Today, over 50% of the Mongolian railway system is owned by the Russian State Railway, and Mongolia has already stated, in 2010, that its main rail lines will be to 1520 mm gauge, in order to link up with Russia. Hence it appears unlikely that Mongolia’s railways will be converted to Standard gauge – or will they?
Mongolia has discovered huge interest from China in increasing both freight and passenger traffic between the two countries, without the necessity of bogie changing at the border. China has already expressed an interest in investing in an additonal Trans-Siberian line through Mongolia – and that would be to China’s 1435 mm gauge. A decision to allow such investment by China in Mongolia’s railways – and hence the gauge of those railways – could have profound consequences on Mongolia’s relations with its neighbours to both the north and the south.
But there is widespread opposition to the idea of China having some influence and even control over Mongolia’s interests in future railway development, so whether Mongolia will actually see Standard gauge rails within its borders remains to be seen.
KAZAKHSTAN
Railways came to Kazakhstan well after they appeared in ‘parent’ country Russia, in 1894, when Russia built a metre-gauge railway from Pokrovskaya Sloboda (today Engel’s, in Russia) to Ural’sk (today Oral, just inside the border of Kazakhstan). Quite why it should have been metre-gauge and not the Russian standard 1524 mm gauge is not recorded – certainly the distance involved of some 400 km, of which 130 km is in Kazakhstan itself, would seem to justify the larger gauge.
But it wasn’t long before 1524 mm gauge came to Kazakhstan, starting just two years later, when construction was initiated of the 190 km of the Trans-Siberian Railway that lay within Kazakhstan. By 1901, there were various branches to other cities within Kazakhstan. All work in connection with the Trans-Siberian Railway in Kazakhstan was completed in 1904, and all to 1524 mm gauge.
Over the following 100 years, Russia increased the construction of 1524 mm gauge railways, which were later adjusted to 1520 mm gauge along with all other railways within Area 1520’s field of influence, when Russia itself adjusted its gauge (see above), leaving Kazakhstan well provided for, with a total of over 15 000 km of railways. Some 20% of this is electrified. Links exist to Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and China. That with China, in the course of being completed, involves of course a break of gauge (see Part 5).
But not all railway construction in Kazakhstan was to 1524 mm gauge – many narrow gauge lines were also built, most to 1000 mm gauge. These were later converted to 1524 mm gauge.
On the face of it, Kazakhstan would appear to be firmly established as a 1520 mm gauge country. I mentioned above that a link is almost completed with China’s Standard gauge railways, on Kazakhstan’s eastern border. And China, investing heavily in Kazakhstan, and with ever-increasing co-operation between the two countries, has built a high speed railway between Almaty and Astana. This line, rated at 350 km/h, and notwithstanding the link with China’s Standard gauge railways, is to 1520 mm gauge.
But cracks in that position are already starting to appear. It seems quite possible that future lines in which China is investing in Kazakhstan may not be to 1520 mm gauge. In 2007, China proposed to convert the main line between the Chinese border and Druzhba, just over the Kazakhstan border, to Standard gauge. While this is a very short stretch of railway, could this be the thin edge of the 1435 mm gauge wedge? It looks highly probable that this will be the case.
This stretch of line could become a part of one of the proposed routes of the Trans-Asian Railway (see below), a continuous line that is proposed to connect Singapore in the east with Istanbul in Turkey in the west. In fact, parts of this northern route are well under construction, and are, as far as is known, to Standard gauge.
There are however at least four gauges involved in the countries that this railway will traverse. At this point in time, apart from the parts already under construction mentioned above, the decision has not been made to use any particular gauge; instead this railway is using the gauge of each country it runs through, involving a number of breaks of gauge at each border. Gauges encountered are 1676 mm, 1520 mm, 1435 mm and 1000 mm, although the bulk of the route is to 1520 mm gauge.
