中国高铁有多先进？看看外国网民怎么说

点击：  作者：译者：龙腾比目鱼    来源：超级大本营  发布时间:2017-02-15 12:19:47

 

 

 

       问题：中国高铁有多先进？

Question：How advanced are Chinese high-speed rail trains?

原外文链接：https://www.quora.com/How-advanc ... h-speed-rail-trains

（英文好的直接看原文吧）

译者：龙腾比目鱼

Answered by Robin Daverman（upvote|3.3k）：

罗宾•达韦尔曼的回答（3300赞）：

The Chinese high-speed rails have a quality all on its own, because it’s so massive. There are more than twice as many high-speed trains in China as the rest of the world combined. The picture below is an early morning photo at the train station of a second-tier city in China.

中国高铁之所以有如此高的质量完全是因为中国高铁本身的体量，因为中国高铁系统太庞大了。中国高铁的数量比世界其他国家高铁总数的两倍还要多。下面的图片展示了中国一个二线城市的火车站清晨的图景。

中国高铁有多先进？看看外国网民怎么说

Tier 1 cities like Beijing have a couple hundred

一线城市比如北京每天有两百多列高铁停靠。

中国高铁有多先进？看看外国网民怎么说

And the Chinese Spring Festival is just a mad house - an estimated 3 billion person/trips take place within a 2-week window. It would be the equivalent of every American taking 10 trips during Christmas, or every European taking 5 trips during Christmas. All the train tickets are gone within like 10 seconds after they become available.

中国春节期间简直就是车如流水马如龙，据估计在春节期间两周的窗口期内共发送旅客30亿人次。这相当于所有美国人在圣诞节期间每人搭乘10趟火车，或者相当于所有欧洲人在圣诞节期间每人搭乘5趟火车。春节期间所有的火车票在开售10分钟内就全部被抢完。

中国高铁有多先进？看看外国网民怎么说

The Chinese high-speed rail system made 1.5 billion trips last year, growing 30% a year. It’s just absolutely massive!

中国高铁系统去年发送旅客15亿人次，一年之内增长30%。这规模简直就是丧心病狂的庞大！

外国网民评论：

Lei Sun：（82赞）

The fact that this 3 billion person/trips can happen in 2 weeks in the first place demonstrates the infrastructure is some human wonder. In my adopted home country Sweden with less than 10 million people, due to poor management and evasion of responsibility etc, as soon as it snows a little bit trains get cancelled or delayed for hours. I once had to travel 3 hours by train to the airport, the train came 3 hours too late and I almost missed my flight! Our minister of transportation once outrageously claimed “people can celebrate Christmas another day”! This will never happen in China. No Chinese official dares to utter these words. Why the elected officials of a “democratic” country take less responsibility towards the public than officials of a “dictator” country is beyond normal people’s comprehension.

首先，光“在春节期间两周的窗口期内共发送旅客30亿人次”这一点上，就证明了中国的基础设施在某种程度上简直就是人类奇迹。在我的第二故乡瑞典，人口不到一千万，由于管理不善和逃避责任等等问题，一到刚下了一点儿小雪的时候，火车就取消或者推迟几个小时。我曾经有一次坐了3个小时火车才赶到机场，最后火车还是晚到了3个小时之久，让我差点没赶上航班！我们的交通部长曾经有一次极其离谱地讲“人们可以改一天再庆祝圣诞节”！这种事情绝不可能发生在中国。没有一个中国政府官员敢说出这样的话。为什么在一个“民主”国家里，一群被选举出来的官员，对公众如此不负责任，比起一个“独菜”国家的官员都不如，这完全超出了一个正常人能理解的范围。

Nishi Kaanti Dasgupta：（3赞）

meritocracy is better than democracy.

精英政治比民主政治要好。

Fred Gan：（3赞）

China is definitely not a democratic country but also not ruling under a dictature system. actually, this country executes by meritocracy at all levels. these political leaders are, of course not elected by its people but also not nominated by leaders. To become an official in the bureaucracy, those candidates get to pass several examinations and interviews, most eliminated in the process and only 3–5% may get offers. All government employees will be scored based on their performance at the end of year

中国确实不是一个民主国家，但是同时也不是一个独菜体制统治之下的国家。实际上，这个国家在各个层面上实行精英体制。这些领导层当然不是由民众直接选举出来的，但是也不是由领导层直接任命的。要成为官僚体系中的一员，这些申请人必须通过几轮笔试和面试，在这个过程中，只有3%到5%的最优秀的人在可以进入体制。所有的政府雇员在年终都必须基于他们的表现进行考核。

Ryed Jadun ：（1赞）

I feel like the infrastructure was created by need. Not sure about the need in Sweden, but if the growth in public transportation does not supplement the need of it, then there really is no point in creating so much. However, it’s also true that if the public transportation becomes so advanced that there is no more need for cars anyway, more people will opt for the public transportation in the first place.

