A Paper titled: "High Speed Rail- Need, Challenges, Key Issues and Options: Indian Perspective" was presented during the 4th Annual South Asia Transport Infrastructure Conference 2016 held at Shanri-La's- Eros Hotel, New Delhi on 19-20 th september 2016 by Rajesh Prasad, IRSE, Chief Project Manager & Group General Manager, Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd, Kolkata

1. HIGH SPEED RAIL – NEED, CHALLENGES,
KEY ISSUES & OPTIONS:
-INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
by
Rajesh Prasad, IRSE
Chief Project Manager & Group General Manager
Rail Vikas Nigam Limited, Kolkata

2. Contents
I. Need of High Speed Rail in India
II. Key Issues, Challenges and Few experiences
III. Implementation Options

4. Foot plate inspection between Madrid
and Cordoba in high speed train

5. Comparison of HSR System in the world
First Inauguration year
Country Year
Japan 1964
France 1981
Italy 1988
Germany 1991
Spain 1992
South Korea 2004
Taiwan 2007
China 2008
India -

7. WHAT IS HIGH SPEED RAIL?
 As per UIC definition, trains running at speed of
200 kmph on upgraded track and 250 kmph or
faster on new track are called High Speed
Trains.
 These services may require separate, dedicated
tracks and "sealed" corridors in which grade
crossings are eliminated through the
construction of highway underpasses or
overpasses.

8. Japan France Italy Germany Spain South
Korea
Taiwan China India
Track Gauge
(mm)
1,435 1,435 1,435 1,435 1,435
1,668
1,435 1,435 1,435 -
Minimum
Curve Radius
2,500-
4,000
4,000-
6,250
5,400 4,000-
4,670
4,000 7,000 6,250 4,000-
9,000
-
Max. Gradient 35 35 8.5 40 12.5 15 25 35 -
Max Axle load
(T)
16-17 17 17 16-19.5 17.2 17 25.5 20 -
Distance btw
Centres of
Tracks
4.2-4.3 4.2-4.8 5.0 4.5-4.7 4.3-
4.7
5.0 4.5 5.0 -
X-Sec. of
Double Track
tunnel
62.8 -
63.5
71 -
100
76 82-92 75 107 90 90-100 -
Track Structure Ballasted/
Ballastles
s
Ballasted Ballaste
d
Ballasted/Ball
astless
Ballaste
d
Ballaste
d/Ballast
less
Ballasted/B
allastless
Ballasted/
Ballastles
s
Comparison of HSR System in the world

9. Japan France Italy Germany Spain South
Korea
Taiwan China India
Rolling Stock
Type
EMU LOCO LOCO
/EMU
LOCO/E
MU
LOCO
/EMU
LOCO
/EMU
LOCO EMU -
Car Body width 3,350-
3,380
2,814-
2,904
2750-
3000
2950-
3020
2830-
2960
2904-
2970
3380 3200-
3380
-
Max. Operation
Speed (Km/H)
320 320 300 300 300 300 300 300 -
Power/Seat
(KW/seat)
13.13 23.47 16.67 18.65 21.84 24.24 10.37 20.00 -
Body material Alumi
num
Steel Alumi
num
Aluminum Alumi
num
Alumi
num
Aluminu
m
Alumin
um
-
Power Supply
KV
AC
2x25
AC
2x25
AC
2x25
AC 2x15 AC
2x25
AC
2x25
AC
2x25
AC
2x25
-
Overhead
Catenary
Heavy
Compoun
d/Simple
Catenary
Simple
Catenary
Twin
Simple
Catenary
Stitched
Catenary
Stitched
Catenary
Simple
Catenary
Heavy
Compound
Catenary
Simple/S
titched
Catenary
Signal Type Cab Single
Continuo
us
Cab Single
Continuous
Cab Single
Continuou
s
Cab Single
Continuous
Cab Single
Continuou
s
Cab Single
Continuou
s
Cab Single
Continuous
Cab Single
Continuous
Comparison of HSR System in the world

10. WHY HSR IS REQUIRED IN INDIA ?

11. Commercial vs Social
• Railway has social obligation to run transport service
for all the area of country irrespective of profit
motive. It can not close uneconomic lines
• It can not increase fare due to adverse political
impact even though high fuel cost – latest reaction
on dynamic pricing
• It has to generate enough resources for efficient
maintenance & replacements of assets on its own