Will this situation change? As China is funding this railway (see above), it will likely have the most influence, and that therefore it is possible that this Railway could be converted to a single gauge throughout – and that gauge would be Standard gauge, notwithstanding that the bulk of this Railway’s route is in 1520 mm territory. Apart from the 1000 mm sections, converting to the narrower Standard gauge presents fewer problems than the opposite, although the railway would be out of operation while this occurred. So far though, there is no sign that such rationalisation is planned.
While the Trans-Asian Railway may be wrestling with the use of a number of gauges, no such issues cloud the construction of the Trans-Kazakhstan Trunk Railway project. This 3930-km long line links China, via Kazakhstan (3070 km), Turkmenistan (770 km), and Iran (90 km), with Europe, with the entry into Europe through Turkey (i.e. on a much more southerly route than the China-funded line from Beijing to Moscow). This line will be to 1435 mm Standard gauge all the way.
The Trans-Kazakhstan Railway will run parallel to the existing railway along the side of Lake Balkhash from Aktogai to Mointy on the north-south main line. From here both new Standard gauge and 1520 mm gauge tracks will head west on a new alignment to Kyzylzhar, after which the Standard gauge will again run parallel to the existing branch to Zhekazgan. Eventually the Standard gauge line will reach the shores of the Caspian Sea at the port of Aktau, from which a ferry will reach the Iranian port of Bandar Turkman.
The route to Europe will thus be considerably shortened, and laid out for high speed. Currently the plan is to run this 1435 mm gauge railway through Turkmenistan to Iran.
The Trans-Asian Railway is covered below, but for now, China’s interest in both opening up at least one trans-Asia railway route in particular (and maybe other routes as well), as well as in investing in Kazakhstan generally, may well mean that 1435 mm gauge tracks will gradually appear in ever increasing amounts within Kazakhstan’s borders.
Before leaving Kazakhstan, mention should be made of the tram and metro systems in Almaty, Pavlodar, Temirtau, and Ust-Kamenogorsk.
Kazakhstan’s metro, in Almaty, opened in 2011. At this point in time completely underground, with typically opulent stations, it is to the main line 1520 mm gauge. It is in the progress of being extended, and replaces a former tram system.
In the case of trams, like all surface street lines in this part of the world, they run on 1524 mm gauge trackwork. The one in Almaty is being progressively closed down as the new underground metro is extended, while that in Pavlodar has recently been upgraded, and now operates some very modern low floor trams. The systems in the other two cities are still reminiscent of old Soviet era trams.
AFGHANISTAN
Although Afghanistan is, alphabetically, the first on our list of ‘Area 1520’ countries, I have left it to the last in our odyssey in this part of the world, for one very specific reason, and that is the fact that Afghanistan’s railways form the heart of the link between three different gauges as we travel from the west to the east.
The very first railway in Afghanistan was built in 1880, from Ruk to Sibi. Because of disagreements between Britain and Afghanistan (Britain and Russia, which controlled Afghanistan during this time, were essentially at war with each other), the line was built through Pakistan to the Indian gauge of 1676 mm (at this time, Pakistan was part of India). But in 1901, the then ruler of Afghanistan banned railways, to prevent invasion by either British or Russian troops, and the line was dismantled.
[I should add that this is a gross simplification of the complex politics that were going on between Britain, Russia, Persia and Afghanistan at this time, but these politics had no subsequent bearing on further railway development in Afghanistan, and so I will not go into th
em any further.]
A second line was reportedly built in Afghanistan in 1920 – a 7-km long steam tramway that ran between Kabul and Darulaman, but this too was subsequently dismantled, as the country’s rulers continued to resist all attempts at allowing contact with other countries.
From that point on until the start of the 21st century, apart from some 600 mm gauge industrial lines built in the 1950s, Afghanistan shunned railways completely. When railways started to be built, little more than a decade ago, the country essentially was starting from a clean sheet of paper.