我感觉基础设施是由需求创造出来的。而在瑞典这种需求不明确，但是如果公共交通的增长没有相对应的需求，那么建造如此多的基础设施就毫无意义了。然而，同样有道理的是，如果公共交通变得非常先进，以致于人们不再对汽车有更多的需求，那么更多的人们就会首选公共交通了。

Leo Xie：（5赞）
Actually, in most cases, things are not created by need. We didn’t really need iPhones. We didn’t really need Facebook. We didn’t even need the internet 30 years ago.

Swedish people might not need high-speed trains. However, would they love to travel faster and more comfortable? I guess most of them would say YES!

实际上，在大多数情况下，很多事情不都是由需求创造出来的。我们过去并没有对iPhone的需求，我们过去也没有对Facebook的需求，我们在30年前甚至都没有对互联网的需求。

瑞典人可能没有对高铁的需求。然而，难道他们不喜欢更快更舒适的旅行吗？我猜他们当中大多数人会说：“喜欢”！

Ryed Jadun：

You have a good point, but I feel the comparison is not very good. iPhones and internet were first created as an advancement, and advancements/novelties usually sell based on popularity, and they’re created by a corporation, so they’d want to sell it whether it’s needed or not. Trains and stuff are more state/city based, so there’s more supplied for a larger demand, otherwise it wouldn’t be worth it to create so many with such fast pace if no one is really using them.
That’s just my TRAIN of thought.

你说得有道理，但是我觉得你的打的比喻不恰当。iPhone和互联网一开始是被作为前卫产品被创造出来的，前卫产品或者新奇的事物通常是基于受大众欢迎程度来售卖的，它们是由公司创造的，所以无论是不是有这个需求，公司都会努力去售卖。火车更多是基于国家或城市的，所以只有需求越大，才会供给越大。否则如果没人用的话，以再快速的步伐创造再多，也是不值得的。

Ibrahim Ahmed：

lool are you saying china is better than sweden? hahaha man it surprises me how many chinese there are on quora to upvote you

Gabriel Chan：（26赞）

That tier two city is Wuhan, Hubei.

这个二线城市是湖北武汉。

Athanos Lee：

But Wuhan is a transportation hub. Robin should choose a more typical second-tier city like Kunming or Yinchuan. Otherwise it would simply be misleading.

但是武汉是一个交通枢纽。罗宾你应该选择一个更加典型的二线城市比如昆明或者银川来示例。否则将会误导读者。

Lei Sun：

I lived a few years in Basel, Switzerland, also a very sizable transportation hub in Europe. And it looks nowhere close to this picture from Wuhan.

我在瑞士巴塞尔（瑞士西北部城市，在莱茵河畔）住过几年，同样是一个相当大的交通枢纽。但是它在哪一个方面看起来都比不上图片上的武汉。

Delio Mugnolo：

Wuhan’s population is 30 times as large as Basel’s.

武汉的人口是巴塞尔的30倍。

Lei Sun：

Most of Basel’s train traffic is international, the city stands on the border of France, Germany and Switzerland. So population size of Basel itself is not very relevant here.

大部分的巴塞尔火车交通都是国际性的，这个城市位于法国、德国和瑞士三国交界的地方，所以在这儿谈巴塞尔的人口规模是不相关的。

Andrew Wong：

How about Chengdu? I was very impressed with their High Speed Rail station.

成都怎么样？我对他们的高铁站印象非常深刻。

Hal Xu：

These two u have mentioned are definetly third tier

你提到的两个城市无疑都属于三线城市。

Alexander.Jin：

But I dont think Kunming and Yinchuan are second-tier cities.

但是我不认为昆明和银川是二线城市。

Fred Weems：

The high speed train system in and out of Xi’an is absolutely first class. If there’s a train option I’ll take that over flying. The scenery is fantastic from ground level.

