What's new

China trains now fastest in the world 350 km per h. America too poor to build bullet trains.

Why China Doesn’t Publish Fatal Train Crash Data
Infighting Between Two Government Organizations Has Kept the Casualty Report Out of Public Eye
  • January 19, 2016
By Lu Binyang, a Caixin staff reporter. This article was first published by Caixin.

Disputes between the two agencies running the trains in China over how to classify and publish details on fatal railroad incidents has kept reports on some fatal accidents last year from surfacing, people close to the matter say.

Several employees of China Railway Corp. (CRC), which builds the country’s railroad networks and manages their commercial operations, said they have received reports about several serious accidents that involved three to 10 deaths last year.

None of the reports have been made public, which would contradict new rules from the National Railway Administration, the agency established in 2013 to handle the non-commercial affairs of the country’s railroad network after the Ministry of Railways was dissolved.

The sources Caixin spoke to did not say how many accidents occurred or how many people died in total.

The railroad administration announced rules in May that said that all companies in the industry must tell it about accidents that caused three deaths or more. Information including investigation results and who was punished and how, should be contained in the report and published on the administration’s website within 20 working days after the report was filed, the rules say. As of January 11, no reports on fatal accidents have appeared on the website’s page.

An official from the Ministry of Transport, which supervises the railroad administration, said the CRC opposed the disclosure rules and has argued for a “more cautious” approach to publishing the information.

He said employees of the ministry and the railroad administration found people at the CRC’s 18 regional bureaus were reluctant to cooperate with them on accident probes and on publishing investigation results.

A source close to the ministry said the administration’s rules were rushed out before all parties concerned agreed on key provisions. Negotiations on new rules seem to have stalled over sharp divisions regarding how to investigate and classify fatal accidents, and when and how to release information to the public, he said.

The CRC has not replied to Caixin’s request for comment.

Opening Slowly
Fatality rates in the railroad industry have traditionally been among China’s most closely guarded secrets. The State Administration of Work Safety has a database for accidents that includes data on deaths and injuries in almost all major industries and most of the information is published on its website.

However, the railroad sector is not included in the database, a source close to the safety watchdog said. Before the CRC was created, the old railroad ministry handled nearly every aspect of accidents, especially when the dead or injured worked for a state-owned company in the railroad industry or had relatives who did, experts who follow reform of the railroad industry say.

The ministry managed to keep information about most accidents in-house because it owned hospitals that treated the injured and the companies that could be ordered to compensate victims, the experts said. It also controlled a network of courts and law enforcement that was funded by and answered to local railroad bureaus. This system was intact until 2012.

The ministry started publishing some data in 2007 on accidents that killed people outside the railroad system. The data show that from 2007 to 2012, the number of deaths involving people outside the industry steadily fell every year. Even in 2011, when a collision of two bullet trains in the eastern city of Wenzhou killed 40 passengers, the annual death toll was still 5.4 percent lower than the previous year, the data show. The ministry has never published the total number of people who died in mishaps every year.

In 2014, the CRC published a death toll for the first time. It said that 1,336 people died in railroad accidents in 2013, down 5.7 percent from a year earlier. It said last year the death toll in 2014 was 1,232.

Xie Feng, China’s ambassador to Indonesia, said in August the casualty rate in the railroad industry over the past decade was 0.02 per 1 billion passengers per kilometer, among the lowest of all nations. China is trying to convince Indonesia and many other countries to let it build their railroad networks.

Yet information regarding specific accidents remain out of reach. Caixin has recently reported on two accidents, one in 2013 that left four people dead and the other in 2014 that killed three, but details on either crash remain unavailable.
 
The US doesn't have the population density that makes railways and dense public transportation means a priority. Plus, China can make all these amazing projects because everything there is cheap, most importantly, the wages and the labor required is dirt cheap!

Labor doesn't even make 5% of the entire cost of any high speed train project, most cost comes from material, technology, maintenance, so using labor wage as reason is pretty lame. If china really wants dirt cheap labor, they could of hire a bunch of Indians to build it, who makes 1/6 of Chinese labor wage.
 
Actually, the Chinese are too poor to have their own SUVs, so they need to use trains. :D

(And for longer journeys, Americans use luxurious RVs.)

assuming no special constraints I would use a car for anything less than 300 miles . it is fast. I will be there in less than 5 hours
 
Labor doesn't even make 5% of the entire cost of any high speed train project, most cost comes from material, technology, maintenance, so using labor wage as reason is pretty lame. If china really wants dirt cheap labor, they could of hire a bunch of Indians to build it, who makes 1/6 of Chinese labor wage.


Where does the material and technology come from? how do they get the materials?Technology, R&D, anything and EVERYTHING involves the workforce.
 