So to what gauge should its railways be built? For Afghanistan, that is a question that is probably harder than in almost any other country, as the country shares borders with Iran, four CIS countries, China and Pakistan. And therein lies the problem, as there are three different gauges involved – 1435 mm in Iran and China, 1520 mm in the CIS and 1676 mm in Pakistan (plus 1000 mm gauge in Vietnam and Myanmar [Burma], which border China, and would be considered to be part of any linking up of railways in Asia).
Does Afghanistan, now just embracing contact with the outside world, look west (Iran), north (CIS), east (China), or east/south (Pakistan)? For one of the first railways in the 21st century – the 25-km line to the border with Uzbekistan via the Friendship Bridge – the CIS gauge of 1520 mm was chosen.
A couple of other lines that connect with CIS countries are also to 1520 mm gauge (e.g. the line from Hairatan to Uzbekistan, and the Andkhoy Project – a 1520 mm gauge line from Turkmenistan). But now the position becomes a little more complicated.
China has constructed a 1676 mm gauge link line, 921 km long, from the border with Pakistan via Kabul to Uzbekistan, while a new north-south line, to 1435 mm Standard gauge, is planned to connect Shir Khan Bandar with the 1520 mm gauge line at Uzbekistan, via Naibabad.
For Afghanistan, the problems of what gauge to use appear to be intractable.
Notwithstanding the multiplicity of gauges already appearing within Afghanistan itself, the country has chosen, very significantly, Standard gauge for its internal railways. At first glance, one may wonder why, especially given the extensive links already established with both 1520 mm and 1676 mm gauge tracks, as noted above. But one has to only look at the western and eastern extremities of the country, as shown on the map below, to see the logic in that decision.
China has already invested in a Standard gauge line through Kazakhstan – the 3900-km long Trans-Kazakhstan Trunk Railways project (see above). And, again as noted below (the Trans-Asian Railway), the route through Afghanistan is by far the most direct route, from the east at the border with China (in Afghanistan’s long thin ‘finger’ south of Tajikistan and east of Kabul, see map above), to the west at the border with Iran.
This is however very difficult country in which to build a railway, with much of the land (e.g. the Khunjerab Pass) at over 5000 m above sea level, and many of the mountain peaks at around 8000 m – the highest in the world. Nonetheless, the Chinese, having built railways into Nepal and Tibet, are used to building railways in this kind of country (see China in Part 5), and they will likely be able to bring their expertise to bear on this railway.
While Afghanistan may never be able to settle completely on one gauge for its railways, it has in no uncertain terms sent out a strong message to its 1520 mm gauge neighbours that Standard gauge is the country’s preferred option. Quite what Russia, in the guise of Area 1520, thinks of that remains to be seen.
TRANS-ASIAN RAILWAY
The final two countries described above, as well as Mongolia, in Area 1520 represent what may be significant chinks in Area 1520’s pursuit of spreading its gauge far and wide, for these countries have begun to embrace 1435 mm Standard gauge railways within their borders.
It’s not hard to see why. All three countries are on the more direct routes between China in the east and Europe in the west – and can thereby profit handsomely from the trans-Asian traffic (especially container traffic) that originates in China (and to some extent, India – see below), and travels overland to markets throughout Europe. Overland shipment is much preferred, as it in general cuts as much as two weeks off the total transit time.
As both China and Europe use Standard gauge, the use of such a gauge in Mongolia, Kazakhstan and Afghanistan – all of which are on the most direct routings proposed for the Trans-Asian Railway – makes perfect sense, saving all the trouble of either changing bogies on freight wagons, or using large cranes to offload containers from one train to another, at each break of gauge.
India of course uses its own 1676 mm gauge – and India is becoming ever more competitive in terms of producing goods for western markets, so the use of Standard gauge on the Trans-Asian Railway is not a complete solution. In fact, it appears that there is a lot of conflicting information as to precisely what form the Trans-Asian Railway will take, including what gauge, or gauges, it will use, which route it shall take (there are at least two routes in prime contention), and what standards it will use in its construction and operation.