进出西安的高铁绝对是一流的。如果可以选择坐高铁，我绝不坐飞机。沿途的地貌风景简直太奇妙了。

Magnus Reynhamar：

Xi'an is just almost outer worldly beautiful to me.

西安对我来说就像是世外桃源。

Victor Gan：

Kunming and Yinchuan are fourth tier cities in China!

Jo Michie：（40赞）

The Chinese High Speed Rail-system is awesome in the true meaning of the word. It is opening the far west and the interior of China and will bring prosperity to areas previously cut-off from the economic growth of the eastern seaboard of the country.

中国高速铁路系统用一个词就可以表示真正的含义：awesome（太棒了）。它打开了偏远西部地区和内陆地区的大门，并将给这些地区带来繁荣，以往这些地区和东部沿海地区的经济增长脱节了。

It is my preferred method of traveling within China. The trains always leave on time despite weather conditions (unlike aircraft) and always arrive on time.

高铁是我在中国旅行的首选交通工具。列车总是准点出发，准点到达，不管怎样的天气状况（飞机就不一样了）。

Once on board the passengers are well cared for, the trains are well staffed and maintained. Toilets are clean, seats are comfortable, you can purchase snacks and drinks on board.

一旦坐上了列车，旅客们都能得到周到的照顾，车上工作人员配置齐全，列车保养良好。卫生间干净整洁，座位舒适，你还可以在列车上买到零食和饮料。

It is sometimes hard to realise just how fast the train is moving as it is so smooth (compared with trains in the UK). Announcements are given in both Mandarin and English.

有时候你很难搞懂，中国高铁是怎样做到运行得如此快速，但是却又如此的平稳（和英国的火车相比）。列车还会给出普通话和英语双语广播。

I really wish Britain would get its act together and invest in a proper high speed rail system linking Scotland, the North of England, the Midlands and the South West of England - it would bring immense benefits, and help reduce road traffic.

Corey Tournet：（6赞）

I don’t think the technology itself is any sort of breakthrough. The main breakthroughs are the extremely low cost of the tickets and the scale. Here in the USA we always try to make everything so expensive and complicated.

我不认为单从技术上来讲，中国高铁有什么大的技术突破......中国高铁主要的突破在于，极度低廉的票价和如此庞大的规模。在美国，我们总是试图把每一样东西搞得又贵又复杂。

Answered by Paco Cabeza-Lopez：（upvote|74）：

Paco Cabeza-Lopez的回答（74赞）：

I have read all the answers so far but I can’t see any of them providing a real answer to the question. Some answers confuse the size of Chinese fleet with technological development. Bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better. We know that well in Europe.

我看完了到目前为止所有对这个问题的回答，但是我还没有发现其中任何回答提供真正的干货。有些答案把中国高铁舰队的规模和中国高铁的技术发展混为一谈。规模更大并不一定意味着技术更好。在欧洲，我们可以很清楚地看到这一点。

Certainly, “how advanced” depends on your own benchmark. For someone in the US, the Chinese High Speed (HS) network will be simply awesome. If your benchmark is France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium or Japan, then I would say it is quite equivalent in most general instances except for one, probably the most important one, SAFETY(I’ll get back to this in a minute).

当然啦，“有多先进”取决于你采用什么样的参照系。比如对于一个身在美国的人来说，中国的高铁网络简直就是牛逼。但是如果你的参照系换成法国、西班牙、意大利、德国、比利时或者日本，那么我会说，在大多数情况下，中国高铁和他们旗鼓相当，除了有一点，或许也是最重要的一点，安全（这一点我待会儿再讲）。

I say quite similarly advanced simply because the Chinese have “borrowed” all technologies to make HS trains from the main European technological contractors. Simply look at the rolling stock running on the Chinese networks. Most of the trains are exact copies of the original Alstom, Siemens, Bombardier (rails division based in Germany, not Canada) Ansaldo and a few Japanese Shinkansen models. (Partially or completely) built in China but exact copies of the European/Japanese marvels.