12. ENERGY EFFICIENCY
High Speed saves Energy Costs and reduces Greenhouse Gases
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
“Fuel equivalent grams” per passenger-kilometer
High Speed
Railway
Bus
Plane 51.1
29.9
18.3
17.6
12.1
Classic Train
Private Car

13. LAND REQUIREMENT
A HSR-line allows more passengers than an six lane highway per hour
Elevated rail corridors reduce the hassle of Land Acquisition.
Land requirements are Smaller
35 m

14. DECONGESTION AND CAPACITY ADDITION
High Speed Rail Motorway
Double Track 2x3 Lanes
12 Trains per hour per Direction 4000 Cars per hour per direction
1200 Pax/Train 2.0 (Average) Passengers per car
Capacity = 14400 Passengers
per hour
Capacity = 8000 Passenger per
Hour
Reduction in commuting time between cities and
added capacity gives an excellent opportunity for
decongestion of the mega urban centers and growth of
smaller towns and other cities.

15. Increasing Urbanization
The major challenges faced are:
 Major Urban centers are severely
congested:
 Dramatic growth in vehicle
ownership in the past
decade.
 Accessing jobs, education -
becoming increasingly time-
consuming.
 Billions of man-hours are
lost with people stuck in
traffic.
285
377
473
590
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2001 2011 2021 2030
Urban Population in India (in Million)

16. Explosion in Inter City Travel
India’s urban population - 285 million
reported in the 2001 census and 377
million in 2011 census.
McKinsey Global Institute (MGI)
projects - 590 million by 2030 (40%
of India’s total projected population).
Increasing Urbanization
The rapid urbanization in the country
has triggered a growing demand for
inter city traffic between metropolitan
cities and 2nd and 3rd tier cities.
In absence of HSR, passenger traffic
of Airlines/ Car users is growing at 15-
20%

17. DECONGESTION of Metropolitan cities
Tier I
City
Tier II
Tier I
City
Small towns and Tier II & III Cities
Tier I
City
Tier II
city
Tier II city

18. TRAVEL TIME ( Trigger for modal shift)
Delhi
(city centre)
(city centre)Delhi Airport
Chandigarh
Airport
.75 hr 30 min1.25 hrs at Terminal + 1 hr Flying time
Total time: 3.5 hrs
Plane
Delhi
(city centre)
Chandigarh
(city centre)
Total time: 1 hr
High Speed
Railway
Journey time for air travel involves travel to airport, away from city centers and waiting
time at Airports. Distance between DELHI to CHANDIGARH is 245 Km.

19. HSR is energy efficient and is less polluting than Road/Air travel.
India imports about 80% of its oil requirement. HSR will use indigenous
energy resources like thermal/hydel/nuclear based energy
Economically as well environmentally, Rail based Transport
system is ideally suited for India.
NEED FOR HSR IN INDIA

20. Introduction of
TGV service in
1981-83
Evolution of first Class rail traffic in France
Before and after opening of the first HSR line
 Existing long distance rail services have difficulties
in competing with road and air modes of transport,
 The new HSR lines can stop the decline of the
railway’s share on the long distance transport
segment along those corridor.
 It provides an attractive transport offer in terms of
reduced travel times and comfortable journey.
 Despite the high investment cost it is economically
sustainable and need of the hour.
IMPACT OF INTRODUCTION OF HSR

21. Railway’s rescue
plan through
HSRC & NHSRC

22. RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED
Delhi
Secunderabad
Mumbai
Chennai
Bengaluru
Kolkata
(3 PIUs)
Jodhpur
Ahmedabad
Lucknow
Pune
Bhubaneswar
(2 PIUs)
Bhopal
(3 PIUs)
Waltair
Rishikesh
Raipur
(2 PIUs)
Corporate Office at Delhi
27 Project Implementation Units
Kota
Kanpur
• RVNL has a lean and
thin organization.
• Only 446 employees as
on 31st March 2016.
Varanasi
(2 PIUs)
Chandigarh
Ambala
268
178 Number
of officers
Number
of staff

23. PROJECTS WITH RVNL
Projects completed as on 31st March 2016 50
Projects in hand as on 01.04.2016 78
Projects under implementation by Railways 2
Projects under execution by RVNL 42+3 part
(including projects partially commissioned)
Projects for which tenders have been or are being invited 5
Projects where execution could not be taken up for various reasons
 Projects on hold due to constraint of funds 4
 Projects adversely affected/held up due to land 7
acquisition, forest clearance, law and order & other issues
 Clearances from Central & State Governments 1+2 part
(Metro projects) shifting of utilities etc
 Under Planning & Development 14+1 part

