An 8000 Km Freight Shipment -- By Rail! (transfer, costs)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I came across this discussion regarding regular shipment of new Volvos from an assembly point in China to a distribution center in Belgium via the famous Trans-Siberian railroad. The autos are actually in marine containers, and differences in gauge (space between the rails) probably mandates trans-loading between rail systems at one or more points, but the story speaks volumes as to the role of free trade in the promotion of cooperation between industrialized economies.
The prospect of an international rail tunnel under the Bering Strait has been proposed in some quarters (China, Russia, Canada and the United States comprise the four most rail-dependent economies), but I believe that will be a long time in coming.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 07-25-2017 at 10:42 AM..
that's where china's Belt and Road Imitative comes in to play. China is going to building a lot of rail roads in highways in central Asia. Interestingly china is trying to by pass Russia by building a rail road to Afghanistan, Iran, turkey and then into Europe, even though the shortest route is through Russia.
play around with that tool in the link above and you will see that the shortest point between Europe and east/south Asia is always through Russia rather than Istanbul. Yet China seems hell bent on avoiding Russia even if they would save considerable time. Though I suppose transferring between different gauges is a pain in the ass and costs a lot of time too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_gauge
In addition to the disparity in gauges (Australia had substantial mileage among each of three last time I checked, BTW) lack of standardization in equipment probably is a factor as well.
Early attempts at shipping highway trailers on flat cars can be traced as far back as the 1930's, and the loading of circus wagons and the like probably predates that. But it wasn't until the 1950's that major railroads like the Pennsylvania and New York Central decided to run solid intermodal trains; here again, there was discord from the first, NYC opting for a detachable box dubbed a Flexi-Van, while PRR tried to convince common carrier truckers to turn their units over to the railroad for the line-haul -- circus-loaded style.
The picture was further muddled by changing weight and size restrictions; TrailerTrain (a rail industry equpment consortium which now offers the RailBox fleet as well) had decided upon an 88-foot flatcar designed to handle two forty-foot trailers when several states liberalized their maximum to 45 feet in the early Seventies, and to 53 feet when a mandate was tied to Federal Highway funding about a decade later. For a while TrailerTrain facilities were filled up with 88-footers generating rust, rather than revenue.
But the players finally standardized their act. and their equipment, in the wake of the final round of weight and size limit increases. The state-of-the-art approach also involves articulated cars with several sets of single-axle trucks (wheels) interspersed within the frame, as opposed to the two-trailer 88-footer with two double-axle trucks and several inches of vertical play in the center (another freight-busting force -- as the line-haul manger of a trucker I once worked for discovered when a shipment of plate glass disintegrated during the trip). And double-stacking has become common practice.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 07-26-2017 at 10:41 PM..
that's where china's Belt and Road Imitative comes in to play. China is going to building a lot of rail roads in highways in central Asia. Interestingly china is trying to by pass Russia by building a rail road to Afghanistan, Iran, turkey and then into Europe, even though the shortest route is through Russia.
play around with that tool in the link above and you will see that the shortest point between Europe and east/south Asia is always through Russia rather than Istanbul. Yet China seems hell bent on avoiding Russia even if they would save considerable time. Though I suppose transferring between different gauges is a pain in the ass and costs a lot of time too.
A few years ago a guy left London by train headed for Sydney. This was by rail across Europe and Asia and then south in to Vietnam. The Mekong was flooding and the way was blocked so he had to improvise and finally got to Darwin and then took the train across Australia. Took about three months.
no I don't think that's the reason, plus southern Russia's climate isn't that bad, similar to southern Canada/northern US. Maybe the southern route is just to increase trade with Iran/Turkey/other middle eastern countries, and then connecting it to Europe because might as well. Plus it's not like China is out right avoiding Russia, and the reason Russia has less projects compared to central/southwestern Asia is probably because Russia's rail network is probably much more developed so doesn't need as many upgrades, and Russia is probably already on top of that too. Also now that I think about it, the reason why they are so interested in Kazakhstan is probably so they can avoid the Ural mountains, other wise it's just one huge flat plain between Germany and the Altai mountains on the eastern Chinese border.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