我说它们几乎是一样的先进，纯粹是因为中国人用来建造高铁的所有技术，都是从几个主要的欧洲技术承包商那里“借来的”。这一点你只需要看一看，目前正运行在中国高铁系统的轨道机车车身就可以知道了。大部分的车身都是原封不动地复制了阿尔斯通、西门子、庞巴迪（它的铁路部门总部在德国，而不是加拿大）、安萨尔多和一部分新干线的原始模型。车身（部分地或者完全的）在中国生产制造，但是完全是欧洲/日本生产商的杰作的翻版。

译注：来源 / 百度百科；

阿尔斯通：法国公司，世界五百强排名448，阿尔斯通是全球交通运输和电力基础设施领域的先驱；

西门子：德国公司，西门子股份公司创立于1847年，是全球电子电气工程领域的领先企业；

庞巴迪：加拿大公司，庞巴迪是一家总部位于加拿大魁北克省蒙特利尔的国际性交通运输设备制造商；

安萨尔多：意大利公司，是一家拥有150多年历史、全能型的工业公司，拥有悠久的重工业研发及制造的历史，目前是全球最优秀的综合机电工程公司之一。

CRH1 train models are Bombardier/Ansaldo Zefiro’s

CRH2 train models are Japanese Shinkansen’s

CRH3 train models are Siemens ICE3 models

CRH5 train models are Alstom Pendolinos

Etc, etc.

CRH1列车模型是庞巴迪/安萨尔多的Zefiro型列车

CRH2列车模型是日本新干线型列车

CRH3列车模型是西门子的ICE3型列车

CRH5列车模型是阿尔斯通的Pendolinos型列车

等等。。。

（译注：CRH 全称为China Railways High-speed，中文字面意为“中国铁路高速”。CRH1即为和谐号CRH1型电力动车组）

It is true that now China is able to make HS trains almost by themselves, but previous agreements with suppliers suggest they still pay royalties for every model they produce (or at least they should). And in no case, the Chinese may claim these trains as “Chinese technology”. Period.

确实，如今中国已经能够完全靠自己的能力来建造高铁了，但是根据此前与供应商达成的协议推断，他们仍然要为自己制造的每一辆车身支付专利使用费（或者至少是他们应该支付）。所以无论是在哪一种情况下，中国人都没有资格宣称他们的高铁是“中国技术”。这部分说完了。

Now, let’s go to the safety part.

现在，让我们回到关于安全的部分。

Any country may have the fastest, superfanciest trains they can, but you need a signaling management system that goes with it and that guarantees no accidents while optimizing headways (ie, to get your return on investment operators place trains as fast as possible and as close to each other as possible in total SAFETY): in Europe, with ERTMS, we can place trains at 350 km/h every 3 minutes in a way that if one needs to stop to halt, the next one will do so without crashing into the previous one, in total safety. Of course this is not easy and needs its own planning, development and investment.

每个国家都可以建造他们认为的最快速、最豪华的列车，但是你必须有一个信号管理系统来相配套，这样才可以保证在不出事故的前提下优化列车行驶速度（例如，为了回收投资，在总体安全的情况下，经营者会将列车设置在尽可能快的速度下行驶，并且设置前一趟列车和后一趟列车的间距尽可能的短一些）：在欧洲，通过ERTMS，我们能够把列车速度设置成每隔3分钟切换至350 km/h一次，通过这种方式，一旦前一趟列车需要紧急制动，那么后一趟列车将会采取同样的方式来避免撞上前一趟列车，这样就可以保证总体安全。当然要做到这一点不是那么容易的，这需要相关人员计划，发展和投资。

ERTMS stands for European Rail Traffic Management System. Basically, to make the long story short, the Chinese have adapted (or taken) ERTMS and called it CTCS, which stands for, you guessed it, Chinese Train Control System. ERTMS comes in 3 levels, 1 being the least advanced and 3 being a pure moving block system (trains talk to each other permanently and report their position in real time, no signals needed). CTCS also comes in 3 levels, with CTCS2 somehow equivalent to ERTMS1, CTCS3 equivalent to ERTMS2 and, CTCS1 equivalent to, mmhhmm, “non-safe” Automatic Train Protection System (ATP). Let’s try to elaborate a bit further:

ERTMS 代表“欧洲铁路运输管理系统”。长话短说，总体上，中国人已经改编（或者说 “采取”）了ERTMS，然后改了个名字叫做CTCS，意思是“中国列车运行控制系统”。 ERTMS分3个等级，其中1级是最落后的，3级是指“纯移动闭塞系统”（列车之间互相保持持续稳定的信息传输，并且实时报告各自的位置，不需要信号控制）。CTCS同样分3个等级，但是不知怎么搞地，CTCS2等同于ERTMS1，CTCS3等同于ERTMS2，CTCS1等同于，额额额。。。，“非安全”的列车自动防护系统（ATP）。我再努力说得详细一点：

CTCS 1 is a non-safe ATP system improved by some trackside data reading from a Eurobalise via packet 44. CTCS1 is not used for HS trains because it is designed for maximum speeds of up to 160 km/h. You may find this outside the HS network.