24. PROJECT LENGTH COMPLETED
UPTO MARCH 2016
S. No. Plan Heads Completed (km)
1. New Line 213.82
2. Gauge Conversion 1590.2
3. Doubling 2051.24
4. Railway Electrification 2712.07
Total 6567.33
5. RE as part of Doubling/GC/NL 1421.73
6. Workshop projects 3
7. Cable Stayed Bridge 1
ORDER BOOK – Rs. 40,000 Cr.

25. TURNOVER
843.35
985.26
1423.11
1654.16 1749.08
1444.65
1597.92
2116.85
2492.37
3141.97
4527.17
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Rscrore
Cumulative-Rs 21975.89

26. RVNL & HIGH SPEED RAIL
• Initially Ministry of Railways has directed RVNL to
form a SPV for planning and implementation of
High Speed Rail projects.
• High Speed Rail Corporation of India Ltd. (HSRC)
incorporated on 25th July, 2012 as a 100%
subsidiary of RVNL.
• NHSRC has now been incorporated for
implementation of High Speed Rail

27. NHSRC has been incorporated

28. KEY ISSUES & CHALLENGES

29. Key Issues & Challenges
System
Integration
(1) Political Will
(4) Financing
HSR Project(s)
(5) Land Acquisition
(3) Economic &
Financial Viability
(7) Selection of
Technology
High Speed Rail
Development
(2) Selection of
Project Corridor(s)
(6) Policy Framework

30. (1) POLITICAL WILL
 Each HSR corridor will have a long gestation period and
will be highly capital intensive, so, strategic thinking is
required at the Apex level for implementing in a
programmed manner
 Coordination among Central Government Ministries, State
Governments and Government Agencies
Success stories- National Highways, Airport
up-gradation, Yamuna express-way

31. (2) Selection of Project Corridor(s)
for Implementation
 Vast country – Many potential corridors - Selection of
pilot Project;
 Economically/financially viable projects to be given
priority;
 Willingness of local governments to participate in the
project by way of land and funding support.

32. (3) Economic & Financial Viability of the
Project
 High capital cost will impact viability
 HSR will be a dedicated line; High demand risk due to
higher tariffs as compared to conventional rail.
 Emphasis on other alternative revenue sources like Real
estate revenues, carbon credits, cross-subsidy from road/air
travelers.

33. (4) Financing of the Project(s)
 The high capital costs of HSR makes it a financing
challenge.
 GOI may not fully fund the corridors.
 Most state governments will have to raise finances by
extra levies, real estate etc. even for part funding
 Private sector may not have adequate financing
capability to fund the large HSR projects. Proper project
structuring by unbundling the projects into smaller
packages may be essential.
Funding by multilateral and bilateral funding agencies

34. (5) Land Acquisition
 Critical due to stringent alignment requirements
 HSR corridors pass through conurbations or sensitive
land;
 Strong public protests adversely affecting large number
of projects.
Mix of alignment choice- grade/ elevated/ tunnels

35. (6) POLICY FRAMEWORK
 Robust policy framework for:
 Seamless implementation of projects
 Assurance for attracting International investors
 Creation of National High Speed Rail Authority

36. (7) Selection of Technology
Choice of Technology:
A) Fixed Infrastructure:
 Mix of Embankment/Elevated/ Underground Structures and
their dimensional control;
 Construction Gauge;
 Fencing of the complete track/elevated track;
 Electrical Installations.
B) Fast Upgrading Technology
 Rolling Stock
 Signaling and Communication
 Train Control
 Fare Collection

37. INTERNATIONAL CASE STUDIES

38. TGV, France
French Govt.
SNCF - French
national rail operator
Réseau Ferré de France
(RFF) – State owned
Access Charges
(for use of rail infrastructure)
The first opened in 1981
between Paris and Lyon
(480 Km) and now total
network 1887 km. French
govt. plan to have new 2000
km HSR lines by 2020.
Borrowing from the
international markets to
enable it to undertake
major projects but not on
a particular project
basis. This funding is
supported by
government guarantee
but is restricted to the
amount that RFF can
repay from the access
fees
The rolling stock for the
TGV lines is procured
by SNCF and is funded
through lease
commitments

