# High Speed Rail linking Russia and the U.S.?



## Oreius (Mar 26, 2015)

It could happen! Would Amtrak help with this? Seems like a neat idea. This would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, however.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/russia-unveils-plans-for-high-speed-railway-and-superhighway-to-connect-europe-and-america-10132564.html


----------



## StriderGDM (Mar 26, 2015)

Oreius said:


> It could happen! Would Amtrak help with this? Seems like a neat idea. This would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, however.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/russia-unveils-plans-for-high-speed-railway-and-superhighway-to-connect-europe-and-america-10132564.html


It could. But it won't.

Russia unveils new plans like this all the time.

They've been revealing new plans to replace their Soyuz spacecraft for decades and still go back to the same basic thing.

Lots of talk and hype, but ain't happening.


----------



## Oreius (Mar 26, 2015)

It could be a multinational effort, with the U.S, European Union, Russia, and even China contributing.


----------



## Oreius (Mar 26, 2015)

Only thing is, I don't see how Amtrak would fit in, especially since it's going to cost tens of billions of dollars just to bring the entire NEC to high speed rail specifications...


----------



## crabby_appleton1950 (Mar 26, 2015)

I think the Russian economy is tanking due to the sanctions imposed on them for their fighting in Ukraine.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 26, 2015)

Well it's only a little more than 51 miles from Russia past the Diomedes to Alaska by my old stompin' grounds, Tin City. Been there in the Winter. I'd do it by tunnel. Why? Been there in the Winter.


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2015)

This scheme resurfaces every few years in varying guises. Some all rail, some rail & road, some have pipelines added. If and only if the areas on both sides of the strait would built up it might happen. The crossing of the strait itself is the easy part. It is getting there from civilization on either side is the hard part.


----------



## chakk (Mar 26, 2015)

There is not enough potential traffic -- passenger or freight -- between Russia and USA (Alaska) to justify building a rail line. Countries outside the USA have been adding high speed rail primarily in locations where traffic increases can not be reasonably handled by air services or roadways.


----------



## crabby_appleton1950 (Mar 27, 2015)

chakk said:


> There is not enough potential traffic -- passenger or freight -- between Russia and USA (Alaska) to justify building a rail line.


Wouldn't Alaska to Russia mean ending up in Siberia? Wonder how they'd advertise that ... *"*_See our gulags_*"*


----------



## Seaboard92 (Mar 27, 2015)

Well if they connect China to the lower 48 I could see it as a freight line. And a busy one at that as much stuff comes from china. That is if rail is faster then a boat. But to do that one must tunnel past two mountain ranges. And hundreds of mile of the Russian frontier


----------



## FriskyFL (Mar 27, 2015)

Lemme check my calendar....nope, not April 1 yet.


----------



## CCC1007 (Mar 27, 2015)

Seaboard92 said:


> Well if they connect China to the lower 48 I could see it as a freight line. And a busy one at that as much stuff comes from china. That is if rail is faster then a boat. But to do that one must tunnel past two mountain ranges. And hundreds of mile of the Russian frontier


meaning it must be less than two WEEKS travel time.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Mar 27, 2015)

StriderGDM said:


> They've been revealing new plans to replace their Soyuz spacecraft for decades and still go back to the same basic thing. Lots of talk and hype, but ain't happening.


Hard to criticize the Russia over Soyuz while our own manned space program depends on theirs to actually reach space.



Oreius said:


> It could be a multinational effort, with the U.S, European Union, Russia, and even China contributing.


You mean like the Kyoto Protocol? These days if it doesn't involve extrajudicial trade then it's usually a nonstarter for intercontinental agreements.



crabby_appleton1950 said:


> I think the Russian economy is tanking due to the sanctions imposed on them for their fighting in Ukraine.


Partially due to sanctions but also due to major swings in the price of crude, the weakness of the RUB, and the strength of the USD. It's not just the Russian and Ukrainian economies which are being impacted. The fundamental concept of a representative government is being swept away as the East and West resume their cold war proxy battles.


----------



## RailRide (Mar 27, 2015)

Last time this was proposed, it was to be a joint Russia/China thing. China might have even been willing to foot the bill for reaching the closest North American railhead and connecting it to Canada. They at least seem to have some experience building rail lines over permafrost.

(Edit, since pasting text is disabled on AU

In 2014 China did indeed float a proposal to connect its rail network to North America via Russia, Bering Strait, Alaska and Canada. Apparently they were willing to foot the bill entirely on their own.

Source: Wikipedia "Bering Strait crossing"

---PCJ


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

CCC1007 said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> > Well if they connect China to the lower 48 I could see it as a freight line. And a busy one at that as much stuff comes from china. That is if rail is faster then a boat. But to do that one must tunnel past two mountain ranges. And hundreds of mile of the Russian frontier
> ...