CTCS 2 makes use of ERTMS type data packets but – big difference – the system does not read a Movement Authority (MA) from the Eurobalise as we do in Europe. Instead, the MA is computed by the on-board unit combining trackside data from the Eurobalise with a track circuit code indicating the number of blocks ahead free. Putting your safety in a track circuit may not be the wisest of the ideas, as the Wenzhou train collision on 23 July 2011 proved, with 40 people killed after a heavy storm with lightning hit the area of the accident and made the track circuit fail.

CTCS 3 is the highest end Chinese ATP system capable of dealing with speeds up to 380 km/h with a similar ERTMS 2 type architecture and comprises Radio Block Centers (RBC) and a GSM-R radio communications infrastructure and on-board data radios.

CTCS 1是指非安全的“列车自动防护系统”，它是从“欧洲标准查询应答器”通过packet 44读取的轨道数据改进而来的。CTCS1不是用于高铁系统的，因为它是为最大速度不超过160 km/h的列车设计的。你在高铁网络系统之外的铁路系统中也可以发现它。

CTCS 2使用ERTMS类型数据包，但是，有很大的不同，CTCS 2无法像我们欧洲这样读取来自欧洲标准查询应答器的“行车许可模块”数据。取而代之的是，中国的“行车许可模块”数据是由车载单元综合两方面的数据计算而来的，一方面是来自欧洲标准查询应答器收集的轨道数据，另一方面是来自轨道电路编码指示的前方道路是否通畅的数据。将你的人身安全置于一个轨道电路之上，可能不是所有的方案中最明智的那一种，正如发生在2011年7月23日的温州火车相撞事故证明的那样，那次事故导致40人死亡，起因就是事发区域出现雷暴天气，导致轨道电路发生故障。

CTCS 3是中国最高等级的“列车自动防护系统”，能够应对最高速度达380 km/h的列车，采用和ERTMS 2等级类似的架构，包含“无线闭塞中心”（RBC），GSM-R无线通信设施和车载数据无线电通信。

In other words, and in response to the question asked, Chinese HS rolling stock (trains) are as good as European and Japanese counterparts but I would only trust a Chinese HS ride on a CTCS3 equipped network (and would try to skip CTCS2). Would never ride on a CTCS1 line (this one not supporting HS traffic). Today, only the CTCS3 signaling system in China is up to the European and Japanese standards.

换一句话说，可以这样回答上面提出的这个问题，中国高铁系统的轨道机车车身，和欧洲或日本的同行一样好，但是我只会信任运行在装备了CTCS3标准网络上的高铁（或许会尝试一下CTCS2），但是绝对不会乘坐一条CTCS1线路列车（CTCS1根本就支撑不起高铁交通运输）。当今，在中国只有CTCS3信号系统才可以比肩欧洲和日本的标准。

Rick Wang：（13赞）

LOL, I love how this person just low key skips the indigenously developed CRH6s and the CRH380s. Copied the Japanese and European models? China signed contracts and collabrated with those companies to design its first few models together. By your logic the Fiat 124 Spider is a copy of the Mazda Miata? Oh and China only has 3 CTCS levels? Forgot about the CTCS 0 and 4 I see? Do you want to do some more research?

真搞笑，我奇怪你这个人是怎么跳过了关键性的中国自主研发的CRH6s和CRH380s型列车的？复制日本和欧洲的模型？中国和这些公司签订了合同，一起来合作研发设计最初的车型。按照你的逻辑，菲亚特124Spider汽车是马自达MX-5 Miata汽车的复制品了？哦？中国只有3个CTCS等级？我看你是忘了还有CTCS 0的CTCS 4了？你难道不想回去做点功课再来谈这个问题吗？
Paco Cabeza-Lopez（

答主

）：（2赞）

Rick, Ill be happy to read your answer if you can provide one to Quora. Sometimes, being a bit of a fanatic makes you believe things are not exactly like you think they are. I can see that in many of your Chinese-related answers.