39. TGV, France
 In addition to borrowings, the TGV lines have also been developed with grant
funding from local sources. Funding pattern for three TGV lines are:
Funding by Source TGV Est East Rhine Rhone Brittany loire
French State 39% 31% 32%
Regional funding 24% 29% 35%
RFF 22% 26% 33%
SNCF 2% 4% n/a
EU 10% 8% n/a
Luxembourg 4% n/a n/a
Switzerland n/a 3% n/a
Concession model Partnership contract
► Rail operators pay an
access charge based on
their actual use of the
infrastructure
► Demand risk lies with
the concessionaire
►RFF pays a rental or
availability fee based on
the performance of the
private sector partner
► Demand risk remains
with RFF
Forms of PPP
models
followed by
RFF to create
Infrastructure

40. Infraspeed Consortium: Fluor Daniel
BV, Koninklijke BAM/NBM Amstelland
NV, Siemens Nederland NV, Siemens
Transportation Systems, Innisfree
Limited and Charterhouse Project
Equity Investment Limited
30 years Concession on DBFM (PPP)
basis
HSL Zuid, Netherland
HSA
Dutch govt –
6 D&C contractors
One D&C
contractor
Rail Systems
Network
Connections
Substructure
Passenger
Transport
• 125 km line between the
Netherlands (Amsterdam)
and Belgium border
(Schiphol).
• This lines provides
connectivity of Amsterdam
to Brussels and Paris

41. TAIWAN
Consortium led by
Kawasaki Heavy Industries
• A concession to finance,
construct, and operate the
High Speed Rail System
for a period of 35 years
and a concession for HSR
station area development
for a period of 50 years.
• Demand risk
transferred to the private
sector operator
Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation:
Alstom Transport SA of France and
Siemens AG of Germany
• The link Taipei to
Kaohsiung - total length
of 345km.
• The project had a
construction value of
approximately US$18bn.
Procurement of Rolling
Stock
Taiwan Govt.
10 % of yearly earnings to
government for further HSR
development during the
HSR operating concession
period regardless of the
performance of the
concession company.
The accumulated amount
could not be less than
US$3.4bn.

42. DIAMOND QUADRILATERAL
NETWORK IN INDIA

43. Diamond Quadrilateral
Diagonals
Legend
Diamond
Quadrilateral of
High Speed Rail
Network
44

44. Feasibility studies for Diamond
Quadrilateral Network
• Railway Board has entrusted the feasibility studies of
Diamond Quadrilateral of HSR network to RVNL/HSRC,
(i) Delhi-Mumbai (1357 Km),
(ii) Mumbai-Chennai (1260 Km),
(iii) Chennai-Kolkata (1649 Km),
(iv) Kolkata-Delhi (1429 Km) and both the diagonals i.e.
(v) Mumbai-Kolkata (1968 Km)
(vi) Delhi-Chennai (2182 Km)

45. Status of HSRC projects
S
No.
Corridor/
Consultant
Status
1 Delhi-Chandigarh-
Amritsar
M/s Systra -RITES
Draft Final Report of Pre-Feasibility study was submitted by consultant
04.03.16.
Presentation made to the Railway Board on 01.04.2016 and the remarks
on the DFR have been sent to the Consultant on 26.4.16 and the Final
report to be submitted by September 2016.
2 New Delhi-
Mumbai
M/s TSDI,China -
Lehmeyer
Inception report was submitted on 2.11.2015 and was accepted on
17.11.2015.
Interim Report 1 to be submitted by first week of June 16.
Interim Report 2 to be submitted by December 2016.
Draft final report is to be submitted to Railway Board by March 2017
3 Mumbai-Chennai
M/s Systra,
France- RITES - E
& Y
Inception report was submitted on 30.10.2015 and accepted on
13.11.2015.
Interim Report 1 submitted in May 2016
Interim Report 2 to be submitted by December 2016.
Draft final report is to be submitted to Railway Board by March 2017
4 Delhi-Kolkata
M/s Ineco-Typsa
Spain
Interim Report 1 submitted on 16.02.2016
Interim Report 2 to be submitted by December 2016.
Draft final report is to be submitted to Railway Board by March 2017

