turnstiles and a lot of stairs and an occasional escalator (moving stairs), and no place to sit while you wait for the HSR that is being delayed because the BiB have decided that they can better run the HSR by radio.

I'm betting the money runs out before they buy the first train.

[rubl]

I'm not betting as that's against forum rules :-)

I'm just being my patient and optimistic self and assume I may see a High-speed rail link before I'm turning 100. Even if I have to move to France or China :-)

[dcutman]

I'm not betting as that's against forum rules :-)

I'm just being my patient and optimistic self and assume I may see a High-speed rail link before I'm turning 100. Even if I have to move to France or China :-)

If you are sensitive to pollution and you are considering being a passenger, France my be your safest option.

[Lakegeneve]

Why was it going to take 30 years - because of lack of funding. With dual and upgraded tracking (and even electrification, eventually) there will be a large

increase in system speed. Introduction of a few high speed tilt train expresses could make available fast services.

But no, go HSR at billions more, to benefit those rich enough to afford it and who don't like flying, and the rest of the population can carry the ever-increasing debt for generations.

Remember this:

Govt Mulls Pre-Packed Lunch Boxes For High Speed Trains; Sees New Market For Upscale Travelers

I can post all sorts of silly puff piece articles which are irrelevant This is Thailand after all, how many silly statements from politicians in govt news agency releases do you really want to read? I could post enough to keep you busy for a few hours. Please deal with the substantive issues and not fluffy wrapping. Not quite sure how linking such an article is meant to make us take you more seriously?

Yes, the 30 year timeframe was primarily due to funding - in fact the MOT in 2009 asked for 1 trillion baht over 10 years to achieve the same outcome. The Dems gave the SRT 176 billion in Dec 2010 for 43 projects over 5 years (excluding HSR). PT has continued that funding. Seemingly you would have been happy with the MOT 1 trillion baht being funded just because it related to the existing network?

However in respect of the 30 year time frame, you also have to take into account that it generall also takes longer to upgrade an existing operational line than is does to build a completely new one. Upgrades are much slower when you have operational trains. (Obviously, specific elements specific for each project determine exact comparisons).

HSR narrow gauge lines even with tilt trains such as the Rocky one in Queensland or the Virgin ones in the UK only do a max of around 160kph. Narrow gauge limits operational speed in a HSR context. The Japanese example is a good one, a narrow gauge country built a standard gauge HSR network (with loads of corruption as well!).

Experience has shown that a 3hr HSR rial journey competes with air travel. Whether one looks at the examples of Paris-Lyon, Madrid to Barca or Tokyo to Osaka (all of which I have personally traveled) they have the overwhelming pax numbers over air. A 220-250kph max HSR standard line to Chaing Mai, NE Isan and Hat Yai gets is close to the 3 hr window. Narrow gauge does not.

You mention debt. The SRT is already some 85 billion in debt. The SRT operational losses for the last 6 years have been;

2007: 8 billion

2008: 10.2 billion

2009: 11.7 billion

2010: 12.4 billion

2011: 13+ billion (TBC)

2012: unavailbale as yet

Taxpayers are currently heavily burdened by an organisation that is a dysfunctional mess and has been beaten and flogged for the last few decades. Only 60% of the SRTs loco are operational, over 50% of its rolling stock is over 40 years old. Only just over 85% of the 4,400km network is double tracked. The Namtok line is so bad that on average is suffers a derailment at least once a week!

The SRT registers some 3000 accidents a year (most minor). However, in the last 6 years accidents just at rail crossings have killed 297 people and injured 979 people! Most of those accidents occur due to idiot Somchai not looking or thinking that he can beat the train but the newtowrk has nearly 2000 official crossings - that is almost a crossing every 2km of track! - and some 562 unauthorised crossings (ie. local make one to cut down distance). A new HSR network will have none!

Your own figures confirm that SRT badly needs a re-organisation, and a huge investment to upgrade its services. Yes, it runs at a loss, as do most railways, but this is compensated by the benefits to the public.

I still see no reason to build at huge expense, a whole new debt-incurring service for the benefit of a very few who have the alternative of air travel. Of those who will carry that debt and losses, the vast majority will never use it because the price of a ticket far outweighs the benefit of saving an hour or two.

"Only 160km/h" could be achieved, compared to the current 50-60 - I call that a vast improvement, and one that will apply (to a lesser extent) to freight as well as passenger services.

Have you read the link re the problems in China? do you think that they couldn't happen here?

