←back to thread

461 points axelfontaine | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.227s | source
Show context
vesinisa ◴[] No.44039149[source]
Here's a much better article from the Finnish public broadcaster giving more context: https://yle.fi/a/74-20161606

My comments:

The important thing to note that at this point it's just a political posturing and an announcement of intent. They haven't shown any concrete technical plan how this would actually be executed.

> "Of course, we are very pragmatic and realistic, we cannot do this in five years. Planning will continue until the end of the decade, and maybe in 2032 we can start construction."

Once they have the cost estimates and effects on existing rail traffic studied, I bet construction will never start.

replies(10): >>44039465 #>>44039611 #>>44039693 #>>44039743 #>>44039754 #>>44039771 #>>44039846 #>>44040123 #>>44040743 #>>44045724 #
cladopa ◴[] No.44039611[source]
>Once they have the cost estimates and effects on existing rail traffic studied, I bet construction will never start.

It is not that hard. Countries like Spain have already two different gauges and have the necessary technology in the trains to change between different systems.

replies(2): >>44039699 #>>44044508 #
varsketiz ◴[] No.44039699[source]
One of the main goals of this is to not have the russian gauge available in case russians attack, so that logistics deeper into Finland cant happen easily with the same train, so backwards compatability is not desired.
replies(4): >>44039773 #>>44039786 #>>44039826 #>>44042602 #
potato3732842 ◴[] No.44039773[source]
It's not like this results in a categorical difference in difficulty. Gauge switching infrastructure is common at borders. Yeah stopping and switching is slower than driving right through but it's not the end of the world in the long tail of military logistics.
replies(4): >>44039822 #>>44039942 #>>44040261 #>>44041645 #
1. stuaxo ◴[] No.44040261[source]
It adds time for each train though.