Speed not likely to matter. Ask any railroad that parallels a navigtable waterway. The majority of the freight goes to the boat because it is cheaper. There is no perceivable traffic volume either passenger or freight on this line for the next century or so.


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 31, 2015)

I had to laugh at this passage from the article:



> Alaska is already connected to the United States by superhighway through Canada, along the Alaska Highway –


Their definition of "superhighway" must be a little different from ours.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Apr 2, 2015)

Assuming political situation is right in the near future is this possible with current technology? Linking Alaska and Russia? Bering Strait is pretty rough and there is a fault line there so tunnel is a no go.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Apr 2, 2015)

fairviewroad said:


> Their definition of "superhighway" must be a little different from ours.


From the richest counties and municipalities to the poorest possessions and territories the vast and varied range of American infrastructure is rather amazing.


----------



## Anderson (Apr 2, 2015)

Shawn Ryu said:


> Assuming political situation is right in the near future is this possible with current technology? Linking Alaska and Russia? Bering Strait is pretty rough and there is a fault line there so tunnel is a no go.


Actually, the fault line is a few hundred miles west of the strait (it's actually west of Kamchatka). The strait itself is geologically not significant when you get right down to it (there's no continental break there, no continental shelf or deep trench or anything like that)...the best comparison would be the English Channel or the southern parts of the North Sea.

A handy, rough map of the boundary:

http://elainemeinelsupkis.typepad.com/earth_news/images/2008/04/24/picture_9.png


----------



## jis (Apr 2, 2015)

fairviewroad said:


> I had to laugh at this passage from the article:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, just like India is connected to China by National Highways with fancy numbers.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Apr 2, 2015)

I can see Russia from my patio! Does this mean the Texas Eagle will be extended? LOL


----------



## jis (Apr 2, 2015)

Been on those 'shrooms Jim?


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2015)

Shawn Ryu said:


> Assuming political situation is right in the near future is this possible with current technology? Linking Alaska and Russia? Bering Strait is pretty rough and there is a fault line there so tunnel is a no go.


Seikan tunnel between Honshu and Hokkaio is through much worse geology. For the Siberia to Alaska railroad, the tunnel is probably the easiest part.


----------



## neroden (Apr 12, 2015)

Yeah, the hard part is actually Alaska to Canada across the Rockies. Alaska to Russia is quite straightforward.


----------



## jis (Apr 13, 2015)

Just another very long tunnel or two should take care of the Rockies 

Sort of like the Chinese are proposing to take care of the Himalayas for their proposed Xegaze to Kathmandu rail link.


----------



## WICT106 (May 30, 2015)

I note that, just to connect Alaska to the rest of the North American railroad network, over 1000 miles of track must be built. In a part of the continent that is sparsely populated. This 1000 -- 1500 miles would have to be built, over some challenging terrain, and then another 2000 miles would have to be built in order to cross the Bering Strait and connect to the Russian railways. The costs, combined with the marginal prospect of financial returns, Make this project either a "Moon program" -level national unifier, or a complete non-starter. I think we might see the Alaska connection, but no trans--Bering Strait Tunnel.

Never gonna happen, dear readers.


----------



## Anderson (May 30, 2015)

On the one hand, I do think a Russia-Alaska-US rail system is plausible if you get the right conditions for it (mainly, increased resource extraction efforts in the relevant parts of all three countries). With that said, it won't be HSR...it'll be a "normal" freight railroad, perhaps with limited passenger service (i.e. a train per day in each direction, with one or two per week running as "tourist"-ish trains with improved services).


----------



## Amstruck (Jul 20, 2015)

Oreius said:


> It could happen! Would Amtrak help with this? Seems like a neat idea. This would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, however.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/russia-unveils-plans-for-high-speed-railway-and-superhighway-to-connect-europe-and-america-10132564.html


Amtrak under the current management would be too incompetent to make a hot dog, let alone doing something at this magnitude. Beside why would the US want to "link" with Russia?


----------



## Eric S (Jul 20, 2015)

Not sure how Amtrak's ability or inability to make a hot dog has anything to do with a rather far-fetched idea of US-Russia HSR line. Or a US-Russia standard rail line.


----------



## cirdan (Jul 21, 2015)

Seaboard92 said:


> Well if they connect China to the lower 48 I could see it as a freight line. And a busy one at that as much stuff comes from china. That is if rail is faster then a boat. But to do that one must tunnel past two mountain ranges. And hundreds of mile of the Russian frontier


It may be fatser to send freight that way but it won't be cheaper as modern freight ships are pretty much unbeatable in terms of cost efficiency.

So the question is, how big is that segment of the market for which speed can justify the extra cost but for which air freight is still too expensive.

I don't think that sector alone is big enough to be able to pay for such a highly expensive infrastructure.


----------