Firstly, you are selectively using info and mixing it up to support your blanket uniformed opposition. Again, please do some research and use facts - not out of context. You can argue your assertion all you want, that is good. However, being lazy and mixing up figures out of context is just poor form.

I have agreed with some of statements and I explained why that is. With those statements that I disagree with or I believe are incorrect, I have taken the time to provide some facts and figures to support a my view and explain why your those assertions are incorrect. You should at least try to give the appearance of making an effort given your strongs views on the matter.

1) "Yes, it runs at a loss, as do most railways, but this is compensated by the benefits to the public."

The SRT doesn't just run at a loss, it bleeds money. Yes I agree with you that a railway need not make a profit as there are other benefits to the public (which I mentioned in my first post but which you called "airy-fairy ephemeral benefits"). However, we are talking huge sums here, nearly US$15billion in debt, losing over US$400m a year and huge unfunded pension liabilities! Yet on the one hand you think the SRT losing money like this is ok but a new HSR network that may lose money for a number of years as it builds a pax base is not?!? No other benefits to the public??? Seems like a patent contradiction in your statements.

2) "Of those who will carry that debt and losses, the vast majority will never use it because the price of a ticket far outweighs the benefit of saving an hour or two.".

The vast majority DON"T currently use the railways! It is for the homeless, the rural and the inner city poor, the lower middle class, and rail buffs. Plus backpacking tourists. The 3rd class free program of the last 4 years basically treats the very poor like cattle.

You seem to have the weird idea that only the rich will use a HSR network. This is a very similar argument that existed in the first few years of the BTS when there was near empty trains. (How foolish those comments seem now). Yet you ignore the patent demographic changes in the country of a growing middle class which is upwardly mobile and has purchasing power (much of it debt driven - that's Thaksinomics for you!) Also, with the huge growth in tourism projected there is significant pax potential there.

The rich will still mainly fly. Not going to waste time and their image anymore than they catch the BTS or MRT to save time compared with driving in their Mercedes All about image with that lot. The majority of train pax will be the middle class, upper and lower. Ticket prices projections are still lower than most LCC airfares. People will pay an extra premium to have significant time savings compared with a bus or van on a congested highway.

3) ""Only 160km/h" could be achieved, compared to the current 50-60 - I call that a vast improvement,"

You either completely missed the point or intentionally misrepresented info. The current ave speeds are 50-60km/h. Even after track upgrades and dual tracking it will only be 90-100km/h!! Not 160km/h! Please don't intentionally misrepresent facts.

I explained that 160km/h is the max for any HSR narrow gauge network in the world (you originally referred to tilt trains). Some future small sections of narrow gauge network will be built for a higher operating speed- perhaps 120-140km/h- but not the whole network! I also explained the universally accepted time window for HSR rail to be competitive with air travel of the 3 hr journey window. Standard gauge offers this, narrow gauge does not. A narrow gauge network will probably cost nearly just as much yet will not be as competative journey time wise and thus pax numbers would not be as high as it won't compete with the airlines.

And you completely ignored the fact that in 2009 the MOT wanted 1 trillion baht to undertake the complete upgrade of the whole narrow gauge network - dual tracking, systems and signalling, electrification and new rolling stock. How much is the new HSR standard gauge network currently costed at - 900 billion! Am I to assume that you were fine with the debt levels of the 1 trillion for the MOT costed upgrade but you are not fine with the 900 billion of a new HSR network?!? You really are all over the place with you contradictory views.

4) "Have you read the link re the problems in China? do you think that they couldn't happen here?"

Yes I do know a bit about Chinas HSR network development. However, what the heck are you referring to??? Could you at least be specific to expand on your sentence? Is this the way you attempt to support your concerns, with unclear generalised statements referring to nothing? What is the unstated relevance?

I don't know if you mean the billions lost in corruption, the fact that the MOR was abolished and replaced by the CRC, the fact that there was a major accident in 2011, that snowstorms which disrupted services every winter, that people were displaced by building new lines, that an old lady had a heart attack on a HSR train??? What exactly? Any major, rapid expansion of a modern transport system is going to have problems particularly in a highly corrupt, undemocratic and unaccountable political paradigm.

One could make a comparative study of the rapid building of the US highway system in the 50s and see that it was not free of corruption, loss of life and not without problems. What one must say about the Chinese HSR network is that it is already over 10 500km long, will be 16 000km by 2020 and carrying an estimated 5 billion pax a year! While the US still piss farts around trying to build the 1st stage of a small HSR line, the Chinese have invested heavily in efficient, durable and long term transport solutions. However, I wouldn't personally hold the Chinese up as example of how to build a network in Thailand.

