A multidimensional examination of performances of HSR (High-Speed Rail) systems

The power supply system is an integrated system including the high-voltage electric power lines, substations, contact line, HS trains, and the remote command and control system ensuring efficient, reliable, and safe supply of electric power to the HSR lines and trains, and consequently operations. The electrified networks for the HSR lines generally use the alternate current (AC) or direct current (DC). As given in Table 3, the typical voltage and frequencies are 25 kV 50 Hz AC, 1.5 kV DC, and 15 kV 16.7 Hz AC. The latest has been installed in Germany and supplied from the dedicated high-voltage network called the ‘Railway Frequency.’ The above-mentioned general system components can further be divided into two main components: the HSR electrical infrastructure and the HS rolling stock traction equipment [17].

The different HSR signaling systems have been applied in different countries. For example, each European country has its own HSR signaling systems: in France it is Transmission Vole Machine (TVM), in Germany LinienZugBeeinflussung (LZB), in Spain German’s LZB (for speeds up to 300 km/h) and Electrique Bureau CABine (EBICAB) (for speeds up to 220 km/h), and in Italy Blocco Automatico a Correnti Codificate (BACC) (for speeds up to 250 km/h). In addition, the European rail traffic management system (ERTMS—Level 1 and/or 2) has been introduced on the particular lines in different countries as an alternative and/or a complement to the existing national systems [17].

The type of signaling system influences the length of a block of the track, which can be occupied exclusively by a single HS train. The number of such successive empty blocks determining the (breaking) distance between any pair of HS trains moving in the same direction depends of their maximum operating cruising speed and the breaking/deceleration rate(s).

In general, at the HSR rail lines/networks the rail traffic control/management systems is fully computer supported and can include the following main components: TOC—train operation controller; PC—power controller; STC—signal and telecommunication controller; CCC—crew and car utilization controller; PSC—passenger service controller; and TSMC—track and structure maintenance controller. These components are usually accommodated in the same room with the corresponding staff [18].

The capacity of HSR rolling stock reflects its size expressed by the number of trains of a given seating capacity required to operate under the conditions specified in the timetable. These conditions are usually characterized by the service frequency during the given period of time (h, day) and the train’s turnaround time along the given line/route. Consequently, the required number of rolling stocks/trains to carry out at the specified service frequency on a given line, m _rs [T; f(T)], can be estimated as follows [6, 26]:where f(T) is the train service frequency on a given line during time (T) (trains/h; trains/day) and τ is the average turnaround time of a train along a given line (h).

The service frequency f(T) in Eq. 2a can be either considered to be equal to the line/route ‘ultimate’ capacity determined by Eq. 1 or set up to satisfy the expected demand as follows [26]:where D(T) is the expected user/passenger demand on a given HSR line during time (T)(pax); ρ(T) is the average load factor on a given line during time (T) (ρ(T) ≤ 1.0); and s is the seat capacity of a train operating on a given line (seats/train).

The other symbols are analogous to those in the previous equations.

The train’s turnaround time (τ) increases with the increase of the operating time along the line/route (the ratio between the length of line/route and the operating speed), the number and duration of intermediate stops, all in both directions, including those at the beginning and end station/terminus, and vice versa. The train’s seat capacity is usually constant per service frequency indicating the above-mentioned homogeneous HS train fleet on a given line/route. For example, if the given line/route operates at the service frequency of f(T) = 15 trains/h, and if the average turnaround time per train is τ _l  = 4 h, the required number of trains will be m _rs (T) = 15 × 4 = 60. In addition, if the average train’s seat capacity is s = 485 (TGV Atlantique, see Table 3), the total number of required seats will be m _s (T) = 29,100.

The schedule delay is defined as the difference between the desired and the available time of boarding a chosen HSR service. Under an assumption that the users/passengers familiar with the timetable arrive uniformly during the time between any two successive HS trains’ departures on the same line/route/direction, this delay can be roughly estimated as follows [28, 29]:where all symbols are analogous to those in the previous equations. For example, for the service frequency of f(T) = 1 train/h, the schedule delay will be SD(T) = 15 min; for the service frequency of f (T) = 15 trains/h, the schedule delay will be SD = 1 min (T = 1 h or 60 min).

As can be seen, the average delay per HSR service has varied from 0.3 to 0.5 min. In addition, the average delay of the Shinkansen HSR system has been about 0.6 min per service over the last decade [24, 31].

As can be seen, this rather very low failure rate has fluctuated during the observed period with an average of 0.084 failures/10⁶ km.⁶

Accessibility of stations is an important attribute of the overall quality of services provided by the HSR systems. In most cases, the new dedicated HSR stations are usually located and designed to fit as good as possible within the surrounding urban and/or sub-urban layout on one hand and enable the satisfactory quality of accessibility on the other. In some other cases, the parts of conventional railway stations have been appropriately upgraded and adapted to serve the HSR services. In both cases, the quality of accessibility needs is expected to be efficient, effective, and safe. This implies a reasonable (acceptable) time and costs from/to the doors of users/passengers by a variety of urban and sub-urban transit modes (car, taxi, and frequent, punctual, reliable, and safe, i.e., without incidents/accidents due to known reasons, bus, tram, metro, regional rail, etc.), respectively.

