Comments on: IRTS — Part 2

By: Prasanna

Prasanna — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:02:50 +0000

I am not sure if we need trains that go faster, I am more of the opinion that the railways needs to cut out unnecessary stops.

For example the average time from Bangalore to Mysore by Rail is 3 hours. But by cutting out most unnecessary stops one train does it in 2 hours and 20 minutes(including mandatory slowing down at all junctions/stations) . The fact is, most folks travel from Bangalore to Mysore, not to all those intermediate stops that are encountered.

As much as the railways should plan for higher loads and speeds(which might reflect 10, 20 years down the line), there is a crying need for efficient utilization of current resources, to serve immediate needs!

By: Prakash

Prakash — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:25:32 +0000

The need for creation of social and physical infrastructure is undeniable. However, i would tend to agree on greater government effort only on the first 2 issues - education and more sustainable sources of energy.

There are many facets of rail transportation that need to be improved before going in for any more massive keynesian projects. The very first is that prices have to be responsive to the market, which means increasing passenger fares and reducing freight rates. The money gained by the increase in passenger fares should ideally be put into creation of greater infrastructure, most importnat of which is digital signalling systems to increase the safety of rail networks.

Unnecessary roadblocks to creation of better airport infrastructure should be removed.

The administered market in fuels should be replaced by a free market. Remove cross-subsidy. Let people buy petrol and diesel from anywhere in the world. This will raise the diesel price again, thus giving advantage to rails.

By: kuffir

kuffir — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:06:46 +0000

the fact that none of the four readers above had chosen to comment on the very first item on your list is, what shall i say, telling. and your postponing your own views on the issue seems to indicate the general consensus on what’s needed ( and can be delayed).
in my view it’s ‘inevitable’ that india educate all its people now,in order to avoid the largest number of potential speedbreakers on its path to true ’superpowerdom’, later.

By: Vkay

Vkay — Mon, 25 Jul 2005 22:47:30 +0000

If we are to have better rail, we should be thinking about competing in an open market. What use is it for us to sell services for peanuts when we have tigers to feed?

Most Indians are now demanding better wages or they walk. So why not put pressure on the industry at a govenment level and get some money out of our IT and outsourcing industries whilst we can, and whilst it will do some good for India. As you say yourself, what use is our I.T. Industry when it all moves to China. Most blogs point out the fact that India is getting les of the outsource work, yet we invest in more I.T. Education. I.T. does not grow food, does not move people does not do much for India, it is only to be American slaves that the Industry exists.

I say its time the Industry paid its way, time the Taxes were raised and time India got a backbone again.

That is unless you are like the monkey and like peanut, or like the American and like yellow leaves.

You only get one life friend.

By: Kiran

Kiran — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 13:26:35 +0000

Two things: big nations rarely have very high speed trains. In the US, unless I am mistaken most trains travel at 60 mph or almost 100 kmph, not much higher than that. Moreover the cost of travelling by train over a given distance is almost the same as travelling by flight, both having their inherent advantages and disadvantages.

The Bullet and TGV are the glory of smaller nations like Japan and France respectively. In fact the US does not even have the best highways in the world, with rarely a road that does not have an upper speed limit, unlike Germany or nations in the Middle East.

The Indian government is taking the view that the average speed of trains needs to be improved for freight, where it is currently a princely 22 kmph. Accordingly a high speed freight corridor is being worked on with Japanese help. This would be laid along the Golden Quadrilateral. But yes, passenger trains can also increase in speed.

For the Chennai-Delhi route for instance, flights would still remain the best option.

By: Michael H.

Michael H. — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:10:03 +0000

Hi Atanu
Eswaran has a valid point: this has to pay for itself, and we don’t really know if it would. Faster trains will probably be much more expensive. It might be nice if you could have faster trains for the new middle class of India and slower ones for the poorer people, but obviously you cannot have them running on the same track. So it raises an interesting question: if the trains ran twice as fast but cost four times as much to ride, is it worth it to the average Indian?

By: Eswaran

Eswaran — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:18:35 +0000

Good blog that you have got here folks! All the best..

Atanu,

When you talk about “Too expensive” and “People can’t afford it” as objections to your idea, you dismiss them as if they are not relevant. If an IRTS is built, but the ticket prices are too expensive and people do not buy tickets (because they cannot afford it), then the system is doomed to failure. This is not a fear of large projects or socialist thinking - the project must be financially justifiable. Who pays for what and how much should be clarified in your next post. If you want the government to pay for it (this being a public good), we should also remind ourselves of all that can go wrong with that.