Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
workhorse wrote:What I would rather like them to do is to try to make Pudong more attractive for it to compete better with Hongqiao in the eyes of the public (expanding the Maglev line to the west bank? building freight lines that go directly to the logistics zone through the port?).
FromCDGtoSYD wrote:My thoughts exactly, the maglev was supposed to be expanded to Hongqiao in the first place but they decided otherwise.
FromCDGtoSYD wrote:And now it doesnt even operate at 400km/h all day anymore.
FromCDGtoSYD wrote:workhorse wrote:What I would rather like them to do is to try to make Pudong more attractive for it to compete better with Hongqiao in the eyes of the public (expanding the Maglev line to the west bank? building freight lines that go directly to the logistics zone through the port?).
My thoughts exactly, the maglev was supposed to be expanded to Hongqiao in the first place but they decided otherwise. And now it doesnt even operate at 400km/h all day anymore.
I don't get the need to look for other airports, PVG is still pretty good and it looks like it has enough room for extra runways and terminals.
workhorse wrote:FromCDGtoSYD wrote:And now it doesnt even operate at 400km/h all day anymore.
Yes, I noticed that too, don't know why they run at reduced the speed during part of the day now. Are there any any worries about wearing off the infrastructure too fast?
c933103 wrote:Official reason is to reduce energy consumption and also CO2 emission, as well as reduce its impact on surrounding environment.
But according to report it seems like even back in 2007 there were already some time slots that they aren't operating at max speed?
http://2008.people.com.cn/GB/62310/62391/6366154.html
And reduce energy consumption make it sound like it's a way to cut cost.
glbltrvlr wrote:c933103 wrote:Official reason is to reduce energy consumption and also CO2 emission, as well as reduce its impact on surrounding environment.
But according to report it seems like even back in 2007 there were already some time slots that they aren't operating at max speed?
http://2008.people.com.cn/GB/62310/62391/6366154.html
And reduce energy consumption make it sound like it's a way to cut cost.
A few years ago it was just the first few trips in the morning that were slower which led me to believe it was a track issue. My Mandarin isn't sufficient to read the linked article, but perhaps it was a noise issue? Hard to believe there would be that much of an energy savings.
glbltrvlr wrote:A few years ago it was just the first few trips in the morning that were slower which led me to believe it was a track issue. My Mandarin isn't sufficient to read the linked article, but perhaps it was a noise issue? Hard to believe there would be that much of an energy savings.
moa999 wrote:And should be noted you've also got airports in Hangzhou HGH (10th biggest in China 35m pax) and Wuxi WUX (4m pax) in the broader area.
Both can be reached quickly from Shanghai by HSR, and I suspect in a few years the Shanghai metro will link to those cities metros.
Sean-SAN- wrote:They still don't want to talk about the real problem, which is airspace management. PVG (and PEK) perform about have as many take-offs and landings (movements) compared to ATL/ORD, and are lower than even CLT. The relatively high pax counts are due to widebody usage but the real problem plaguing Chinese airports is horrible delays, cancellations, and that won't be changed by building a new facility.
jsnww81 wrote:Cities like London, New York and Moscow have more than two large airports, so it's certainly understandable that Shanghai would benefit from another one as well. PVG still has room to grow... aren't there plans to reclaim more land for a sixth runway?
I do agree that getting the Maglev a bit further into the city would make Pudong much more convenient. I know there were plans to do so at one point (and if anyone can get it done, the Chinese can) but that might help ease some of the burden on Hongqiao... it's still a miracle they were able to demolish so many properties and double Hongqiao in size.
Hangzhou, Wuxi and Nantong are nearby but those are huge cities in their own right with plenty of O&D passengers. Hangzhou has room for two more runways and is about to start on a huge third terminal, but I don't believe Wuxi's airport can grow much beyond its current boundaries. Is there an airport planned for Changzhou?
c933103 wrote:FromCDGtoSYD wrote:workhorse wrote:What I would rather like them to do is to try to make Pudong more attractive for it to compete better with Hongqiao in the eyes of the public (expanding the Maglev line to the west bank? building freight lines that go directly to the logistics zone through the port?).
My thoughts exactly, the maglev was supposed to be expanded to Hongqiao in the first place but they decided otherwise. And now it doesnt even operate at 400km/h all day anymore.
I don't get the need to look for other airports, PVG is still pretty good and it looks like it has enough room for extra runways and terminals.
