High speed Durban–JHB rail link viable

[John Ashworth]

High speed Durban–JHB rail link viable, says Prasa's Montana

By: Irma Venter
9th June 2010
Engineering News

A high-speed rail link between Durban and Johannesburg, as first mooted publicly by government in April, is viable, but only as a combined freight and passenger operation.

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) CEO Tshepo Lucky Montana says that the agency, which houses the Metrorail operations, has completed the prefeasibility study on the proposed venture, adding that the “project is financially viable, but we are convinced it will not work without also carrying freight”.

Montana says Prasa envisions that the train, if it becomes a reality, will travel between 300 km/h and 350 km/h, completing the 600-km-plus distance in 3,5 hours. It currently takes more than ten hours to travel between the cities by train.

He says Prasa is now waiting for the go-ahead from the Department of Transport to move on to a feasibility study.

Transport Minister Sibusiso Ndebele earlier this week did not want to be drawn on the project, telling Engineering News Online only that he regards the projects as “desirable”.

Montana says that the Durban – Johannesburg corridor is “extremely busy” and that it will only “get worse over the next 15 years. It requires increased rail capacity, and we have to move if we do not want to be left behind”.

A large volume of imported goods have to be freighted up to Gauteng, the economic heartbeat of the country, with Durban also the exit point for many goods exported from the province. Durban is also a popular holiday destination with many Gautengers.

Montana believes it is possible for the project to be a public-private partnership, offering a 35-year concession to a suitable party.

“Otherwise, the cost may be prohibitive.”

Montana does not want to elaborate on the possible rand-value of building such a rail link, which will require quite a bit of tunnelling through the Drakensberg.

“A high-speed rail link will reduce travel times and increase efficiency. It will be quicker than driving, and very competitive compared with the complete flying experience.

“There are 40 high-speed rail systems in the world. We can’t miss out on this rail renaissance. The future of intercity travel rests with high-speed rail.”

The Gauteng province earlier this week launched the first phase of the Gautrain rapid-rail link, a PPP project which ferries passengers between Sandton and the OR Tambo International Airport at 160 km/h. By 2011, it will also link Pretoria with Johannesburg.

[Rob Jamieson]

Great idea, but it will obviously cost a fortune. A dedicated high-speed line will be great for passenger trains, but can't see it working for freight trains, except maybe container and car trains. Will a high speed passenger service be viable? I think that in the near term no, but in the longer term yes. There will need to be a major swing away from air travel to generate the amount of passengers needed to make it viable. Should such a service be reliable and efficient, I am sure it would be able to draw the required numbers of passengers especially as in the future, more people will be concerned about enviromental issues and this is where train travel should become more favourable over air travel.

As far as normal freight services are concerned, major upgrades to the present mainline would be required to provide a faster and more reliable service. I am sure that this could be achieved. This is probably more important than a dedicated high speed service as the amount of vehicles on the roads to Durban needs to be drastically reduced due to its effects on the enviroment.

[Derek Walker]

It would make more sense to join Soweto, the West Rand and the South of Johannesburg onto the Gautrain than fork up all that dosh for a high speed link to Durban.

[John Ashworth]

Derek, surely the two are different, and it could be both/and rather than either/or? Soweto, etc is basically an urban link, so this would fit well with the Gautrain system, which is not a "real" high speed train - 160 kph is a good speed for outer suburban commuter services. But Jo'burg-Durban is an intercity line, where trains could operate at a much higher speed, provided they can find a way of separating passenger and freight. I don't think any of the "real" high speed lines in the world (ie 250+ kph) have freight on them.

[Steve Appleton]

Good points, John.
Not only that but Gautrain has a seriously limited loading gauge -- the UK one, imposed by its commercial developers.

Any inter-urban high-speed line must be built to at least European UIC standards, or even better, the US AAR dimensional standard, allowing much bigger rolling-stock including double-decking of pax and containers.

If that is not done, then we might as well stay with the current SAR track and loading gauges for all the non-advantage that would accrue.

[Kevin Wilson-Smith]

If they are thinking of freight this would be interesting.........

There is a huge volume of daily containers brought up by road to JHB. I would not hazard a guess at the numbers, but it is the bulk of the goods imported for the Reef.

[Aidan McCarthy]

What for me is strange in this proposal is the idea of carrying freight and high speed passenger on the same line. Most of the high speed lines constructed e.g. French TGV are dedicated passenger high speed lines with steep grades, the freight runs on the existing network. The ability of the high speeds to have steeper grades is that the light weight passenger sets at high speed are impacted less by the grades that low speed heavy freight trains. Mixing high speed and lower speed trains from an operational point of view is also an issue.

[Kevin Wilson-Smith]

Aiden - that is a very pertinent point.

I am not an expert at all but logically the two do not mix - as actually is proven in the States with the Amtrak debacle.

[Ian Roberts]

Some Comments I posted on the Sar-L forum on June 9 prior to this thread going active and reposted here for those who do not go there.

"I am fascinated by all this talk of TGV type trains in South Africa.

The reality, which is shared by countries like Australia, Canada and the
United States is that, with few exceptions population centres to feed
passengers to this train are very limited.

The reality of air transport is that it can move passengers between, for
example Cape Town and Johannesburg in less than two hours plus the two hour
check in time and probably skims off the premium passengers to the extent
that a TGV operation would only be able to provide a very infrequent service
due to lack of premium demand.

There are very few intermediate centres with sufficient population to
provide additional passengers.

The TGV in France has several differences over a similar South African
development

1) Population is more dense and there are usually sufficient potential
passengers to justify more stops

2) The French trains originate mainly from Paris, which is reasonably
central and run out nonstop for several hundred Km to a major rail center on
designated TGV passenger only railways where the split to their final
destinations on conventional tracks at lower speeds. The gradients on these
lines are often much more severe than those designated for freight traffic.
This extension requires common gauges to succeed.

In the United States long distance travel by train is more of a tourist
activity, personal cars are used or for longer distances planes or if
travelling on the cheap busses. The only exception, where high speed is
viable, is the Washington to Boston corridor in the north east. Of course
politicians are always trying to propose High Speed Rail, they seem to have
little success in raising viable finance."