We get that you don't think Thailand needs the much delayed & long proposed HSR network. You'd probably argue against expanding the metro network in BKK as well given the debt that will be incurred. Please in your fervent opposition do try to use facts in context and build a supporting argument - not wafer thin general statements and contradictory views .

In my 1st response to you I agreed with some of you concerns, stated that there are many aspects of such a project which require critical debate - I especially mentioned the funding model. However, as yet you have failed to demonstrate a cohesive, factual response to support your concerns. You really have not even addressed most of the information I have posted instead preferring to ignore it. There are plenty of sheep already in this country flocking to the easy, lazy view of uninformed criticism for the sake of being negative. (I jump on that bandwagon myself at times but try to check it).

[OzMick]

Your own figures confirm that SRT badly needs a re-organisation, and a huge investment to upgrade its services. Yes, it runs at a loss, as do most railways, but this is compensated by the benefits to the public.

I still see no reason to build at huge expense, a whole new debt-incurring service for the benefit of a very few who have the alternative of air travel. Of those who will carry that debt and losses, the vast majority will never use it because the price of a ticket far outweighs the benefit of saving an hour or two.

"Only 160km/h" could be achieved, compared to the current 50-60 - I call that a vast improvement, and one that will apply (to a lesser extent) to freight as well as passenger services.

Have you read the link re the problems in China? do you think that they couldn't happen here?

Firstly, you are selectively using info and mixing it up to support your blanket uniformed opposition. Again, please do some research and use facts - not out of context. You can argue your assertion all you want, that is good. However, being lazy and mixing up figures out of context is just poor form.

I have agreed with some of statements and I explained why that is. With those statements that I disagree with or I believe are incorrect, I have taken the time to provide some facts and figures to support a my view and explain why your those assertions are incorrect. You should at least try to give the appearance of making an effort given your strongs views on the matter.

1) "Yes, it runs at a loss, as do most railways, but this is compensated by the benefits to the public."

The SRT doesn't just run at a loss, it bleeds money. Yes I agree with you that a railway need not make a profit as there are other benefits to the public (which I mentioned in my first post but which you called "airy-fairy ephemeral benefits"). However, we are talking huge sums here, nearly US$15billion in debt, losing over US$400m a year and huge unfunded pension liabilities! Yet on the one hand you think the SRT losing money like this is ok but a new HSR network that may lose money for a number of years as it builds a pax base is not?!? No other benefits to the public??? Seems like a patent contradiction in your statements.

2) "Of those who will carry that debt and losses, the vast majority will never use it because the price of a ticket far outweighs the benefit of saving an hour or two.".

The vast majority DON"T currently use the railways! It is for the homeless, the rural and the inner city poor, the lower middle class, and rail buffs. Plus backpacking tourists. The 3rd class free program of the last 4 years basically treats the very poor like cattle.

You seem to have the weird idea that only the rich will use a HSR network. This is a very similar argument that existed in the first few years of the BTS when there was near empty trains. (How foolish those comments seem now). Yet you ignore the patent demographic changes in the country of a growing middle class which is upwardly mobile and has purchasing power (much of it debt driven - that's Thaksinomics for you!) Also, with the huge growth in tourism projected there is significant pax potential there.

The rich will still mainly fly. Not going to waste time and their image anymore than they catch the BTS or MRT to save time compared with driving in their Mercedes All about image with that lot. The majority of train pax will be the middle class, upper and lower. Ticket prices projections are still lower than most LCC airfares. People will pay an extra premium to have significant time savings compared with a bus or van on a congested highway.

3) ""Only 160km/h" could be achieved, compared to the current 50-60 - I call that a vast improvement,"

You either completely missed the point or intentionally misrepresented info. The current ave speeds are 50-60km/h. Even after track upgrades and dual tracking it will only be 90-100km/h!! Not 160km/h! Please don't intentionally misrepresent facts.

I explained that 160km/h is the max for any HSR narrow gauge network in the world (you originally referred to tilt trains). Some future small sections of narrow gauge network will be built for a higher operating speed- perhaps 120-140km/h- but not the whole network! I also explained the universally accepted time window for HSR rail to be competitive with air travel of the 3 hr journey window. Standard gauge offers this, narrow gauge does not. A narrow gauge network will probably cost nearly just as much yet will not be as competative journey time wise and thus pax numbers would not be as high as it won't compete with the airlines.