Rick，我很高兴在这个网站上看到你的回复。有时候，你的某种狂热情绪，让你笃信了一些事情，但是事情并非你认为的那样。我可以从你回答的与中国相关的问题的许多答案上看出这一点。

Anyhow, not mentioning the CTCS0 or CTCS4, or even ERTMS3 doesn’t mean I am not aware of them. They were not relevant for THIS answer. I just didn’t want to get too technical. but if you wish, I can tell you in this direct reply to you that CTCS0 is not signaling system, just a compliance level, and that CTCS4 only exists on paper, just like ERTMS3. Some suppliers claim having ERTMS3 solutions (moving block principle, like CBTC), but this is not completely true. They only have ERTMS3-like systems

不管怎么样，不用说CTCS0或者CTCS4，哪怕是ERTMS3，我也不是非常了解它们。这些跟这个问题无关。我不想谈太多的技术问题。但是如果你非要追根问底，我可以直接跟你说，CTCS0不是信号系统，还尚处于编译级别。而CTCS4还只存在纸面上，就像ERTMS3一样。一些供应商声称已经开发出ERTMS3解决方案（移动闭塞原理，就像CBTC），但是也不完全正确。他们目前只达到了“类ERTMS3”级别。

Re. vehicles (rolling stock), youre perfectly endorsing my answer, and I thank you for that. What you call “design its first models together” is what I call “copies of exactly the same model made in China with mainly Chinese labor”. We are on the same page here.

回应你关于车身的问题，你点赞了我的答案，我很感谢这一点。你所说的“一起来合作研发设计最初的车型”，就是我所说的“在中国制造，主要使用中国工人，原封不动的模型翻版”，这里我们说的是一个意思。

Last but not least. I need do no “research”. Its part of my own knowledge and experience. Thank you.

最后但是同样重要的一点是，我不需要做任何“功课”。这是我自身的知识和经验的一部分。谢谢。

===========================

Yi Lu：（1赞）

Thanks for an answer with hardcore details! I love such answers.
谢谢你的干货答案！我喜欢这个答案。

I checked on Chinese internet and it is said that D trains use CTCS2 systems and their speed is 200km/h, while G trains use CTCS3 systems and their speed is 300km/h.

我在中国相关网站上查了一下，网上说D字打头的火车使用CTCS2系统，速度是200km/h；G字打头的火车使用CTCS3系统，速度是300km/h。

So D trains are not safe? or safe at 200km/h?

所以D字打头的火车是不安全的吗？或者说只要在200km/h下行使才安全？

Paco Cabeza-Lopez（答主）：

D trains are rather safe, otherwise we would have accidents every week or month. My point is that theyre not as safe as the equivalent European system for the reasons I explained around the Wenzhou accident. Never fully trust a track circuit. Theyre quite easy to fail, especially in bad weather conditions.

D字打头的火车也是相当安全的，否则我们每个月或每周都要发生交通事故了。我的重点是，他们只是没有像同等级的欧洲系统那样安全而已，原因我已经在温州事故那个问题上解释了。不要过分相信轨道电路。他们很容易出故障，尤其是在恶劣天气状况下。

===========================

Kåre Skak Pedersen：

I’m trying to imagine myself at the ticket office:

我脑补一下我自己在车站买票的场景：

“I would like a ticket back home to Beijing. Please make sure it’s a HS ride on a CTCS3 equipped network.”

“你好，我要买一张回北京的票。请确保我买的这张票的高铁是运行在配备了CTCS3网络系统上。”

Besides I wouldn’t know how to express it in Chinese, I have a feeling that they wouldn’t have a clue what I’m talking about.

除了我不知道应该怎样用中文表达这个意思之外，就算我会用中文说，我估计售票员也对于我所说的一头雾水。

But I still get the point: Chinese trains are cheap copy-crap and only the HS ride on a CTCS3 equipped network is worth risking your life on.

但是我还是抓住了你的要点：中国的火车都是便宜的仿制品，除了运行在CTCS3配置的线路上的高铁值得一试。

Paco Cabeza-Lopez

（答主）：

I tried to provide an answer with limited technical details to the question. Of course, the situation you mention is rather unrealistic but, as just replied above to Yi Lu, traffic on CTCS2 systems are rather safe, otherwise we would have accidents every week or month. Fortunately this is not the case.