The comfort offered to their users/passengers on board of the HS trains usually includes the booked seats and the very limited number of stops along the lines/routes compared to those at the conventional train counterparts. As far as the comparison with the ATP system as the main competitor on the short- and medium-haul liens/routes is concerned, the attributes for comparison have usually been the distance between seats and internal mobility, diversity and type of services, noise on board, and the potential impact on health. Table 4 summarizes these for both systems/modes.

As can be seen, the HS trains have generally possessed higher comfort on board than their aircraft counterparts.

The HS trains generate noise while operating at the high speed(s), which comprises rolling, aerodynamic, equipment, and propulsion sound. This noise mainly depends on its level generated by the source, i.e., moving HS train(s), and its distance from an exposed observer(s). Figure 16 shows a scheme of changing the distance and time of exposure to noise by an HS train of an observer.

The shadow polygon represents an HS train of length (L) passing by an observer (small triangle at the bottom) at the speed (V). He/she starts to consider noise of an approaching train when it is at distance (β) from the point along the line, which is at the closest right angle distance (γ) from him/her. The consideration stops after the train moves behind the above-mentioned closest point again for the distance (β). Under such circumstances, the distance between the observer and the passing-by HS train changes over time as follows:where the last term represents duration of the noise event, i.e., the time needed for a train to pass by the observer (The length of HS trains is given in Table 3). If the level of noise received from the train passing by an observer with the speed (V) at the shortest distance (γ) is L _eq(γ, V), the level of noise at any time (t) can be estimated as follows:

The second term in Eq. 5b represents the noise attenuation with distance over the area free of barriers. The total noise exposure of the observer from f(T) successive trains passing by during the period (T) can be estimated as follows:

As a standard approach, the noise from HS trains is measured at the right angle distance of \(\gamma\) = 25 m from the track(s). Figure 17 shows the results of some such measurements across Europe depending on maximum operating speed of the HS trains.

As can be seen, the noise has generally linearly increased with increasing of the train’s operating speed: at the lower rate for the speeds up to about 300 km/h, and at the higher rate for the speeds above V = 300 km/h. The variation of noise level at the given speed has been about 3–4 dBA. This noise has included the train’s rolling (wheel), pantograph/overhead, and aerodynamic noise. Some additional measurements have shown that the rolling and pantograph/overhead noise has predominated and increased with increasing of the HS train’s speed approximately at the rate of 30lgV up to the speed(s) of about 300 km/h (some data have shown that this is 370 km/h). The aerodynamic noise depending on the HS train’s (aerodynamic) design has also increased, equalized with the rolling noise at the above-mentioned (transition) speed(s), started predominating and further increasing at an approximate rate of 80lgV [38]. In addition, in cases when the frequent HSR services are carried out along the particular lines/routes, their noise becomes persistent over time and can be estimated from Eq. 5c. As well, the time of exposure of an observer to noise by a passing by HS train can be estimated from Eq. 5a. If β = 0 m, L = 200 m, and v = 250 km/h, this exposure time to the maximum noise will be about t ₁ = 3 s; if V = 350 km/h, this time will be about t1 = 2 s.

Last but not least, while considering the actual exposure of the population located close to the HSR lines to noise by the passing-by HS trains, it is necessary to take into account the noise-mitigating barriers protecting the particular land use activities, i.e., a quiet land with intended outdoor use, a land with the residence buildings objects, and a land with the daytime activities (businesses, schools, libraries, etc.), all by absorbing the maximum noise levels for about 20 dB(A) (single barrier) and 25 dB(A) (double barrier).

Thanks to applying the above-mentioned separation rules in addition to designing timetable(s) on particular lines/routes and the entire HSR network accordingly, the HSR systems are free of congestion and consequent delays due to the direct mutual influence of trains on each other while ‘competing’ to use the same segment of given lines/routes at the same time. However, the substantive delays due to some other reasons can propagate (if impossible to absorb and neutralize them) through the affected HS trains itineraries as well as along the dense lines/routes also affecting the other otherwise non-affected services. Under such conditions, the severely affected services are usually canceled in order to prevent further increase and propagation of their delays. On the one hand, this contributes to maintaining the punctuality but on the other, it compromises the reliability of the overall services (as mentioned above). Nevertheless, the already mentioned figures indicate that both reliability and punctuality of the HSR system services worldwide have been very and in some cases extremely high (The latter is the example of Japanese HSR system).