46. Status of Projects with HSRC
S No. Corridor Status
5 Mumbai-Kolkata
(Mumbai-Nagpur
section as Phase-I)
Feasibility study is being done under Government to
Government cooperation with Spain by M/s ADIF-INECO.
In the first phase, study for only Mumbai-Nagpur section of
the corridor is being taken up.
6 Delhi-Chennai Feasibility study is being done under Government to
Government cooperation and Financed by China by M/s
SIYUAN. The Planning Study for feasibility study has been
completed and the Report submitted by them in July, 2015.
MORs decision is awaited regarding Indian counterpart
funding to take up certain activities of the Study
7 Chennai-Kolkata Yet to be decided by MOR.
Note:- S.N. 2 to 7 are the studies of Diamond Quadrilateral of High Speed Rail Network

47. FEASIBILITY STUDIES ON
KOLKATA –NEW DELHI
HIGH SPEED RAILWAY CORRIDOR

48. NEW DELHI – KOLKATA HIGH SPEED RAIL
CORRIDOR

49. NEW delhi – kolkata HIGH Speed Rail corridor

50. The best option & main features :-
 This alternative is the longest one (1,565 Km)
 Alternative D is the best one in terms of Investment and Territorial
Structure, and the second one in terms of Environment
 This alternative is the one with more commercial stops (17) which
determines the number of passengers available along the corridor
 In terms of “social benefits”, alternative D is the one that allow more
benefit impact in the society (less cost per kilometre and more
demand)

51. MUMBAI – AHMEDABAD
HIGH SPEED RAILWAY CORRIDOR

52. Implementation Options
Considering the case studies, following could be the
implementation options
 Non – PPP Option: The project are implemented by the
Government on EPC basis
 PPP Options
 Option 1: Design, Build, Finance, Operate and Transfer
(DBFOT) of the entire project by a single Private Developer
 Option 2: Unbundling the project into different components, so
as to make the project components attractive to private players
from the perspective of affordability in terms of size and risk
allocation:
 B&T (Fixed infrastructure)
 DFOT (Train operations)

53. Implementation Options
 Whether project is implemented through PPP or partial
Government funding route, pre-construction activities should
be started in a programmed manner – Government guidelines
 MOR has already created a company named High Speed Rail
Corporation of India as a subsidiary of RVNL.
 MOR has further created company called NHSRC for
implementation of Mumbai-Aahmedabad High Speed Railway
Corridor

54. Funding Options
 Project Development Activities
 A separate fund may be created
 To be recovered from viable projects along with additional fee
 Rolling fund for further project development activities
 Funding Support for PPP projects:
 Viability Gap Funding
 Multilateral/Bilateral loans by providing Centre government
guarantees
 Centre government guarantee for Long term Bonds of Project
SPVs

55. Funding Options
 Funding Support for Non-PPP Projects
 Directly funded by Centre/State Governments
 Other Sources of Funds
 Revenue share from Concessionaires (train operators)
 Contribution from State Governments
 Real Estate Development

56. State: Maharashtra/Dadra-Nagar-Haveli (UT)/ Gujarat
Main Features
Route length 546 km
Maharashtra -176 km
Dadra-Nagar-Haveli (UT) 6 km
Gujarat -364 Km
NHSRC is the nodal and implementing agency
MUMBAI-AHMEDABAD
High Speed Rail

57. MUMBAI-AHMEDABAD : Main Features
Stations and Terminals:
2 Main Terminal Stations in Mumbai, and Ahmedabad
3Intermediate Stations in Navi Mumbai, Surat and
Vadodara.
1 Depot : Main Depot in Ahmedabad (Geratpur)

58. MUMBAI-AHMEDABAD : Main Features
Speed:
The operation speed has been assumed to be 350kmph.
The best travel times at this speed (without stops)1’52”.
(Avg commercial speed will be 286 kmph)
At the horizon year 2021, this operation speed will be the
worldwide standard.
A 350 Km/h operation speed provides 12 minutes time savings
between Mumbai and Ahmedabad compared to a 300 Km/h
speed although energy consumption increases by 27%