And you completely ignored the fact that in 2009 the MOT wanted 1 trillion baht to undertake the complete upgrade of the whole narrow gauge network - dual tracking, systems and signalling, electrification and new rolling stock. How much is the new HSR standard gauge network currently costed at - 900 billion! Am I to assume that you were fine with the debt levels of the 1 trillion for the MOT costed upgrade but you are not fine with the 900 billion of a new HSR network?!? You really are all over the place with you contradictory views.

4) "Have you read the link re the problems in China? do you think that they couldn't happen here?"

Yes I do know a bit about Chinas HSR network development. However, what the heck are you referring to??? Could you at least be specific to expand on your sentence? Is this the way you attempt to support your concerns, with unclear generalised statements referring to nothing? What is the unstated relevance?

I don't know if you mean the billions lost in corruption, the fact that the MOR was abolished and replaced by the CRC, the fact that there was a major accident in 2011, that snowstorms which disrupted services every winter, that people were displaced by building new lines, that an old lady had a heart attack on a HSR train??? What exactly? Any major, rapid expansion of a modern transport system is going to have problems particularly in a highly corrupt, undemocratic and unaccountable political paradigm.

One could make a comparative study of the rapid building of the US highway system in the 50s and see that it was not free of corruption, loss of life and not without problems. What one must say about the Chinese HSR network is that it is already over 10 500km long, will be 16 000km by 2020 and carrying an estimated 5 billion pax a year! While the US still piss farts around trying to build the 1st stage of a small HSR line, the Chinese have invested heavily in efficient, durable and long term transport solutions. However, I wouldn't personally hold the Chinese up as example of how to build a network in Thailand.

We get that you don't think Thailand needs the much delayed & long proposed HSR network. You'd probably argue against expanding the metro network in BKK as well given the debt that will be incurred. Please in your fervent opposition do try to use facts in context and build a supporting argument - not wafer thin general statements and contradictory views .

In my 1st response to you I agreed with some of you concerns, stated that there are many aspects of such a project which require critical debate - I especially mentioned the funding model. However, as yet you have failed to demonstrate a cohesive, factual response to support your concerns. You really have not even addressed most of the information I have posted instead preferring to ignore it. There are plenty of sheep already in this country flocking to the easy, lazy view of uninformed criticism for the sake of being negative. (I jump on that bandwagon myself at times but try to check it).

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

[Lakegeneve]

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

As an interested poster in this subject I trust that you read the two articles in the other english language paper yesterday. Both ask very good and legitimate questions. As I have previously said, there are some queries to discuss about the plans.

1) Problems that can be solved by putting in a huge amount of funds regardless of HSR - again 1 trillion according to the MOT! 5 decades of neglect means it needs a huge amount of money and to be restructured.

2) These two points are self evident and superfluous. You seem to have the deluded ideas that it is ok for the poor to be treated like cattle now and that only the rich will use HSR - no middle ground for you. There really seems to be no reality in your views about what pax will use a HSR network.

3) NO! Again you don't want to deal with facts as it doesn't suit your wish washy arguments. Firstly, an upgrade brings the network to a 1950s/60s standard of 90-100 km/h operation. Again, the whole current narrow gauge network will NOT be built to a 160 km/h standard. Get it? It is not happening albeit for a few sections. So purchase a few of your "higher speed express" rolling stock to perhaps run at 120-130 km/h on ave. Wow, we may be coming into an early 70s speed there! You seemingly want the SRT to receive a huge amount of funds to operate to at a 70s speed from the 3rd decade of the 21st century.

I dealt with the time issue for competition with air AND with the Bus issue. Most bus pax currently suffers long journey times and delays due to congestion. I the case of vans they are also exposed to a high accident rate. Many of the growing middle class will pay an extra premium if it means shaving hrs off a journey. The Bus companies know HSR rail will kill some of them which is why the previous attempt to build a HSR line to Korat 8 yrs ago was killed off by the infamous Madam who owns the largest bus company in Korat.

Using Korat as an example, currently buses depart MO Chit every 15 mins to Korat. The journey takes 3.5 hrs and costs between 180-220 baht for 1st class. A 220km HSR train could do it in 75-90 mins max - that is a 2 hrs saving. Are you seriously going to tell everyone that a business person or middle class person doing a day trip to Korat would not pay to save that time?? Especially with future road congestion problems? Everyone is buying all those new vehicles but finding out it doesn't give them the time freedom they desire. We can't keep building roads without other alternatives.