Last edited:
Where does the material and technology come from? how do they get the materials? EVERYTHING involves the workforce.

yes, but China is a middle income country, where its income ranks at 70 out of 150 countries. So even if all material and technology are build using labor, that's still not cheap. Besides, most high tech and product in China are not built by some farmers, but either by robots or highly educated professionals, those are not cheap.

assuming no special constraints I would use a car for anything less than 300 miles . it is fast. I will be there in less than 5 hours
except you have to drive, I'd rather sleep on the train and get there in couple hours, consider it travels at 300 MPH.
 
yes, but China is a middle income country, where its income ranks at 70 out of 150 countries. So even if all material and technology are build using labor, that's still not cheap. Besides, most high tech and product in China are not built by some farmers, but either by robots or highly educated professionals, those are not cheap.


except you have to drive, I'd rather sleep on the train and get there in couple hours, consider it travels at 300 MPH.


you are assuming every point is connected to every other point via HSR
it takes non-trivial amount of time to get to the HSR. Once I reach the other end I still need a car to go from Point A to Point B

HSR does not go at 300 mph
 
Why would we want to send tanks in a hurry ? or that matter any country ??

Why would I want to go from Los Angeles to New York in high speed rail ? It is 14 hour journey
It is expensive maintaining 3000 km of track



what makes you think the trains will not have security and luggage checkin issues ??
Are you arguing for the sake of arguing?

US, with it's large land mass is perfect for high speed train. Eg LA to Las Vegas, LA to San Francisco, Phoenix to San Diego. These journey takes from 6hrs to 8 hrs by car. No worries about driving fatigue, safe and comfortable.

But high speed rail will never work in US. Not because it does not benefits the people. But because of lobbyists for airlines and the motor industry. Plus lawyers for the private land that train will pass through.
 
Last edited:
Are you arguing for the sake of arguing?

US, with it's large land mass is perfect for high speed train. Eg LA to Las Vegas, LA to San Francisco, Phoenix to San Diego. These journey takes from 6hrs to 8 hrs. No worries about driving fatigue, safe and comfortable.

But high speed rail will never work in US. Not because it does not benefits the people. But because of lobbyists for airlines and the motor industry. Plus lawyers for the private land that train will pass through.

This is not arguing for sake of arguing. be practical

I want to go from San Francisco to Lake Tahoe. It is a popular destination for tourism throughout the year.
How does high speed rail work ? You will ask me to go to Reno. From Reno how does one get to Lake Tahoe ??
Work out the logistics.

Once ready self-driving car will also make driving safe and comfortable without fatigue

you have repeatedly dodged the maintenance costs.

lawyers for private land have helped cellphone companies, telecommunication companies, utility companies. if there is money they will help high speed rail. this is America not a communist country
 
Except for California and the Northeast, HSR doesn't make sense in the US.

world-population-in-half.png


The yellow region in the map includes every cell with a population of 8,000 or more people. Since each of them has an area of about 9 square miles, the population density of each yellow cell is at least 900 people per square mile, roughly the same population density as the state of Massachusetts.

Conversely, the black region is made up of those cells with populations of less than 8,000 people. In other terms, the population density throughout the black area is less than 900 people per square mile.

The US has just 10 cities with over 1m people, while China has 119 cities with over 1m people.

Most Americans live in the suburbs/small cities. It's stupid to drive to the nearest large city (>1m people) just to take the HSR to another large city and drive again to your destination.

Meanwhile the US has nearly 20K airports.

number-of-airports-in-the-united-states-since-1990.jpg
 
Except for California and the Northeast, HSR doesn't make sense in the US.

world-population-in-half.png




The US has just 10 cities with over 1m people, while China has 119 cities with over 1m people.

Most Americans live in the suburbs/small cities. It's stupid to drive to the nearest large city (>1m people) just to take the HSR to another large city and drive again to your destination.

Meanwhile the US has nearly 20K airports.

number-of-airports-in-the-united-states-since-1990.jpg

thank you for your analysis
@Nan Yang
 
Except for California and the Northeast, HSR doesn't make sense in the US.

world-population-in-half.png




The US has just 10 cities with over 1m people, while China has 119 cities with over 1m people.

Most Americans live in the suburbs/small cities. It's stupid to drive to the nearest large city (>1m people) just to take the HSR to another large city and drive again to your destination.

Meanwhile the US has nearly 20K airports.

number-of-airports-in-the-united-states-since-1990.jpg

Again the problem is the perception that everybody lives in cities like New York.

Dense “热闹” is not something Americans are into (and probably not Europeans either). Much of what we do is to mitigate 热闹. Like having reserved times for DisneyWorld rides so we don’t wait in crowded lines. It’s also considered incredibly rude to brush up against someone. So even in crowded situations (like on a subway) people are hesitant to pack themselves tightly like you would see in Tokyo. Even to fit a few thousand people on a cruiseship they have to be made very large to avoid being perceived as crowded.

Also Americans tend to have their own stuff. So for example when people go skiing many bring their own skiis instead of renting. Renting is considered sort of a forced last resort option for people. So if they can use their own they will. When skiing in Lake Tahoe many familes pack a large SUV to the brim with their own stuff and drive. Maybe putting all their stuff on a train isn’t going to work out well. If they went there during the summer they may even bring their own boat.

Screen Shot 2019-03-01 at 10.10.43 PM.jpg
 
Last edited:

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom