Posted on 05/22/2007 5:29:05 AM PDT by iowamark
Arriving soon on Platform 2 is the latest contribution by Germany and France to fast-track European integration: a high-speed train that will slice two hours off the journey from Frankfurt to Paris.
It is being hailed as a breakthrough for the European Union, which trumpets the merits of more closely knit transport links but which all too often buckles under the weight of competing national bureaucracies. By the time the whistle blows for the final test drive on Friday, the 320 km/h (199mph) express will have spent almost a decade in the sidings because of Franco-German quarrels about coffee cups, braking systems, on-board handcuffs and little red flags.
“The French SNCF, the national carrier, slowed down things a lot during the initial years,” admits Peter Lankes, of German Railways’ high-speed technology department. That is putting it mildly: there has been a veritable clash of railway civilisations since the two neighbours developed their sleek engines, the French TGV and the German ICE.
Berlin first allowed the TGV to operate on German track in 2001 – a service from Paris to Stuttgart that takes 5 hours 56 minutes. First, though, the French had to meet German standards: stronger brakes because Germany insists on shorter braking times, drinkable water in the lavatories and real porcelain rather than plastic crockery in the dining car.
It was probably the affront of the Germans telling the French how to eat that released the counter-blast. Before the ICE was allowed to enter France, it had to accept dozens of alterations, adding €8 million (£5.5 million) of additional expense to every train on the route. French trains have a special seat with metal rings to hold any criminal detained on board; the German trains did not. Each French train has, under rules drawn up in the steam age, an emergency kit that includes red flags and flares – pointless, say the Germans, when travelling at these kinds of speeds. The new German trains, in order to meet French specifications, now have three wiring systems and five different fuses. “It’s as if trucks were obliged to have diesel, super and ordinary petrol tanks before crossing the French border,” grumbled the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
Before the French were wholly satisfied, the ICE had to complete 120,000km of tests and more than 30 drivers had to pass an exam in the French language. But the biggest non-technical sticking point was the refusal of French ticket inspectors to serve coffee and meals to first-class customers. This is a normal part of the service for German ICE trains but was a step too far for the proud controlleurs. German inspectors will now double as waiters for the whole journey to Paris.
It has been a long wait, and a great deal of aggravation, but the Germans clearly believe it was worth it. “We are optimistic that we will be able to double our market share on these routes to 40 per cent within five years compared to cars and air traffic,” says Mr Lankes.
The TGV travelling from Paris to Stuttgart will be able to trim travel time to 3 hours 39 minutes. The same train will be able to reach Munich in 6 hours 11 minutes, saving almost two and a half hours on the current journey. The Frankfurt to Paris line will take 4 hours 11 minutes, saving just over two hours. By the end of the year, the train should shave another 20 minutes off the trip. Among the first beneficiaries will be employees of the European Central Bank, based in Frankfurt, but headed by the Frenchman Jean-Claude Trichet.
If the final test drive goes according to plan this week, the service will begin on June 10. The timesaving comes largely because locomotives will no longer be changed at the border. The ICE, with its bilingual drivers and joint Franco-German ticket inspection team, will drive straight through to Paris.
Just be sure not to shout “Garçon!” at the inspector when ordering your meal on porcelain plates. However, “Herr Ober!” might do the trick.
I never had any great desire to drink the water out of the kitchen faucet.
So I didn’t.
Sounds like a win-win to me. Although it wouldn't matter to most, you could also have a designated smoking car. That's what was great throughout my travels in Europe, if I needed a smoke, I just stepped into the smoking(Pub)car. Have a pint and a smoke and you're ready to go back to your book or nap.
I never thought to either. But I guess it's a health concern, as somebody's going to drink it.
So who arrives in Pittsburgh first?
The guy in the train if he's coming from Baltimore. He may get there before the plane even takes off if he's coming from Columbus, OH. He'll pay a lot less, too. Also, while trains make more stops, they are a lot shorter than the stops that airplanes make. I just looked it up, most plane trips from Columbus come with one stop.
Ich hab’ ein Amerikas Hochgeschwindenkeitzug gern.
Mais, l’argent ne c’est pas le bonheur, mon ami...
C’est vrais que l’argent ne peut pas acheter de le bonheur, mais il peut, par contra, diminuer pas mal le misere... ;-)
No our high speed transport is power by jet fuel and is faster then any train.
You're also assuming that the far higher number of stops for a high-speed train will only slow its average speed to 100mph. I'd bet against that, as well. Let's use your LA to SF example... you think there won't be stops in San Jose, Monterey, and San Luis Obispo (or Fresno, Modesto, and Bakersfield, if they don't use the coastal route)? Each stop will last for at least 20 minutes, more likely 30-40 (if not more for maintenance checks, handicapped passengers, bureaucratic requirements, lost children, etc). That adds about 90 minutes to the trip alone.
Even with instantaneous acceleration, that 400 mile trip at 200mph lasts 4 hours, minimum... and that's assuming that Berkeley, Pasadena, Long Beach, Anaheim and Oakland won't want their own stops as well.
But if you're so sure it can be done, then find the investors and make yourself a few hundred million.
D’accord...
They do, but stops are relatively short, about 20 minutes. I didn't just go from memory, I looked at the time difference between the same ICE route with and without stops. No taxi to the runway, no long wait for takeoff. Just wait a minute for a clear track and go.
Trains hand you your luggage instantaneously?
Onboard luggage lockers.
Trains do not have any security measures?
Germany has been dealing with terrorists a lot longer than we have, and the ICE is so popular it has just about 100% brand recognition.
Trains will have as many departures so that you do not have to wait longer or leave far earlier than desired?
The Frankfurt train station services 342 long-distance and 290 regional trains every day, not counting the subway and trams.
You're also assuming that the far higher number of stops for a high-speed train will only slow its average speed to 100mph. I'd bet against that, as well.
I was guessing of the ability of a 200mph train using the example of an ICE's average speed of about 100mph and top speed around only 170 (and then only on special tracks, which they don't always drive on). Not counting any stops, but the theoretical train is faster. This does count the slow-going until the train hits open track outside the city, and I didn't count that an airplane takes a while to get to cruising altitude and speed.
Such long-distance, high-speed trains usually have very few stops, if any.
But if you're so sure it can be done, then find the investors and make yourself a few hundred million.
One problem here is our cars. People might drive for four hours to get to a city where a train could get them there in less than half the time because they want to use their car when they're there. For really long distances, they would probably use planes as they're faster than trains.
But at least in Germany, even with the bad exchange rate, an ICE trip is usually less expensive than a similar-distance plane flight in the US (not even counting if you have a discount card).
If only that were so!
The FAA spends billions directly subsidizing the airlines and many billions more financing airports. But nobody says: "when will the FAA make a profit?" Or "when will the interstate highways make a profit?" Or "when will the Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers make a profit on waterways?" They just take for granted the hundreds of billions in federal subsidies for oil burning transit. However, if one says anything about clean efficient trains, people always ask if there will be a profit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.