Print

Mail

wiki links

Common rail plan is ridiculous

`Experts expressed doubts about the plan early on. But the ministry did not listen, and insists on pushing for a plan that will take a crippled high speed train into Pingtung.'

The Ministry of Transportation and Communications has once again brought up the idea of a rail system between Kaohsiung City, Kaohsiung County and Pingtung County that would integrate the Taiwan High Speed Rail (THSR) and the Taiwan Railway Administration (TRA), thereby allowing THSR trains to go to Pingtung. Experts expressed doubts about the plan early on. But the ministry did not listen, and insists on pushing for a plan that will take a crippled high speed train into Pingtung.

The ministry has said that other countries have such a system. But if ministry officials believe this is relevant to Taiwan's rail system, they have a distorted view of the situation. Taiwan has dallied with common rail: The Taiwan Sugar Railways and the TRA used to use the same rails, so it is technically possible.

But the ministry completely ignores the reasons for and background of the construction of the common rails in other countries . It is also ignoring the real needs of the public. The ministry is only trying to create the impression -- a false one -- that the government cares about improving infrastructure in the south.

In other countries railway systems with different track gauges have been integrated with each other so that the functions of the different systems are combined to create the highest possible efficiency. Countries with a similar system do not take a common rail as a development goal in itself.

The ministry has used the Mini-Shinkansen in Japan -- which extended the Shinkansen line to Akita and Yamagata prefectures -- as an example of a common rail system. However, these prefectures are both rural areas that had few train services to begin with. The existing rails were widened to accommodate the new train, keeping only about 10km of common rail. This portion of common rail has shrunk further in recent years because of the difficulty in operating both fast and slow trains on the rail.

The common rail is a bottleneck in the transport system. Also, when rails are made wider to adhere to the standard, existing lines are sacrificed because of incompatibility. Even though Akita and Yamagata prefectures didn't have an extensive rail service, and now have only a short length of common rail, the ministry still cited Japan as an example to imitate for the network between Kaohsiung city and county and Pingtung County.

The ministry also highlighted different kinds of rails in use in Germany's metro system, most importantly the tram system in Stuttgart.

From 1981, Stuttgart started to broaden its tram track gauge. The common rail system is now only temporary. Conversion of the entire system is to be completed next year, with a portion of the common rail to become an exhibit in a museum.

To use the renewal of an urban tram system as a model for an intercity train is ridiculous.

The Kaohsiung and Pingtung region is really a metropolitan area incompatible with the ministry's plans. Remember that all the foreign examples cited by the ministry are actually being replaced because of the inherent problems of combining vastly different systems.

Another problem is that the train carriages of the TRA and the THSR are not the same width, so platforms at train stations could not be used for both systems. The THSR trains would have to slow down considerably and be led onto another track when coming into a station.

The difference between the two systems is just too big -- one a long-distance service, one a regular train service. To combine them would create a lose-lose situation.

In addition to the high costs and the possibility of crippling the high-speed railway, the ministry's plan would also destroy the TRA's achievements in making its system more like a mass rapid transit system. This is completely wrong. What are the benefits for the people living in the south? How is this a wise choice for expenditure of our tax money?

Ku Ting-wei is editor-in-chief of Rail News magazine.

Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
This story has been viewed 1149 times.