# Safety Problems with China's High-Speed Rail



## LA Resident (Feb 17, 2011)

From Friday's New York Times on safety problems perhaps becoming an issue with China's High-Speed Rail System...

two excerpts:

In his seven years as chief of the Chinese Railways Ministry, Liu Zhijun built a commercial and political colossus that spanned continents and elevated the lowly train to a national symbol of pride and technological prowess.

His abrupt sacking by the Communist Party is casting that empire in a decidedly different light, raising doubts not only about Mr. Liu’s stewardship and the corruption that dogs China’s vast public-works projects, but also, perhaps, the safety, financial soundness and long-term viability of a rail system that has captured the world’s attention.

A new line from Beijing to Shanghai is scheduled to be finished by year’s end. It will whisk passengers across a distance equal to a trip between New York and Atlanta in less than five hours. Amtrak trains require 18 hours for the journey.

full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/world/asia/18rail.html?_r=1&hp


----------



## George Harris (Feb 20, 2011)

Just looking at the excerpts, probably a fairly fact free dissertation.

"lowly train" is absolute nonsense in the Chinese Context. Chinese trains have been the major method of long distance transportation for a long time and the major routes served by numerous high quality trains.

"safety and financial soundness" might or might not be at issue, but "long term viability" is absolutely certain regardless of who is at the top or how well or how poorly things were done.

The New York Fishwrap strikes again.


----------



## jis (Feb 20, 2011)

The one concern that I had read about from several sources is the fact that China has chosen to run their version of German and Japanese train sets at much higher speed in commercial service without having done anything particular to really make any changes to actually ensure that they can be safely operated at such speeds. Also the amount of fluff that the Chinese Railways have published in basic publicity pieces is somewhat disturbing. But I suppose all that goes with the territory in large bureaucracies. There is absolutely no reason to believe that the Chinese are any better at controlling the maladies that often infest large bureaucracies. Afterall you can only do so much mby having the notional freedom to chop someone's head off.

The quality of construction issues are new, that I had not read about before. I don;t have any difficulty believing that there might be such problems either. But only time will tell. Suffice it to say that such is not atypical in Asia in large construction projects, and China is no exception.

So bottom line is that the jury is still out and only time will tell.


----------



## LA Resident (Feb 21, 2011)

jis said:


> The one concern that I had read about from several sources is the fact that China has chosen to run their version of German and Japanese train sets at much higher speed in commercial service without having done anything particular to really make any changes to actually ensure that they can be safely operated at such speeds. Also the amount of fluff that the Chinese Railways have published in basic publicity pieces is somewhat disturbing. But I suppose all that goes with the territory in large bureaucracies. There is absolutely no reason to believe that the Chinese are any better at controlling the maladies that often infest large bureaucracies. Afterall you can only do so much mby having the notional freedom to chop someone's head off.
> 
> The quality of construction issues are new, that I had not read about before. I don;t have any difficulty believing that there might be such problems either. But only time will tell. Suffice it to say that such is not atypical in Asia in large construction projects, and China is no exception.
> 
> So bottom line is that the jury is still out and only time will tell.


Your comments make a lot of sense. I guess it helps when someone reads an entire article, not just excerpts. Shoddy construction has been an issue with several projects in China, as well as Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. And I doubt seriously that The New York Times comes at high-speed rail in China with any bias. If anything, there would be a pro-rail bias, as the newspaper has editorially supported expanded high-speed rail in the United States.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Feb 23, 2011)

Its funny this article is critizing there construction methods....look at a collapse that happened the other day....there appears to be very little to no rebar....


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Feb 23, 2011)

Yea I wouldnt quite trust Chinese with building something so complicated as high speed rail just yet. Go with the proven, the Europeans.


----------



## Guest (Feb 23, 2011)

Shawn Ryu said:


> Yea I wouldnt quite trust Chinese with building something so complicated as high speed rail just yet. Go with the proven, the Europeans.


How about with the truly proven and most reliable? The Japanese Shinkansen. Wider trains, no derailments other than one in an earthquake after which everyone could walk out, no random wheel failures, body panels flying off, etc., that have happened with European equipment.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Feb 23, 2011)

One of the greatest mistakes we as Americans make, and keep making, is the assumption that third world countries that at one time made cruddy plastic toys are incapable of rising above that standard. Such opinions are ridiculous.

In 1955, a small car called the Toyopet Crown entered the U.S. market. It was a decent little car, but completely unsuited to US road conditions, it tended to be unreliable. Of course, the Toyopet Crown was the first import venture of Toyota, who would go on to dominate our auto market in terms of quality and so on, a position they would maintain up until very recently.

In 1985, some thirty years later, a small Korean company called Hyundai unleashed a spectacular piece of garbage called the Excel on innocent Americans. Unreliable and badly made, it was the but of many a joke. Hyundai currently offers cars that score consistently higher than any other manufacturer in quality, fit, finish, and reliability. They cover a broad swath of our market, from the cheapest car sold here (the Accent) to a nearly $60k limosine (the Equus) and all of them are nice cars.

To assume that China can not meet or beat Japan and Korea on speed of quality improvement is a mistake. To assume that because many Chinese products are sub par at the moment that they cannot be improved such that they beat us at our own games would be done at our own peril.


----------



## jis (Feb 24, 2011)

Green Maned Lion said:


> To assume that China can not meet or beat Japan and Korea on speed of quality improvement is a mistake. To assume that because many Chinese products are sub par at the moment that they cannot be improved such that they beat us at our own games would be done at our own peril.


I am absolutely certain that China can and will meet and beat quality, eventually. The issue is a more local one of a bureaucracy being pushed beyond reason to produce something by cutting a few occasional corners in the name of national glory. China is not the only country subject to such, and even our great US of A has on occasions stumbled on such.

The firing of the HSR Chief apparently had a bit to do with unreasonable pushing of the nevelope and possibly also making a lttle something on the side for himself and his cronies. It happens. They are in the process of fixing the problem.

It is foolish of interested parties in the US to try to paint the entire HSR endeavor in China and by extension in the world in general and in the US in particular, with the same brush. Afterall even our highways bridges have collapsed in the past and perhaps more will. So at the end of the day it is all kettle calling the pot black at some level. And so far nothing untoward has happened in China. They have caught a potential problem and are working on nipping it in the bud.


----------

