Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
The killing of the north-south freight corridor and the east-west electrification alongside the future high-speed projects are good indicators of what you can expect in terms of increased spending on conventional lines from this government. An either-or thinking with regards to spending on upgrades vs. new lines is wrong, whether it comes from TGV proponents or opponents: in both cases, the either-or should include other modes of transport.

On higher-speed services on existing or improved lines: these make sense, and happen in France too (in connection with the little electrification that is being done, some of it coupled with connecting high-speed lines), but it's not as unproblematic and cheap and all-applicable as (IMHO unfortunately) thought by many Greens (not just in France):

  • whether you use passive or active tilt trains, they only compensate acceleration felt by passengers, but not track forces thus you need to spend on strengthening and specially maintaining the track, in addition to the higher procurement and maintenance cost of the (often problematic) tilt trains;
  • upgrades to 200-250 km/h often involve re-alignments, which is little different from constructing a new line;
  • even without re-alignment, you need to increase track distance, which means the reconstruction of all existing adjoining infrastructure;
  • in addition, old lines go through inhabited areas which need expensive protection for the higher speeds (sound barriers, over- and underpasses or instead cut-and-cover tunnels);
  • the underground can hide lots of nasty surprises (water pockets, buried wells, unmarked cables etc.) which will add to the cost and time of a full upgrade;
  • on the demand side, the point of considering other modes of transport still applies: for example, Lyon–Nantes in 4h30m is just not competitive with air;
  • disregarding cost issues, the faster you go with expresses on a conventional line, the higher will be the speed differential with freight and local trains, limiting capacity;
  • capacity on existing lines can be constrained already, and not just on conventional lines: the LGV Sud-Est is pretty congested and the second Paris–Lyon line via Orléans and Roanne (paralleled by tow of the 250 km/h sections proposed in your link) would be for relieving it.


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jul 1st, 2013 at 09:49:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The killing of the north-south freight corridor and the east-west electrification alongside the future high-speed projects are good indicators of what you can expect in terms of increased spending on conventional lines from this government.

To put it another way: SNCF likes high-speed lines because high-speed trains bring profit and would like to toss branchlines and thin out rural local trains because they don't. The Court des Comptes and the new government doesn't like high-speed lines because they are high up-front investment which will bring back the money on the long-term if at all. Thus whatever they say, they like major investment in conventional lines with much lower probability of bringing the money back even less.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Jul 1st, 2013 at 10:01:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I know one of the authors of the site, president of the Transport commission of the Rhone Alpes region (co-responsible with SNCF for regional services). I should try to get him to engage here, but I doubt if his English is any good.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Mon Jul 1st, 2013 at 10:57:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They've done their homework :

While the report of the Mobility 21 Committee, presented last week to Jean-Marc Ayrault, does not classify the "POCL" (Paris-Orleans-Clermont-Lyon) as a priority among rail infrastructure projects,  the Greens of six regions (Rhône-Alpes, Auvergne, Limousin, Burgundy, Centre and Ile de France) have devised a solution that is less expensive than the original project, and greener.

Jean-Charles Kohlhaas, vice president (Europe Ecologie Les Verts) of the Rhône-Alpes region in charge of transport, said: "The lines that serve the heart of France are almost all electrified, and the track curves  allow speeds up to 220 km / h instead of 160 km / h maximum today. Our project requires suppression of level crossings, the construction of some new sections ... and a few other amenities. "Travelers will not be boarding a TER (regional express) or a TGV, but a whole new generation of trains: the THNS or "train with high level of service."

The investments needed to complete this project? 6 billion euros. A sum equivalent to one third of the money needed to set up the initial POCL (20 billion euros). The issue, ultimately, is to respond to the saturation of the Paris Lyon line, a scenario which, if you believe the 21 members of the Mobility Committee should occur in fifteen to thirty-five years.



It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Wed Jul 3rd, 2013 at 06:00:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, at least part of the homework. (I should have noted already that they probably did consider capacity issues on the lines affected, because most of those are less busy and the lines from Paris are bypassed by a new Y line.)
  • By curves allowing 220 km/h, do they mean curve radius or superelevation, too?
  • What about track distance (in curves as well as on straight track)?
  • Are sound barriers and re-signalling covered under "a few other amenities"?
  • Have they done a ridership forecast with the lower top speed, especially on the Paris–Lyon and further relation? (I don't see how a connection significantly slower than the existing line can do much in helping relieve it even on the Paris–Lyon relation, much less further on.)

Also, was there a reaction to the dropping of the project to complete the Nantes–Lyon electrification (see Le Parisien map in afew's first comment), which would be part of the EELV plan, too, complemented by some new sections (orange line)?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jul 3rd, 2013 at 07:43:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series