Instead they announced a new subway line from Hongqiao to Pudong http://www.caacnews.com.cn/1/5/201807/t ... 8_wap.html
workhorse wrote:Another probably easier option would be to expand the HSR line to Pudong (for example, from the South railway station) and make all trains teminate at Pudong instead of Hongqiao or Shanghai South (with the possibility to easily buy a ticket to the city center at PVG, of course).
zakuivcustom wrote:Like many said, the only real way to make Pudong better is [. . .] or extend the CRH network that way. It would still not be as good as Hongqiao, though, which is the best intermodal airport in mainland IMO.
c933103 wrote:Instead they announced a new subway line from Hongqiao to Pudong http://www.caacnews.com.cn/1/5/201807/t ... 8_wap.html
sincx wrote:Not quite a subway. Seems like this will be a 160 km/h "Airport Express" line, with 9 total stops and only 5 stops between the stations for the passenger terminals at SHA and PVG. An article estimated 30 minutes from airport to airport. I wouldn't be surprised if they tear down the stub-end maglev line after this is complete.
sincx wrote:It uses the CRH network at SHA, and there's also a planned connector from Shanghai South station to the line.
workhorse wrote:c933103 wrote:Instead they announced a new subway line from Hongqiao to Pudong http://www.caacnews.com.cn/1/5/201807/t ... 8_wap.htmlsincx wrote:Not quite a subway. Seems like this will be a 160 km/h "Airport Express" line, with 9 total stops and only 5 stops between the stations for the passenger terminals at SHA and PVG. An article estimated 30 minutes from airport to airport. I wouldn't be surprised if they tear down the stub-end maglev line after this is complete.sincx wrote:It uses the CRH network at SHA, and there's also a planned connector from Shanghai South station to the line.
That's very good news, didn't know about this one. It will definitely help.
Although I still think it will be needed to extend the CRH line to PVG to make life easier for people who go to Shaoxing, Jiaxing, Ningbo, Hangzhou, Suzhou etc (yes, I know about the existence of HGH, NGB and WUX but while they are all very nice airports they do not come close to PVG in terms of destinations and flight options, especially on the international side).
workhorse wrote:Don't know for the maglev but for regular HSR going at 360 km/h (fastest passenger trains existing today) vs 300 km/h (more typical speed) increases electricity consumption by 50%.
glbltrvlr wrote:Wow. Had no idea it was that much. That said, Maglevs were never going to beat rail for efficiency, which is why they haven't caught on. If you think about it, not only do you need the energy to propel the vehicle and overcome air resistance, you also have to spend energy that supports the very heavy cars. The gain from reduced rolling friction isn't enough to overcome that.
eamondzhang wrote:Hongqiao Station, where the proposed line will terminate at, is probably one of the largest HSR stations in the world and has trains that goes to basically every major cities in China.
eamondzhang wrote:And Shanghai East station, the other terminus, is also supposed to have direct trains to nearby cities as the station is planned to have 16 platforms (IIRC) plus a CRH maintenance facility.
workhorse wrote:glbltrvlr wrote:Wow. Had no idea it was that much. That said, Maglevs were never going to beat rail for efficiency, which is why they haven't caught on. If you think about it, not only do you need the energy to propel the vehicle and overcome air resistance, you also have to spend energy that supports the very heavy cars. The gain from reduced rolling friction isn't enough to overcome that.
This too, but what really kills the maglev is the (lack of) interoperability with conventional rail. A high speed train can go on almost every rail track as long as it has electricity. See how in France the TGVs snake into small tortuous single track lines in the Northern Alps after leaving the high speed LGV lines. Of course, they go very slowly but still, this offers a non-stop link from Paris and London to remote Alpine resorts during the ski season. Same for China: the CRH can go everywhere if it's electrified.
If we see another maglev line it will be a point-to-point link between two big cities that do not have already existing railway infrastructure.
Ironically, the best chance for maglev is the USA: almost non-existant passenger rail transport and big cities far from each other separated by scarcely populated areas.
In China, with its extensive rail network, maglev is dead (which is a pity: I like it).
EBGflyer wrote:I completely agree with the post about airspace management (or lack thereof).
I have never seen such inefficient operations at any airport like PVG. The spacing between takeoffs and landings are just ridiciulously inefficient. It’s not unusual with minutes between departing aircrafts. In The western world it can be 20-30 secs.
Fix that first before spending billions on terminals.
workhorse wrote:eamondzhang wrote:Hongqiao Station, where the proposed line will terminate at, is probably one of the largest HSR stations in the world and has trains that goes to basically every major cities in China.
I am aware of that. And that is what makes PVG look so pale compared to SHA. If foreign airlines were offered the choice, they would all move to SHA overnight. But of course, SHA is maxed out.