Experience everywhere else in the world gives a clear answer. HSR won't be for everyone but it will attract the pax. You seem to have this antiquated idea about "MOST" Thais without giving much thought to the future. Again, check out the rapidly changing socio-economic demographics.

4) Again, nothing specific. That post was real eye opener for you but yet again you don't state what your exact concern is nor why it is relevant to Thailand's HSR network??? DB had a major crash with their great ICE killing over 100 people in 98 - still the worlds deadliest HSR accident!!! Are meant to have stopped taking German trains for the last 15 years??

Edited April 5, 2013 by Lakegeneve

[thaicbr]

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

As an interested poster in this subject I trust that you read the two articles in the other english language paper yesterday. Both ask very good and legitimate questions. As I have previously said, there are some queries to discuss about the plans.

1) Problems that can be solved by putting in a huge amount of funds regardless of HSR - again 1 trillion according to the MOT! 5 decades of neglect means it needs a huge amount of money and to be restructured.

2) These two points are self evident and superfluous. You seem to have the deluded ideas that it is ok for the poor to be treated like cattle now and that only the rich will use HSR - no middle ground for you. There really seems to be no reality in your views about what pax will use a HSR network.

3) NO! Again you don't want to deal with facts as it doesn't suit your wish washy arguments. Firstly, an upgrade brings the network to a 1950s/60s standard of 90-100 km/h operation. Again, the whole current narrow gauge network will NOT be built to a 160 km/h standard. Get it? It is not happening albeit for a few sections. So purchase a few of your "higher speed express" rolling stock to perhaps run at 120-130 km/h on ave. Wow, we may be coming into an early 70s speed there! You seemingly want the SRT to receive a huge amount of funds to operate to at a 70s speed from the 3rd decade of the 21st century.

I dealt with the time issue for competition with air AND with the Bus issue. Most bus pax currently suffers long journey times and delays due to congestion. I the case of vans they are also exposed to a high accident rate. Many of the growing middle class will pay an extra premium if it means shaving hrs off a journey. The Bus companies know HSR rail will kill some of them which is why the previous attempt to build a HSR line to Korat 8 yrs ago was killed off by the infamous Madam who owns the largest bus company in Korat.

Using Korat as an example, currently buses depart MO Chit every 15 mins to Korat. The journey takes 3.5 hrs and costs between 180-220 baht for 1st class. A 220km HSR train could do it in 75-90 mins max - that is a 2 hrs saving. Are you seriously going to tell everyone that a business person or middle class person doing a day trip to Korat would not pay to save that time?? Especially with future road congestion problems? Everyone is buying all those new vehicles but finding out it doesn't give them the time freedom they desire. We can't keep building roads without other alternatives.

Experience everywhere else in the world gives a clear answer. HSR won't be for everyone but it will attract the pax. You seem to have this antiquated idea about "MOST" Thais without giving much thought to the future. Again, check out the rapidly changing socio-economic demographics.

4) Again, nothing specific. That post was real eye opener for you but yet again you don't state what your exact concern is nor why it is relevant to Thailand's HSR network??? DB had a major crash with their great ICE killing over 100 people in 98 - still the worlds deadliest HSR accident!!! Are meant to have stopped taking German trains for the last 15 years??

Can I ask a question so I can get perspective on the issue.

What speeds do the trains run in the UK?

What track do they have?

from reading your post's there seems to be 2 types of HSR. One up to about 160km and another ultra high speed bullet train up to 300km.

Which is Thailand contemplating because I'm seeing different figures.

Thanks Al

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[dcutman]

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

As an interested poster in this subject I trust that you read the two articles in the other english language paper yesterday. Both ask very good and legitimate questions. As I have previously said, there are some queries to discuss about the plans.

1) Problems that can be solved by putting in a huge amount of funds regardless of HSR - again 1 trillion according to the MOT! 5 decades of neglect means it needs a huge amount of money and to be restructured.

2) These two points are self evident and superfluous. You seem to have the deluded ideas that it is ok for the poor to be treated like cattle now and that only the rich will use HSR - no middle ground for you. There really seems to be no reality in your views about what pax will use a HSR network.

3) NO! Again you don't want to deal with facts as it doesn't suit your wish washy arguments. Firstly, an upgrade brings the network to a 1950s/60s standard of 90-100 km/h operation. Again, the whole current narrow gauge network will NOT be built to a 160 km/h standard. Get it? It is not happening albeit for a few sections. So purchase a few of your "higher speed express" rolling stock to perhaps run at 120-130 km/h on ave. Wow, we may be coming into an early 70s speed there! You seemingly want the SRT to receive a huge amount of funds to operate to at a 70s speed from the 3rd decade of the 21st century.

I dealt with the time issue for competition with air AND with the Bus issue. Most bus pax currently suffers long journey times and delays due to congestion. I the case of vans they are also exposed to a high accident rate. Many of the growing middle class will pay an extra premium if it means shaving hrs off a journey. The Bus companies know HSR rail will kill some of them which is why the previous attempt to build a HSR line to Korat 8 yrs ago was killed off by the infamous Madam who owns the largest bus company in Korat.

Using Korat as an example, currently buses depart MO Chit every 15 mins to Korat. The journey takes 3.5 hrs and costs between 180-220 baht for 1st class. A 220km HSR train could do it in 75-90 mins max - that is a 2 hrs saving. Are you seriously going to tell everyone that a business person or middle class person doing a day trip to Korat would not pay to save that time?? Especially with future road congestion problems? Everyone is buying all those new vehicles but finding out it doesn't give them the time freedom they desire. We can't keep building roads without other alternatives.

Experience everywhere else in the world gives a clear answer. HSR won't be for everyone but it will attract the pax. You seem to have this antiquated idea about "MOST" Thais without giving much thought to the future. Again, check out the rapidly changing socio-economic demographics.

4) Again, nothing specific. That post was real eye opener for you but yet again you don't state what your exact concern is nor why it is relevant to Thailand's HSR network??? DB had a major crash with their great ICE killing over 100 people in 98 - still the worlds deadliest HSR accident!!! Are meant to have stopped taking German trains for the last 15 years??

Can I ask a question so I can get perspective on the issue.

What speeds do the trains run in the UK?

What track do they have?

from reading your post's there seems to be 2 types of HSR. One up to about 160km and another ultra high speed bullet train up to 300km.

Which is Thailand contemplating because I'm seeing different figures.

Thanks Al

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

That is the main issue. Nobody really knows anything. There is no plan, therefor there can be no study done. Some minister got on Google, typed in, "cost for HSR per Kilometer" added 30% and came up with a figure, as to cost.

If this was such a great idea, and it would do so much for an economy. Why isn't every country investing in this?

Members on TVF have tried to compare Thailand with so many other countries to try and make an argument, for an off budget, urgent need for this project.

Take the China HSR comparison for example. Even though there has been massive corruption, major accidents, shoddy construction, to the point of entire HSR lines have had to be removed and replaced (sound familiar to Thailands past projects). China has 1.3 billion people, with numerous cities of massive populations(well over a million people), and the need to employ the world largest population. Thailand has one large city (over a million) and an unemployment rate (so the government says) under 1%. It also has an infrastructure in place that moves it population and its tourist effectively.

What nobody has considered, is what is this massive spending going to do to an economy that is already overheated (much of it speculation) without a labor force or sound fundamentals to support it? Property prices are skyrocketing and developers are struggling with manpower and materials shortages now. Whats gonna happen if/when this starts? Nobody knows because this govt is not considering anything, but how to enrich themselves.

Edited April 5, 2013 by dcutman

[Thereisnoif]

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

As an interested poster in this subject I trust that you read the two articles in the other english language paper yesterday. Both ask very good and legitimate questions. As I have previously said, there are some queries to discuss about the plans.

1) Problems that can be solved by putting in a huge amount of funds regardless of HSR - again 1 trillion according to the MOT! 5 decades of neglect means it needs a huge amount of money and to be restructured.

2) These two points are self evident and superfluous. You seem to have the deluded ideas that it is ok for the poor to be treated like cattle now and that only the rich will use HSR - no middle ground for you. There really seems to be no reality in your views about what pax will use a HSR network.

3) NO! Again you don't want to deal with facts as it doesn't suit your wish washy arguments. Firstly, an upgrade brings the network to a 1950s/60s standard of 90-100 km/h operation. Again, the whole current narrow gauge network will NOT be built to a 160 km/h standard. Get it? It is not happening albeit for a few sections. So purchase a few of your "higher speed express" rolling stock to perhaps run at 120-130 km/h on ave. Wow, we may be coming into an early 70s speed there! You seemingly want the SRT to receive a huge amount of funds to operate to at a 70s speed from the 3rd decade of the 21st century.