我是在尽量用不涉及技术细节的语言来回答这个问题的。当然，你提到的场景肯定是不现实的，但是正如我上面回复Yi Lu所说那样，D字打头的火车也是相当安全的，否则我们每个月或每周都要发生交通事故了。幸运的是，事情并没有像这样发生。

===========================

Vincent Poon：（1赞）

Interesting but your answer seems lacking. Out of curiosity, I've decided to search the web for the “worst high speed rail accidents” and here's the top 3 results.

你的答案很有趣，但是有缺陷。出于好奇心，我决定在网上搜索一下“最糟糕的高铁交通事故”，然后发现以下排在前三位的结果。

Eschede derailment occurred on 3 June 1998, deaths 101, injuries 88

Santiago de Compostela derailment occurred on 24 July 2013, deaths 80, injuries 140

Wenzhou train collision on 23 July 2011, deaths 40, injuries 200+ (based in the wiki article, this is China's first fetal highspeed rail accident)

艾须得镇（德国）列车脱轨，发生在1998年6月3日，101人死亡，88人受伤；

圣地亚哥-德孔波斯特拉（西班牙城市）列车脱轨，发生在2013年7月24日，80人死亡，140人受伤；

温州火车相撞事故，发生在2011年7月23日，40人死亡，200多人受伤（根据维基百科词条查询的结果，这是中国第一起致命的高铁交通事故）

In comparison, let's take a look at this list of non highspeed rail accidents by death toll.

相比之下，让我们再来看一看非高铁交通事故导致的死亡人数：（维基百科链接。。。）

Paco Cabeza-Lopez（答主）：

Thank you so much for this question, Vincent. I was really expecting it so that I could elaborate a bit more. Wonder why my answer is “lacking” but anyhow. Ill be short for this is just an answer to a direct question. Ill start in reverse order:

谢谢你的回复，Vincent。我非常期待你们对我的答案感兴趣，所以我可以说得详细一点。但是我很奇怪你为什么说我的答案是有缺陷的，不管怎么样，我长话短说，直接回答你的问题吧。我将采取倒序的方式：

Wenzhou, 2011: I already provided details, no questions here.

温州，2011：我已经提供了事发细节了，这一点应该没问题了。

Spain (Santiago de Compostela) 2013: The accident was a political disaster: The line had to be opened prior to some kind or regional elections and long story short, the last 6.5km were not equipped with ERTMS, only the ASFA national system. The accident ocurred during the transition from ERTMS to ASFA, on the ASFA section. ASFA was not able to stop the train. It warned the driver but he was busy (apparently) on the phone and did not brake in time (he forgot he had to take over the train on the non-ERTMS section). Therefore, ERTMS is not to be blamed here. On the country, it wouldve stopped the train if implemented. But it wasnt.

西班牙（圣地亚哥-德孔波斯特拉）2013：这起事故是一个政治灾难的后果：长话短说，这条线路由于不得不优先向某些地方选举开放，最后的6.5km路线没有配置ERTMS，只是配置了ASFA国家系统。事故发生在ERTMS向ASFA过渡的地方，列车处于ASFA区域。ASFA没有能力紧急停止火车。警告送达火车司机，但是司机显然在忙与打电话，没有及时刹住火车（他忘了在非ERTMS区域应该手动操作车辆）。因此，这起事故不能归咎于ERTMS。相反，如果部署了ERTMS，列车就可以停住，但是很遗憾没有部署。

Last but not least, Enschede, Belgium (1998): the easy outcome of this accident was/is that the whole country is currently being re-signaled into ERTMS (in order to avoid accidents like Enschede), just like Denmark or Switzerland.. Netherlands is also thinking about it. At that time we had no ERTMS in place, it was being developed. The Belgian system was completely outdated in most parts of the country.

最后但是同样重要的一点是，艾须得镇，比利时（1998）：这起事故最简单的结论就是，当时整个国家正在重新调试信号以便改成ERTMS（目的是为了避免像艾须得镇那样的事故），当时丹麦、瑞士和荷兰等等国家也在考虑做同样的事，那个时候ERTMS还没有完全部署，而是正在发展当中。比利时系统在这个国家的很多方面已经完全过时了。