The following map shows the principal gauges used in central Asia:
As can be seen, the gap in 1435 mm rails between China and Iran is not huge – and passes through Afghanistan. The possible alternative, and more northerly, route through Kazakhstan would involve considerable more construction of Standard gauge track through Area 1520 territory, which is less likely to happen for this railway, although it is already happening for other Trans-Asian rail lines.
THE ‘GREAT SILK ROAD’
Before leaving Area 1520, I should mention a very historic railway route that was known (and still is known) as the Great Silk Road. Historically it connects Beijing with Europe, over which trade caravans regularly plied carrying silks (hence its name) and other valuable products to merchants in the great European cities.
During the early parts of the age of the railway, this route comprised the initial Trans-Siberian railway. Today there are additional and alternative freight-only routes that carry goods between east and west – passengers however are still confined to the traditional routes.
But the Great Silk Road may soon have a successor in the form of the Iron Silk Road. I have already mentioned the Trans-Asian Railway and the Trans-Kazakhstan Railways, both of which are components in the developing Trans-Asian Network of railways.
This network will ultimately comprise around 81 000 km of interlinked lines, most (but by no means all) to Standard gauge, and will enable the seamless shipment of freight (particularly containers) between the east (China, South-East Asia) and the west (the main European cities, including potentially – via the Channel Tunnel – London).
It will require huge commitments in principle from all countries involved – 24 in total – to agree not only on a common rail gauge (or invest heavily in rail vehicles equipped with variable-gauge bogies and automatic gauge changing facilities, including their maintenance), but also agree on other common standards, such as couplings, loading gauges, signalling, driver training, and so on.
It is a massive task, already over 30 years in the making. But timelines have been recently reset, and a Standard gauge rail link between Beijing and London could be into construction before the end of the second decade of the 21st century. As the decision has been made to build most of this line to Standard gauge, it will be interesting to see if such a decision will have any effect on the gauge(s) of other railways in this part of the world. Will we, as we surmised at the beginning of this Part, see a new gauge war?
ON TO PART 5…
We started Part 4 with a discourse on how Area 1520 appears to be following an aggressive agenda to spread its 1520 mm gauge far beyond its current borders, which are primarily the old pre-revolution Russia, and later the USSR and its empire of satellite states. We ended Part 4 by showing that the unfettered use of this gauge may not be so certain after all, even within Russia’s own borders, and certainly within a number of these former satellite states.
How these new gauge wars – primarily betwe
en 1520 mm and 1435 mm, but potentially involving 1676 mm and 1000 mm gauges as well – will play out in the years to come can only be the subject of speculation at this point in time. There are very strong competing interests from many very powerful parties, each seeking to persuade the others that its gauge is the best. It sounds just like the gauge wars in Britain in the 1840s!
The solution in Britain in 1846 was of course the Gauge Act (see Part 1), mandating the use of Standard gauge throughout England, Wales and Scotland. But is there any way today of legislating such an action across such a vast part of the world, involving any number of large and powerful sovereign states?
Probably not. Any solution will likely be a technological one rather than a political one, and so we will most likely continue to see a multiplicity of gauges in what is still primarily 1520 mm gauge country, with technology overcoming what political will cannot.
Our next Part, Part 5, takes us to Central and Eastern Asia – and again, we will encounter a multiplicity of gauges, as well as a look further into these proposed links between the Far East and Western Europe as China exerts ever more influence – and the spread of its increasing technological expertise – in international railway building, especially that involving high speeds of 300 km/h and above. Will China’s influence – both its technological prowess and its economic ‘imperialism’ – have far reaching effects on the gauges of the railways in this part of the world? Part 5 attempts to answer that question.
© Copyright Frewston Books Online 2016
Area 1520 Page 4