Experience so far has indicated that the HSR and APT system have been the safest transport systems/modes in which traffic incidents/accidents have rarely occurred, usually due to the previously unknown reasons. This means that the number of traffic incidents/accidents and related person injuries, deaths, and the scale and cost of damaged properties both of the systems and the third parties per, for example, 10⁹ s-km and/or p-km carried out over a given period of time, have been extremely low. In particular, high safety of the HSR systems has been provided also a prior by designing completely the grade-separated lines and the other supportive built-in safety features at both infrastructure and rolling stock. This implies that the safety has been achieved on the account of increased investments and maintenance cost. As well, the HSR operators and infrastructure managers have continuously practiced a risk management and training approach aiming at maintaining a high level of safety and particularly with increasing of the maximum speeds. Nevertheless, the HSR systems in different countries have not been completely free from traffic incidents/accidents. For example, some relevant statistics for the TGV system in France indicate that there have not been accidents with the fatalities (deaths) and severe injuries of the users/passengers, staff, and/or third parties since starting the HSR services started in the year 1981 despite the trains have been carrying out annually about 10 × 10⁶ p-km. In addition, some incidents happened on the HSR lines/routes such as broken windows, opening of the passenger doors during operating at the cruising speed, couple of fires on board, collision with animals and concrete block on the tracks, and the terrorist attempts to bomb the tracks. The incidents and accidents of TGV trains operated on the conventional tracks have been more frequent with fatalities, injuries, and damages of properties but all at the relatively low scale. In these cases, the HS trains have been exposed to the external risk similarly to their conventional counterparts (http://​www.​railfaneurope.​net/​tgv/​wrecks.​html). Similarly, since started in 1960s, the Japan’s Tokaido Shinkansen HS services⁷ have also been free of accidents causing the user/passenger and staff fatalities and injuries due to the derailments and collisions of trains. This has been achieved despite the services have been exposed to the permanent threat of the relatively frequent (and sometimes strong) earthquakes.

Nevertheless, the fatal accidents with deaths and injuries of the users/passengers and staff happened at the HSR systems in Germany, Spain, and China (one in each country). Table 6 gives the main characteristics of these three accidents.

Quantifying the social impacts of HSR systems in the monetary terms as externalities has usually represented an ambiguous and often politically challenging task. Nevertheless, some estimates of these externalities for the HSR systems and other transport modes in Europe have been carried out. They have indicated that the total social externalities of HSR systems have amounted 22.9 €/10³ p-km. In this total, the noise and traffic incidents/accidents externalities have shared about 22 % and 2 %, respectively. Since the HSR systems are free of congestion, the corresponding externality has not been considered. On the other hand, for comparison, the total externalities of APT have estimated to be 52.5€/10³ p-km, of which the noise and traffic incidents/accidents externalities shared about 4 % and 3 %, respectively [39, 40].

The direct employment relates to manufacturing, building, and maintaining the infrastructure and manufacturing, operating, and maintaining the rolling stock and supporting facilities and equipment, i.e., the main system’s components, of the HSR systems. For example, the number of employees operating the HSR services in particular countries is strongly dependent on the length of HSR networks as shown on Fig. 18.

A can be seen, in the considered countries, the number of employees increases linearly with increasing of the length of HSR network with an average of 7.3 employees/km.

The indirect employment relates to the non-rail staff supplying the HSR system(s) with different kinds of daily consuming material and energy on the one hand and that generated just thanks to existing of the system on the other. These latter are the non-rail related economic activities around and at the HSR stations such as: business services (banking, insurance, and advertising), information and retail services, research and development, higher education, tourism, and political institutions [30]. At the larger scale, these businesses have created urban (both business and housing) agglomerations around the HSR stations, which themselves have induced additional demand for the HSR services. Such development has been taking place mainly at the HSR stations already located in the larger urban agglomerations connected by the HSR lines/routes, but also within them. For example, inclusion of the city of Lille (France) in the HSR line/route Paris-Brussels has brought an enormous economic development of the city itself and its region in terms of increasing of business and touristic activities and related employment. In the UK, the substantial economic activities have been created in the cities 2 h from London area just thanks to the HSR [41].

In general, the above-mentioned employment has contributed to the economic-social development and welfare, both at a global-country and local–regional scale. For example, at the global-country scale, the direct effects have been contribution of the investments in HSR systems to the national GDP, which in Europe has estimated to be about 0.25 % of the national GDPs. At the regional scale, this contribution has been about 3 % of the regional GDP [42, 43]. This contribution has been much higher in the cities with the primarily service-oriented than in those with the primarily manufacturing-oriented economy [44]. In addition, the German regions with the cities of Montabaur and Limburg, with populations of 12,500 and 34,000 respectively, have recorded growth of GDP of about 2.7 % just due to increase in their market accessibility to the larger cities Frankfurt and Cologne thanks to the HSR services [45]. In Japan, the HSR has generated growth of population in the cities of about 1.6 % compared to those being bypassed where this growth has been for about 1 %. This growth has taken place primarily in the cities with the information industry and higher education [44].