I dealt with the time issue for competition with air AND with the Bus issue. Most bus pax currently suffers long journey times and delays due to congestion. I the case of vans they are also exposed to a high accident rate. Many of the growing middle class will pay an extra premium if it means shaving hrs off a journey. The Bus companies know HSR rail will kill some of them which is why the previous attempt to build a HSR line to Korat 8 yrs ago was killed off by the infamous Madam who owns the largest bus company in Korat.

Using Korat as an example, currently buses depart MO Chit every 15 mins to Korat. The journey takes 3.5 hrs and costs between 180-220 baht for 1st class. A 220km HSR train could do it in 75-90 mins max - that is a 2 hrs saving. Are you seriously going to tell everyone that a business person or middle class person doing a day trip to Korat would not pay to save that time?? Especially with future road congestion problems? Everyone is buying all those new vehicles but finding out it doesn't give them the time freedom they desire. We can't keep building roads without other alternatives.

Experience everywhere else in the world gives a clear answer. HSR won't be for everyone but it will attract the pax. You seem to have this antiquated idea about "MOST" Thais without giving much thought to the future. Again, check out the rapidly changing socio-economic demographics.

4) Again, nothing specific. That post was real eye opener for you but yet again you don't state what your exact concern is nor why it is relevant to Thailand's HSR network??? DB had a major crash with their great ICE killing over 100 people in 98 - still the worlds deadliest HSR accident!!! Are meant to have stopped taking German trains for the last 15 years??

Can I ask a question so I can get perspective on the issue.

What speeds do the trains run in the UK?

What track do they have?

from reading your post's there seems to be 2 types of HSR. One up to about 160km and another ultra high speed bullet train up to 300km.

Which is Thailand contemplating because I'm seeing different figures.

Thanks Al

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

That is the main issue. Nobody really knows anything. There is no plan, therefor there can be no study done. Some minister got on Google, typed in, "cost for HSR per Kilometer" added 30% and came up with a figure, as to cost.

If this was such a great idea, and it would do so much for an economy. Why isn't every country investing in this?

Members on TVF have tried to compare Thailand with so many other countries to try and make an argument, for an off budget, urgent need for this project.

Take the China HSR comparison for example. Even though there has been massive corruption, major accidents, shoddy construction, to the point of entire HSR lines have had to be removed and replaced (sound familiar to Thailands past projects). China has 1.3 billion people, with numerous cities of massive populations(well over a million people), and the need to employ the world largest population. Thailand has one large city (over a million) and an unemployment rate (so the government says) under 1%. It also has an infrastructure in place that moves it population and its tourist effectively.

What nobody has considered, is what is this massive spending going to do to an economy that is already overheated (much of it speculation) without a labor force or sound fundamentals to support it? Property prices are skyrocketing and developers are struggling with manpower and materials shortages now. Whats gonna happen if/when this starts? Nobody knows because this govt is not considering anything, but how to enrich themselves.

An entire HSR line in China being removed and replaced ? <deleted>

[Almera]

Why don't they just say 'This is the money we were going to spend on it, instead of building it we're going to divide x amount between all of us ministers and the such, and then we'll divide x amount into 10,000 equal amounts and draw I.D. card numbers out of a hat and they'll receive that.

5k baht cash gets your ID card number entered twice. 10k for trice.

Everybody would be happy and there'd be less that could/would go wrong.

[dcutman]

1/ The SRT has problems that can be solved. Funding a HSR will NOT make those problems go away. And if you think the the SRT losses are huge, the HSR will be spectacular.

2/The vast majority don't use railways because they are full to capacity on most trips. An upgrade in service and rolling stock would attract even more. And tax revenue belongs as much to the poor as to the rich.

3/ an upgrade of track would allow 90-100 km/h, and not just for passenger services. Purchase of a few higher speed expresses would attain max 160km/h.

Yes I am fine with spending whatever for a network for freight and passengers. I disagree totally with a hugely expensive passenger only service that will be a debt burden for those who can't afford it. The benefits for HSR you mentioned are much less ephemeral when a freight service and local train services are included. And for MOST of the people of Thailand, their rail network doesn't have to compete with planes - they have to compete with BUSES, the alternative transport for MOST Thais.

4/ Earlier in the thread there was a link to Chinese HSR problems (posted by Dcutman??). A real eye-opener for those willing to look. Another poster reports reduced speed on the airport link due to shoddy track work.

I have made no negative comment re the BKK metro system because I rarely use it.

As an interested poster in this subject I trust that you read the two articles in the other english language paper yesterday. Both ask very good and legitimate questions. As I have previously said, there are some queries to discuss about the plans.

