Finland Bridge links Vladivostok and Helsinki

[Adlington]

RZD Logistics, FESCO Transportation and Nurminen Logistics Services have launched a regular container service between Vladivostok and Vuosaari in Helsinki via the trans-Siberian route. The service has been branded Finland Bridge, and is expected to operate three or four times per month.

Source

This is yet another Far East - Europe rail bridge, which terminates in a wide-gauge port, thus eliminating the wide-to-standard transfer hassle.

 

[edwin_m]

Source

This is yet another Far East - Europe rail bridge, which terminates in a wide-gauge port, thus eliminating the wide-to-standard transfer hassle.

But doesn't Helsinki still ice up in winter? I'd have though they'd be better going to somewhere like Liepaja which I believe is ice free and is still on the broad gauge. Besides, trans-shipment of containers between flats of different gauges isn't a huge deal.

 

[StephenHunter]

It does, but they use icebreakers to clear paths.

 

[jamesontheroad]

But doesn't Helsinki still ice up in winter?

Not sufficiently to prevent shipping. In colder winters they have a well funded and equipped ice breaking service to keep the port open.

Info: https://www.eurisy.eu/stories/finla...ts-due-to-efficient-icebreaking-services_181/

 

[Adlington]

I'd have though they'd be better going to somewhere like Liepaja which I believe is ice free and is still on the broad gauge. Besides, trans-shipment of containers between flats of different gauges isn't a huge deal.

Liepaja is in Latvia. Customs clearance &c....
Trans-shipment isn't a huge deal, but it costs money.

 

[deltic]

How many container trains a week link the Far East to Europe and is the number of containers moved just a very small proportion of those that are shipped?

 

[edwin_m]

Liepaja is in Latvia. Customs clearance &c....

Wouldn't the same apply to Finland?

 

[Adlington]

How many container trains a week link the Far East to Europe

in November [2020], China was sending approximately ten full trains to Europe per week. On the other side, eastbound trains did not exceed the number of two each week.
Source: Railfreight.com

 

[Taunton]

Unfortunately such services fall uncomfortably between two more established modes. As you can see in pictures of current container ships, they carry a huge number of containers, 20,000 or more with the latest ones, to give a low overall shipping cost. Meanwhile, if you want speed, Asia to Western Europe has always been one of the largest air freight markets in the world.

Trans-Siberian container operations fall between these two. The trains carry only a small proportion of what a ship can, and costs per container are far more. Double stack is not possible in Europe, which does not have the loading gauge of the USA - and also overhead electrification is generally incompatible with double stack, which has taken all the headroom where wiring might otherwise go. But they are not nearly as fast as air freight. Plus having to be transshipped in Finland, wait for the next departure to their destination (the big time-loser), and then plod round through The Baltic at 20 knots, and maybe a second rail journey when they get to the destination port, just elongates it all.

 

[JonasB]

But there might be a market for freight where a ship is too slow but a plane to expensive. Maybe not a big market, but perhaps big enough for a few monthly trains?

 

[edwin_m]

Unfortunately such services fall uncomfortably between two more established modes. As you can see in pictures of current container ships, they carry a huge number of containers, 20,000 or more with the latest ones, to give a low overall shipping cost. Meanwhile, if you want speed, Asia to Western Europe has always been one of the largest air freight markets in the world.

Trans-Siberian container operations fall between these two. The trains carry only a small proportion of what a ship can, and costs per container are far more. Double stack is not possible in Europe, which does not have the loading gauge of the USA - and also overhead electrification is generally incompatible with double stack, which has taken all the headroom where wiring might otherwise go. But they are not nearly as fast as air freight. Plus having to be transshipped in Finland, wait for the next departure to their destination (the big time-loser), and then plod round through The Baltic at 20 knots, and maybe a second rail journey when they get to the destination port, just elongates it all.

Double stack is not totally impossible with overhead line - it happens in India, not even using well wagons, by the use of what looks a ridiculously large pantograph. The guidelines for ineroperability in the Gulf Co-Operation Council (the also require clerarance to be provided for double stack plus overhead line, though no GCC country is actively considering OLE as far as I'm aware. But I do agree it's pretty much impossible on any system that wasn't designed with it in mind.

But there might be a market for freight where a ship is too slow but a plane to expensive. Maybe not a big market, but perhaps big enough for a few monthly trains?

That seems to be the intention, noting the quote in the OP mentions three or four trains per month. Probably the target market is Norway and Sweden, which would require a sea crossing whichever route it took. The around ten trains per week from China to Europe noted above are probably serving the countries further south where a through journey by rail is possible, although containers have to be re-loaded twice to account for break of gauge.

 

[rf_ioliver]

But doesn't Helsinki still ice up in winter? I'd have though they'd be better going to somewhere like Liepaja which I believe is ice free and is still on the broad gauge. Besides, trans-shipment of containers between flats of different gauges isn't a huge deal.

No, none of the Finnish ports are closed by ice during winter. The state here keeps a fleet of icebreakers for this very job.

