Author Topic: The New Silk Road  (Read 877 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Scottl

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4030
  • Respect: +445
The New Silk Road
« on: January 19, 2017, 03:19:57 PM »
0
http://business.financialpost.com/news/transportation/the-new-silk-road-from-china-to-the-u-k-worlds-longest-train-route-arrives-in-london

This is pretty cool, especially for more time-sensitive freight that can't take the boat trip.  It obviously has political overtones as a concept as well.

Smike

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 783
  • Respect: +113
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2017, 08:16:23 PM »
0
Cute and and if only symbolic at at 34 cars ;) (or as you stated highly time sensitive freight only)  At that rate it would replace about .4 ships per year if one train left per day.  I wonder what the expected capacity is rated at?

wes_sutton

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • Respect: +109
    • http://www.users.bigpond.com/grms
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2017, 08:44:19 PM »
0
Cute and and if only symbolic at at 34 cars ;) (or as you stated highly time sensitive freight only)  At that rate it would replace about .4 ships per year if one train left per day.  I wonder what the expected capacity is rated at?
There's a bit more detail re numbers etc in this version of the story.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/first-china-to-uk-rail-freight-service-arrives-in-london

A great acheivment, but important to recognise this is just utilsing a number of existing interconnecting services to get the the containers from A to B.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 08:46:52 PM by wes_sutton »

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6517
  • Respect: +273
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2017, 01:44:40 AM »
0
"this is just utilsing a number of existing interconnecting services"

Very true, but that's how the North American rail system worked until the megamerger era.
N Kalanaga
Be well

Scottl

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4030
  • Respect: +445
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2017, 06:45:44 AM »
0
That's still how the transcon works in the US  :ashat:

wes_sutton

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • Respect: +109
    • http://www.users.bigpond.com/grms
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2017, 07:48:20 PM »
0
"this is just utilsing a number of existing interconnecting services"

Very true, but that's how the North American rail system worked until the megamerger era.
I assume they stayed on the same wagon though?

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6517
  • Respect: +273
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2017, 03:01:33 AM »
0
I don't know.  It's all standard gauge, but China uses North American coupler/air brake systems, while Europe/Britain have their own.  Wheel profiles MIGHT be different, but I don't know about those, and The Flying Scotsman ran on US track with British wheels.

The same wagons could have run through with a coupler/brake adapter wagon, so I wouldn't be surprised if they did.  After all, passenger trains run across the Europe/Russia, Russia/China, and Europe/Spain gauge changes, so mismatched couplers couldn't be too big a problem.
N Kalanaga
Be well

svedblen

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 542
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +160
    • Three Yards Yard - beware - it is H0 - No, now it's O
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2017, 10:50:44 AM »
0
I don't know.  It's all standard gauge,

No, it is not all standard gauge. A section through Kazakhstan, Russia and Belarus using the wider Russian gauge made a "transhipment" required at both ends of that section. At least according to the article linked to by the second link above:

Quote from: Railpage
The 12 000 km route ran via Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Poland, Germany, Belgium and France. The two breaks of gauge between China and Europe’s 1 435 mm standard gauge and the 1 520 mm broad gauge used in the former USSR required transhipment at Dostyk on the China-Kazakhstan border and at Brest on the Belarus-Poland border.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2017, 12:21:07 PM by svedblen »
Lennart

wes_sutton

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • Respect: +109
    • http://www.users.bigpond.com/grms
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2017, 07:46:32 PM »
0
Apologies, I wasn't being clear in my previous posts.

The containers from China definitely did not complete the journey on one wagon and would have been transhipped on at least two occasions (if not more).

When people were making the analogy with past transcontinental US operations I was asking if containers and/or goods were transhipped?

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6517
  • Respect: +273
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2017, 01:38:15 AM »
0
Svedblen:  Thank you, and I stand corrected.  Several years ago there were news reports of a planned all-standard-gauge rail link from China to Europe, bypassing Russia.  The minimally informative article I read on this didn't give a route, and I assumed it was the new line.

As for past transcontinental US routes, from the beginning (1869) it was possible to ship from coast to coast in the same car, but there were still lines, especially in the south, that used wider gauges, and narrow gauge was common in several regions.  So into the late 1800s transhipments were common in some areas, and the D&RGW in Colorado and East Broad Top in Pennsylvania, both 3-foot gauge, interchanged with standard gauge railroads into the mid 20th century. 

The East Broad Top also interchanged actual cars, putting narrow gauge trucks under standard gauge cars.  The CN in Newfoundland also did that, but since their connection to the outside was by ferry, it wasn't a direct interchange.
N Kalanaga
Be well

svedblen

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 542
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +160
    • Three Yards Yard - beware - it is H0 - No, now it's O
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2017, 05:53:21 AM »
0
Apologies, I wasn't being clear in my previous posts.
The minimally informative article I read on this didn't give a route, and I assumed it was the new line.
Gentlemen, no need for apologies or excuses! I'm just glad I happened to read the longer article and found that info :)
Lennart

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6517
  • Respect: +273
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2017, 02:47:34 PM »
0
I'm glad you did too!
N Kalanaga
Be well

nickelplate759

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
  • Respect: +146
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2017, 06:05:36 PM »
0
The original Silk Road required transhipment as well  ;)
George

NKPH&TS #3628

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6517
  • Respect: +273
Re: The New Silk Road
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2017, 12:39:56 AM »
0
True, and the motive power varied widely.
N Kalanaga
Be well