1) Problems that can be solved by putting in a huge amount of funds regardless of HSR - again 1 trillion according to the MOT! 5 decades of neglect means it needs a huge amount of money and to be restructured.

2) These two points are self evident and superfluous. You seem to have the deluded ideas that it is ok for the poor to be treated like cattle now and that only the rich will use HSR - no middle ground for you. There really seems to be no reality in your views about what pax will use a HSR network.

3) NO! Again you don't want to deal with facts as it doesn't suit your wish washy arguments. Firstly, an upgrade brings the network to a 1950s/60s standard of 90-100 km/h operation. Again, the whole current narrow gauge network will NOT be built to a 160 km/h standard. Get it? It is not happening albeit for a few sections. So purchase a few of your "higher speed express" rolling stock to perhaps run at 120-130 km/h on ave. Wow, we may be coming into an early 70s speed there! You seemingly want the SRT to receive a huge amount of funds to operate to at a 70s speed from the 3rd decade of the 21st century.

I dealt with the time issue for competition with air AND with the Bus issue. Most bus pax currently suffers long journey times and delays due to congestion. I the case of vans they are also exposed to a high accident rate. Many of the growing middle class will pay an extra premium if it means shaving hrs off a journey. The Bus companies know HSR rail will kill some of them which is why the previous attempt to build a HSR line to Korat 8 yrs ago was killed off by the infamous Madam who owns the largest bus company in Korat.

Using Korat as an example, currently buses depart MO Chit every 15 mins to Korat. The journey takes 3.5 hrs and costs between 180-220 baht for 1st class. A 220km HSR train could do it in 75-90 mins max - that is a 2 hrs saving. Are you seriously going to tell everyone that a business person or middle class person doing a day trip to Korat would not pay to save that time?? Especially with future road congestion problems? Everyone is buying all those new vehicles but finding out it doesn't give them the time freedom they desire. We can't keep building roads without other alternatives.

Experience everywhere else in the world gives a clear answer. HSR won't be for everyone but it will attract the pax. You seem to have this antiquated idea about "MOST" Thais without giving much thought to the future. Again, check out the rapidly changing socio-economic demographics.

4) Again, nothing specific. That post was real eye opener for you but yet again you don't state what your exact concern is nor why it is relevant to Thailand's HSR network??? DB had a major crash with their great ICE killing over 100 people in 98 - still the worlds deadliest HSR accident!!! Are meant to have stopped taking German trains for the last 15 years??

Can I ask a question so I can get perspective on the issue.

What speeds do the trains run in the UK?

What track do they have?

from reading your post's there seems to be 2 types of HSR. One up to about 160km and another ultra high speed bullet train up to 300km.

Which is Thailand contemplating because I'm seeing different figures.

Thanks Al

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

That is the main issue. Nobody really knows anything. There is no plan, therefor there can be no study done. Some minister got on Google, typed in, "cost for HSR per Kilometer" added 30% and came up with a figure, as to cost.

If this was such a great idea, and it would do so much for an economy. Why isn't every country investing in this?

Members on TVF have tried to compare Thailand with so many other countries to try and make an argument, for an off budget, urgent need for this project.

Take the China HSR comparison for example. Even though there has been massive corruption, major accidents, shoddy construction, to the point of entire HSR lines have had to be removed and replaced (sound familiar to Thailands past projects). China has 1.3 billion people, with numerous cities of massive populations(well over a million people), and the need to employ the world largest population. Thailand has one large city (over a million) and an unemployment rate (so the government says) under 1%. It also has an infrastructure in place that moves it population and its tourist effectively.

What nobody has considered, is what is this massive spending going to do to an economy that is already overheated (much of it speculation) without a labor force or sound fundamentals to support it? Property prices are skyrocketing and developers are struggling with manpower and materials shortages now. Whats gonna happen if/when this starts? Nobody knows because this govt is not considering anything, but how to enrich themselves.

An entire HSR line in China being removed and replaced ? <deleted>

Really? You should read up.

In March 2012 AP reported: Since the Wenzhou crash, there have been

reports of problems with brakes, signaling systems and faulty

construction. In one case the Railways Ministry ordered almost all of a

$260 million railway line in northeastern China redone after finding

contractors had farmed the work out to unqualified construction

companies that filled railway bridges' foundations with rocks and sand

instead of concrete. [source: Elaine Kurtenbach, AP, March 12, 2012]

http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=1848&catid=13