59. Travelling Time and Stopping Station
Station Distance (KM) Travelling time and Stopping station
Typical Rapid train Each Stop Train
Mumbai (B.K.C.) 0 K 000 0:00 0:00
Thane 27 K 950 - 0:10
Virar 65 K 170 - 0:24
Boisar 104 K 260 - 0:39
Vapi 167 K 940 - 0:59
Bilimora 216 K 580 - 1:15
Surat 264 K 580 0:58 1:32
Bharuch 323 K 110 - 1:52
Vododara 397 K 060 1:32 2:14
Anand/Nadiad 447 K 380 - 2:32
Ahmedabad 500 K 190 1:59 2:50
Sabarmati 505 K 750 2:07 2:58
Stopping time at Surat, Vadodara and Ahmedabad : 2 Minutes
Other Stations: 1 minute

60. Train Operation Plan
Year 2023 2033 2043 2053
Train configuration 10 10 -16 16 16
Traffic volume
(person/day/one-
direction)
17,900 31,700 56,800 92,900
Number of trains
(day/one-direction)
35 51 64 105
Numbers of trains
(train/hour/one-
direction)
Peak hour
Off peak
Peak hour :
about 3
Off peak:
about 2
Peak hour :
about 4
Off peak:
about 3
Peak hour :
about 6
Off peak:
about 3
Peak hour :
about 8
Off peak:
about 6

61. Structure arrangement
Type of Structure Length Share
Embankment 313.0 Km 64.6 %
Cut 8.9 Km 1.8 %
Viaduct 122.5 Km 25.3 %
Bridge 12.8 Km 2.6 %
Tunnel 27.5 Km 5.7 %
Total 484.7 Km 100.0 %

62. Proposed main specification for rolling
stockItems Main specifications
Train Type EMU
Train formation 10 Cars ( at the beginning), 16 Cars (future)
Car body width 3.4 m
Axel load 17 T or less
Passenger capacity 10 Cars – 750 seats or more
16 Cars – 1200 seats or more
Bogie Bolster –less type with air spring suspension
system
Propulsion system VVVF inverter control system
Braking system Regenerative brake, Electric/Pneumatic
blending brake

63. Functions of Depot and Workshop
Inspection Light maintenance Heavy maintenance Other
Daily
(48 Hrs)
Regular
(30 Hrs)
Bogie
(18 Hrs)
General
(36 Hrs)
Special &
Breakdown
Thane Depot     
Sabarmati
Depot/Works
hop
    
 Maintenance facility plan depends on Rolling stock’s specifications and
maintenance system.
 Maintenance system consists of preventive and breakdown maintenance.
 Depot and workshop will be constructed in Thane and Sabarmati.

64. Total Design Management
 HSR is an integrated system, composed of Hardware, Software and Human-
ware, and factors affect each other.
 Total design management, aiming at overall optimization, Ultimate safety,
Reliability, LCC and Environmental friendly, is essential.
 Safety is the top priority for HSR.
 Not only Construction cost but also O & M cost affect success of HSR.
 Overall optimization can minimize necessary structure and facilities and
reduce total life cycle cost.
 The key is appropriate interfacing on the entire HSR system with technical
standards and human resource development.

65. Project Cost :- Mumbai – Ahmedabad (Sabarmati)

66. Project Cost :- Mumbai – Ahmedabad (Sabarmati)
Project Cost per KM = 1,312 billion JPY/508.5 KM = 2.58 billion JPY/KM
Project cost per KM = 709 billion INR/ 508.5 KM = 1.40 billion INR/Km
Assumptions:
1) Construction period is assumed as seven (7) years from2017 to 2023.
2) Escalation in capex cost during Construction period: 60% of WPI Inflation forecast.
A WPI forecasts by IMF is 6.2% per annum.
3) IDC is calculated with option 1(Public Sector + ODA) case.

