Talk:Lötschberg Base Tunnel

Future infrastructure ?!
The definition for the {future infrastructure} tag is These articles are about infrastructure that has yet to be constructed. Maybe news have not reached some remote areas on the east coast but construction of the tunnel has been completed, only extensive testing of the vast electronic systems for control, surveillance, guidance, emergency are pending. This fact is in sheer contrast to the quoted definition. Bad cards for an edit war. Better contribute something useful than setting stupid boxes which do not even apply. --Cooper.ch 16:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

This article should say something about the reduction in the original specification of the tunnel and any plans to complete the postponed works.--Grahamec 14:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I wanna know if this tunnel is intended to be completed as a double-rail tunnel all the way. 130.243.248.165 20:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * This tunnel was planned with two tube with one track each, but the construction of the second tube has been stopped. East tube is completed, west tube is completed for about 1/4 of its lenght, excavated but without tracks of 2/4, not built at all for the remaining 1/4. I will update the article later (waiting someone to correct my English). Coccodrillo 16:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * "as well as heavy freight trains with a maximum weight of 4000 tons and a maximum length of 1500 meters which are unable to pass the existing mountain track." Not really true: that is what official site declares, but it's unlike that these heavy trains will use the tunnel in the near future. The tunnel was officially built to avoid the existing step line, but in fact, 90% of goods trains going to or coming from the Lötschberg line uses also the Simplon line to/from Italy. Or, this line is as step as the old Lötschberg line, with 20 km of 2.6% grades. Coccodrillo 12:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmn, not sure what you're trying to say here Coccodrillo, dunno about grades of the Simplon line in Italy, since the Simplontunnel is a base tunnel. Everybody is waiting for the opening of the Lötschberg base tunnel, especially Hupac Ltd., I doubt this people wouldn't know about that. But I'm no train expert, just wrote what I learned from what I read. Cooper.ch 21:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Domodossola lies at 240 m above sea level, Iselle (Simplon southern portal) is at 630 m and Visp (near LBT southern portal) at 650 m. Between Domodsossola and Iselle there are about 19 km of continuos 2.5 % grade. The Simplon tunnel itself never exceed 1%. The grade influences the weight and length of trains that can be used. That's way 4000 t of trains will not be used. They can pass throught the LBT, but cannot afford the Simplon line. With the LBT the Simplon-Lötschberg axis will have only these 19 km of ramp, in constrast northbound trains on the Gotthard line will have 40 km of 2.6% grade and 15 km of 2.0% grade on the Ceneri line. That's why until the opening of the Gotthard base tunnel the Lötschberg will be useful. Also, on the Simplon-Lötschberg the ramp is only for northbound trains, there are no high grades for the southbound trains, the Gotthard is steep on both sids of Alps. There are plans of a new line between Domodossola and Iselle, with a gentler gradr (1.2%), but nothing is official and it is unlikely it will be built in the near future. With the new Gotthard line, trains will cross the Alps with never more than 1.2%. The Lötschberg tunnel will still be useful as back-up (and for passenger trains obviously), but I think that the greater part of the goods passing throught Switzerland will use the Gotthard line. Coccodrillo 21:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Another benefit I think (I don't have a primary source ready however) is the fact that the clearance of the current Lötschberg line is partially too small for "Rollende Landstrasse" ("rolling highway", piggyback trains for lorries) trains - these trains have to switch from one track to the other on certain sections, reducing the capacity of the line. Btw. Hupac operates these trains, may be a reason why they are eager to see the base tunnel in operation... --Kabelleger 22:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's possible. Also, there are also shuttle trains for road vehicles on the existing line, that maybe reduce capacity, because there is no (important) road between Valais and Bern. Anyway, it had been better if they had built the whole tunnel in one phase. because of the single track, the old line can't be closed. When the LBT will be finished, the old line could have one track removed to reduce operating costs, and be used for local trains and car shuttles.Coccodrillo 11:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * About the 4000 tons: The official word is that there is more freight to be carried from north to south, so full trains may descend on the southern side of the Simplon and empty trains have to ascend. Having trains heavier than 1300 tons descend a 2.5 % grade is possible without adding engines or overloading couplers by using the air brakes. However, because the air brakes cannot be applied gradually (on freight trains), the train speed changes between around 70 km/h and 35 km/h ("Sägezahnmethode", "sawtooth method", because the graphical train schedule looks like a saw blade), which is obviously bad for track capacity. Currently (on the old Lötschberg line), some trains have additional engines added for braking, because having enough electric brake capacity avoids the use of the air brakes and thus allows for higher and more constant speeds. To sum up: Either the trains have to descend by the aid of air brakes and climb with less weight, or bank engines will be used possibly for both braking and traction. I guess we'll see a mixture of both. --Kabelleger 22:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

However, because the air brakes cannot be applied gradually (on freight trains)


 * Sorry, my understanding is that gradual brake application is possible, but it is not desired to descend with the brakes being lightly applied for the entire downward slope. That the sawtooth is not the best for transit time and capacity - agreed. -- Klaus with K 09:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You are right, I confused the restrictions of old variants of the westinghouse brake. But that leaves the question why the sawtooth method is used - is it necessary to keep the car's pressure tanks full? --Kabelleger 10:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Found one reference on the web. Apparently the intervals where only the recuperation brake is used allow the wheel rims and brake blocks to cool down. -- Klaus with K 13:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This sounds questionable according to my basic knowledge of physics. The amount of energy that has to be converted to heat does not change if you brake in intervals instead of breaking permanently. If the train descends in about the same time in both cases, the average kinetic/potential energy that has to be converted to heat per time unit is about the same.


 * This means that when braking continously the brakes are also hot continously, but if you brake in intervals, the brakes get cooler while not braking but they have to get hotter while braking (otherwise it would not be possible to get rid of the same amount of potential and kinetic energy during the descent on average). For instance (the numbers are just random guesses): If braking permanently, the brake blocks could be permanently at 120°C. If braking in intervals, they could cool down to 80°C, but because they did not remove potential/kinetic energy from the train during the cooling down phase, they would have to remove more energy during the braking phase, meaning that they get hotter, say 160°C. Now for my understanding, such temperature changes put way more stress on the brakes than a constant temperature in between of these extreme values... --Kabelleger 11:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I have asked around about the braking. While one can apply brakes lightly, one wants to apply a minimum strength to make sure all cars start braking and not a few of them only. Different equipment manufacturers, state of maintenance and wear all play a roll. Now in conjunction with electrical braking the train slows down. Now between brake release and a new brake application 90 seconds have to pass to make sure the brakes in all cars are back to normal state, meaning valves back to normal and pressure back to standard values. During these 90 seconds one ought not reach maximum allowed speed, this tells you how slow you have to be when releasing the brakes. -- Klaus with K 10:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * This finally makes sense to me :) Thanks for the explication. --Kabelleger 08:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Price in dollars?
Why is the price for the project listed in dollars? Surely Swiss Francs would make more sense, or — if anything else — euros. 82.139.84.114 (talk) 15:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lötschberg Base Tunnel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070620181802/http://www.baunetz.de/sixcms_4/sixcms_upload/media/293/48_57_bahntechnik.pdf to http://www.baunetz.de/sixcms_4/sixcms_upload/media/293/48_57_bahntechnik.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Economics; Profitability; Effects on Freight Costs
Howard from NYC (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Q: who is qualified to describe the financial aspects? not just the costs but justification in terms of reduced costs for freight, alternatives to aircraft, competitive alternatives to 'long way around' routing, etc... and then there are the politics of controlling a competitor to aircraft...