Helsinki no longer has a freight port, other than the two ferry terminals*, they were closed (now housing areas) and everything moved to Vuosaari to the east of Helsinki which is the port mentioned in the article.


*Etelä- and Lansi satama - yes they see freight traffic but using the car ferries. Länsi-satama does see some smaller cargo vessels.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

But there might be a market for freight where a ship is too slow but a plane to expensive. Maybe not a big market, but perhaps big enough for a few monthly trains?

Unfortunately such services fall uncomfortably between two more established modes. As you can see in pictures of current container ships, they carry a huge number of containers, 20,000 or more with the latest ones, to give a low overall shipping cost. Meanwhile, if you want speed, Asia to Western Europe has always been one of the largest air freight markets in the world.

Trans-Siberian container operations fall between these two. The trains carry only a small proportion of what a ship can, and costs per container are far more. Double stack is not possible in Europe, which does not have the loading gauge of the USA - and also overhead electrification is generally incompatible with double stack, which has taken all the headroom where wiring might otherwise go. But they are not nearly as fast as air freight. Plus having to be transshipped in Finland, wait for the next departure to their destination (the big time-loser), and then plod round through The Baltic at 20 knots, and maybe a second rail journey when they get to the destination port, just elongates it all.

I think that market might grow to be more than just a few monthly trains. There is a lot of ongoing dislocation in the global maritime container industry, with some eye-watering rates being quoted for spot and short-term vessel hire. At the Chinese end of things, a number of ports have recently introduced new restrictions concerning COVID precautions, causing further delay and disruptions to schedules. Might be a good time to start a marketing push for more of these trains.

Going by rail can help to avoid incidents like the one last winter, when a container vessel got caught in a typhoon in the Sea of Japan and lost some 1800 containers overboard.

 

[edwin_m]

I think that market might grow to be more than just a few monthly trains. There is a lot of ongoing dislocation in the global maritime container industry, with some eye-watering rates being quoted for spot and short-term vessel hire. At the Chinese end of things, a number of ports have recently introduced new restrictions concerning COVID precautions, causing further delay and disruptions to schedules. Might be a good time to start a marketing push for more of these trains.

Going by rail can help to avoid incidents like the one last winter, when a container vessel got caught in a typhoon in the Sea of Japan and lost some 1800 containers overboard.

Maybe so, but it won't make much of a dent in the market. A 1000m freight train is going to be carrying about 150 Twenty-foot Equivalent Units fully loaded, the Ever Given that ran aground in the canal carries over 20000 TEU, so over 100 trains worth, and is just one of many ships sailing between China and Europe. Carrying a significant proportion of the China-Europe traffic would require several more Trans-Siberian routes.

I guess the flipside of that is that the train doesn't need to capture a big piece of the market to produce a potentially profitable freight flow.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

I guess the flipside of that is that the train doesn't need to capture a big piece of the market to produce a potentially profitable freight flow.

Yes, I’m thinking that rail could develop what might be termed as a ‘semi-premium’ market. Products that have a high enough value to be worth getting distributed quicker than via maritime, but don’t warrant the hefty surcharge of air freight. At any rate, some shipping industry analysts are forecasting that the current maritime turmoil won’t settle down until 2023, and even then rates will be considerably higher compared to 18 months ago.

 

[JonasB]

That seems to be the intention, noting the quote in the OP mentions three or four trains per month. Probably the target market is Norway and Sweden, which would require a sea crossing whichever route it took. The around ten trains per week from China to Europe noted above are probably serving the countries further south where a through journey by rail is possible, although containers have to be re-loaded twice to account for break of gauge.

Unfortunately the rail ferries between Sweden and Finland are history. But it will probably not be that hard to find ways to distribute the containers once they arrive in Finland and are cleared by customs. Some might continue their trip on the Baltic sea, either on a container ship or on a HGV in a ferry to Sweden or Estonia and continue on road.

 

[rf_ioliver]

Unfortunately the rail ferries between Sweden and Finland are history. But it will probably not be that hard to find ways to distribute the containers once they arrive in Finland and are cleared by customs. Some might continue their trip on the Baltic sea, either on a container ship or on a HGV in a ferry to Sweden or Estonia and continue on road.

I think the only ferries that carry rail wagons leave from the Port of Hanko, and I'm not 100% sure that still happens these days.

If as the article points out the trains will go to Vuosaari then from there it is likely that the containers will end upon ships to Travemunde (seems to be a regular service) or some other flow to be determined ( current departures here: https://portofhelsinki.fi/tavaraliikenne-ja-alukset/lahtevat-ja-saapuvat-alukset ).
For the rest of Finland I would guess some wagons come off in Kouvola or Riihimaki yards and then onto other places in Finland.

 

[Taunton]

There's not a lot of value in a train ferry from Finland, as the gauges are different at each end so you are going to tranship anyway, might as well put the containers efficiently on the ship rather than take a rail wagon with them.