An example from real life. I will soon need to go to Shaoxing from CDG. Naturally I would choose PVG as my point of entry. But if I do that, I will have to get onto crowded line 2 (after 11-12 hours flight!) with all my luggage, and go to Hongqiao to catch up my train. So instead of that, I will fly to HGH and take a bus to Shaoxing (which takes about the same time as the train from Shanghai). But to get to HGH I can only go with Air China through PEK. Nothing against Air China, but at PVG I have literally dozens of options (different airlines, alliances, schedules, prices) to choose from. So Shanghai will have lost a passenger and I will have lost the choice.eamondzhang wrote:And Shanghai East station, the other terminus, is also supposed to have direct trains to nearby cities as the station is planned to have 16 platforms (IIRC) plus a CRH maintenance facility.
Hope they will make it as well serviced as Hongqiao. Why not make trains that terminate at Hongqiao continue to Pudong? It will require to turn them around at Hongqiao but that's why they have cab cars on both sides, right?
EBGflyer wrote:I completely agree with the post about airspace management (or lack thereof).
I have never seen such inefficient operations at any airport like PVG. The spacing between takeoffs and landings are just ridiciulously inefficient. It’s not unusual with minutes between departing aircrafts. In The western world it can be 20-30 secs.
Fix that first before spending billions on terminals.
moa999 wrote:Can any Mandarin speakers translate the other stops on that Airport Express line. I assume it will mostly be interchange stops with other metro lines.
workhorse wrote:glbltrvlr wrote:Wow. Had no idea it was that much. That said, Maglevs were never going to beat rail for efficiency, which is why they haven't caught on. If you think about it, not only do you need the energy to propel the vehicle and overcome air resistance, you also have to spend energy that supports the very heavy cars. The gain from reduced rolling friction isn't enough to overcome that.
This too, but what really kills the maglev is the (lack of) interoperability with conventional rail. A high speed train can go on almost every rail track as long as it has electricity. See how in France the TGVs snake into small tortuous single track lines in the Northern Alps after leaving the high speed LGV lines. Of course, they go very slowly but still, this offers a non-stop link from Paris and London to remote Alpine resorts during the ski season. Same for China: the CRH can go everywhere if it's electrified.
If we see another maglev line it will be a point-to-point link between big cities in countries that do not already have an extended railway infrastructure.
Ironically, the best chance for maglev is the USA: almost non-existant passenger rail transport and big cities far from each other separated by scarcely populated areas.
In China, with its extensive rail network, maglev is dead (which is a pity: I like it).
c933103 wrote:Actually most passengers carried by high speed rail system are between important city pairs which usually have all, or mostly, dedicated tracks between them. Like high speed train services to London, most of the passengers are going to Paris or Brussels, and only very few of them visit Alpine resort with the train (frequencies that they run are just a few trains every weeks seasonally last time I checked)
eamondzhang wrote:Because many trains don't terminate at Hongqiao; or they terminate at Hongqiao to turnaround in a short timeframe (especially those going to Beijing/Hangzhou/Nanjing).
eamondzhang wrote:Going to Shaoxing you can always fly into PVG and take the long-distance bus
workhorse wrote:Here's just a few French destinations that do not have dedicated HSR lines and yet get MULTIPLE DAILY TGVs: Grenoble, Chambery, Annecy, Bourg-Saint-Maurice, Bourg-en-Bresse, Geneva, Evian, Brest, Saint-Malo, La Rochelle...
The ability of high speed train to go "off track" is a MAJOR advantage for passengers and for governments (as a means to develop territories).
workhorse wrote:c933103 wrote:Actually most passengers carried by high speed rail system are between important city pairs which usually have all, or mostly, dedicated tracks between them. Like high speed train services to London, most of the passengers are going to Paris or Brussels, and only very few of them visit Alpine resort with the train (frequencies that they run are just a few trains every weeks seasonally last time I checked)
Here's just a few French destinations that do not have dedicated HSR lines and yet get MULTIPLE DAILY TGVs: Grenoble, Chambery, Annecy, Bourg-Saint-Maurice, Bourg-en-Bresse, Geneva, Evian, Brest, Saint-Malo, La Rochelle...
The ability of high speed train to go "off track" is a MAJOR advantage for passengers and for governments (as a means to develop territories).
workhorse wrote:workhorse wrote:Here's just a few French destinations that do not have dedicated HSR lines and yet get MULTIPLE DAILY TGVs: Grenoble, Chambery, Annecy, Bourg-Saint-Maurice, Bourg-en-Bresse, Geneva, Evian, Brest, Saint-Malo, La Rochelle...
The ability of high speed train to go "off track" is a MAJOR advantage for passengers and for governments (as a means to develop territories).
P.S. See this map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carte_TGV.svg Only blue lines are high-speed tracks.
c933103 wrote:Then the problem seems to be the speed of constructing the high speed network, first high speed line in China was only opened about 10 years ago and now the network have already been extended into most county.
c933103 wrote:Furthermore, given the existing high speed rail network in country like China, it's also possible to delegate the existing high speed rail lines for through service to other part of the network while letting maglev carry the point to point traffic.