WSJ article on China HSR/foreign maker friction

[bikkuri bahn]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704814204575507353221141616.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle

 

Nothing new here covered previously by the FT.  Comments section interesting as usual, with the same (mistaken) belief that higher top speeds make HSR trainsets "better" than competitors.  Yeah, well the concorde was way faster than the jumbo jet, but which was more successful?  Most competent railways are businesses that have to worry about real world things like profit and shareholder value, and are not organs of the army or strategic government largesse.

[Mudkip Orange]

Concorde was killed by NIMBYs and crappy business plans, not technology.

[CaptOblivious]

Concorde was killed by NIMBYs and crappy business plans, not technology.

 

There was also that one tire…

[KenS]

The tire was the death blow.  But the Concorde died decades earlier when it was restricted to over-ocean routes due to people not wanting their windows rattled (something I can sympathize with, actually, but it is a type of NIMBYism).

[westfalen]

There was a TV documentary, British made I think, about the Concorde on TV here recently. It was a lot more successful than most people think, British Airways had made test flights after the French crash and were about to announce their return to full service, the date?, Sept 11 2001. They interviewed the pilot who flew the test flight and he said that when they landed after returning from New York and were told what had happened in the U.S. while they where enroute back to the U.K. they knew it was all over. Like a lot of things, terrorism played a big part in Concorde's final downfall.

[bikkuri bahn]

Leading edge technology, for all its merits, has to meet the test of business and operational reality.  If one of the Concorde's problems was noise, than you can also say the same about HSR going over 350km/h- higher speeds means more noise, plus more wear and tear on train systems and infrastructure.  If railways are willing to mitigate that with higher ticket prices (leaving it to the market), or through subsidy, then fine, but that doesn't make it "better".

[Nick_Burman]

Concorde was killed by NIMBYs and crappy business plans, not technology.

 

Rattling and/or broken window panes! My grandmother lived in Clevedon by the Bristol Channel, BAE's test center is at Filton north of Bristol (about 20 miles away) and when the Concorde was being tested pilots used to accelerate into supersonic cruise speed right after leaving the airfield...the chorus of complaints from houseowners (Granny included) about rattling windows when Concorde flew over meant that BAE had to alter the test filght routes and BA pilots could only accelerate into supersonic speed only when out at sea...

 

 

Cheers NB

[CaptOblivious]

Also, the cramped seats. As it happens, I would never have fit in a standard seat on the Concord, as the seat pitch was too narrow for my 6'8" frame, and the long legs that come with it…hell, I have enough time fitting in regular coach seats. Person in front of me does not have the option of leaning back. I have to warn them at the beginning of the flight, and even then the rare *sshat has to give it a try anyway, and when it does work, repeatedly slams their seat into my knees, often over my objections…

 

Grr. Sorry, need to vent.