67. Project Implementation Schedule

68. TALGO MODEL

69.  Revolutionary concept
 Lightweight construction
 Articulated union between cars
 Low floor coaches
 Independent wheels
 Aerodynamic design
Speed: 130 km/h in tests
 First commercial Talgo service in Spain
 Aluminium construction
 High comfort level for passengers
 Open gangway between cars
 On-board services and AC equipment
 Talgo Maintenance services
Speed: 120 km/h in comercial servicies
 Guidance system
 Automatic variable gauge system in ’69
 Night and day services
 Quality in manufacturing and maintenance
(more than 45 years of commercial service)
Speed: 200 km / h
 Natural Tilting
 Pneumatic suspension
 Increased speed to 30% while maintaining a high
level of comfort
 Munich test bench: 500km / h.
Speed: 220 km / h
 Push-Pull Diesel Intercity train
 Automatic variable gauge system in power heads
 Multiple possible configurations
 World Record in traction diesel 256 km / h
Speed: 220 km / h
 Very High Speed
 Lowest energy consumption in HS
 Lowest noise emissions in HS
 Lowest weight in HS
 Great interior space
 Best in the world in accessibility
Speed: 350 km/h
 High Speed
 100% Spanish Technology
 First locomotive with variable gauge
system
 Dual voltage
Speed : 260 km/h
 High Speed
 Interoperability
 Change width
 Low energy consumption
 Low noise
 Accessibility
 T250: Dual Voltage
 Hybrid: two diesel engines (1800, vel 220 km /h)
Speed: 250 km / h
 Low consumption
 High capacity 3+2
 Modularity
 Flexibility
 Use of recyclable materials
 TSI European Standards
Speed: 380 km / h
1942 TALGO I
1950 TALGO II
1968 TALGO III
1980 PENDULAR TRAIN
1998 TALGO XXI
2001 TALGO 350
TRAVCA
TALGO 250, 250 Hybrid
2012 NEW TALGO HIGH
SPEED PLATFORM “AVRIL”
PASSENGERS COACHES
 Seats and Night Couches
 Tourist, 1st Class, 1st Class PMR, Etc.,
Couches
 Bistro and Restaurant Couches
 Tourist , 1st Class, 1st Class PMR, Etc., Cabins
 Super Reclining Seats Couches
Speed: 160-220 km / h
TALGO TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS

70. Very High Speed
High Speed
Intercity
Locomotives
THEIR TRAINS PORTFOLIO

71. PRINCIPLES OF TALGO TECHNOLOGY
Lightweight construction Lower traction cost and higher acceleration
Articulated union
Guided axles
Independent wheels
Natural tilting
Higher acceleration and increased safety
Higher acceleration, increased safety and lower
maintenance cost
Increase comfort, decrease noise and track
adaptability
Higher speed on curves and higher confort

72. LIGHTWEIGHT CONSTRUCTION
• Lower traction cost
• Higher acceleration
• Lower track interaction
• Less aerodynamics drag
•Higher passive security
•Guidance facility
• Lower maintenance and
higher reliability
ARTICULATED UNION BETWEEN CARS
ADVANTAGES:
ADVANTAGES:
ADVANTAGES OF THEIR TRAINS

73. GUIDED AXLES
• Higher acceleration
• Increased safety
• Lower maintenance cost
INDEPENDENT WHEELS
ADVANTAGES:
• Increases comfort
• Decreases noise
• High track adaptability
ADVANTAGES OF THEIR TRAINS

74. •Zero energy consumption
•Maximum reliability due to its simplicity
•Zero maintenance and manufacturing cost
•Improved passenger comfort
•No additional investment on infrastructure
needed
•Higher speed in curves
NATURAL TILTING SYSTEM
ADVANTAGES OF THEIR TRAINS

75. CHANGE OF GAUGE WHILE MOVEMENT

76. FEW EXPERIENCE

77. SNCF WORKSHOP AT ROUBEN

78. VISIT OF TALGO MAINTENANCE DEPOT

79. • This is a 380 kms of high speed construction site between Jinan to
Shedong. 86% of the corridor is elevated with viaduct and
remaining are either tunnel or embankment with BLT. A typical pier
is having 8 piles with 40 m depth. Casting of girders are done in
casting yard which are generally located 15 kms apart. Casting yard
is spread over 7 hectares and production rate is 2 girders per day.
One typical girder weighs 180 T having a span of 31.5 m.

81. World wide HSR

82. SAFETY………

83. Derailment of Santiago de Compostela Train
Crash - Spain

84. Spain disaster: Train jumps off the tracks on approach to north-
western city of Santiago de Compostela Spain killing 80
Passengers
In Spain there is a provision of refund of 100% fare if the
train is late by more than 5 min. In this case destination was
about 5 kms and only 5 min was left to reach platform at
destination. European Rail Traffic Management System
(ERTMS) is normally available for High Speed route to take
care of such eventuality. In this case it was about to be
provided in next few days. The conventional system AFSA by
Dymetronics was discontinued only few days back and the
new system ERTMS was not in place. The driver was under
pressure to reach destination within the permitted time and
Technology was not there to check and control. It seems to
be Human Error with System Failure and gives a feeling ….

85. We really need to do like this….

86. We might have been doing like that

88. THANK YOU