中国是如何成为高速铁路行业有力竞争者的？ [美国媒体]

How did China become a strong competitor in the high-speed rail industry

中国是如何成为高速铁路行业有力竞争者的？



Henry Lu, Chinese with 40% off.
TL;DR:
Big bucks, hostility to Japan and a well adapted Game Theory strategy.
First, a little bit of background:
China has long wanted to upgrade its massive rail network to the standards of Japan and France. From day one, the leadership knew this was going to be a big cake for whoever wins the bid, as the scale of the potential High Speed Railway (HSR) coverage is unheard of in this industry. 
The rule of engagement is set out very clearly from the beginning: any firm wished to bid in this mammoth project must transfer their technology to Chinese domestic partners. 
Although it may sound like shooting oneself in foot by transferring cutting edge technology to a developing country with huge industrial capacity, the accountants soon worked out that even if a firm transfer all of its technology, the profit from the project will still more than offset the cost of R&D for the next generation of HSRs (this idea was heralded by Bombardier who started transferring technologies since as early as 1998). 
The Big Bucks:
In 2010 alone, the Ministry of Railway (MOR) invested over US$100 billion in new construction. The next year, in 2011, another US$100 billion is invested. If compared with military expenditure, this places MOR as No.3 in the world, behind USA and China and ahead of Russia (US$87 billion in 2013). 
With this much cash on the table, the project has become a modern day gold rush for the likes of Siemens, Alstom, Bombardier and Kawasaki.
Hatred of Japan:
Initially, Shinkansen train sets (Kawasaki) was going to be awarded to supply the entire project. Once made public, the decision was overturned by angry nationalists who gathered over a million signatories against the deal based on Japan's unresolved WWII atrocities. 
As a result, the bidding process re-opened to start favoring European and North American companies. The structure of bidding also changed - it has decided that instead of a winner-takes-all scenario, all participants are going to have a slice of the cake which lowered the risk as well as maximized technology transfer benefit to domestic train makers.
To the Chinese train makers, instead of obtaining one type of technology from Japanese train maker, they now have access to all types of HSR technologies thanks to the re-structure. 
Game Theory:
The foreign bidders were played off against one another in a text book Prisoner's Dilemma: holding out on technology transfer or refusing to lower prices will yield maximum profit but risks missing out entirely on the bidding. If all Chinese requirements are met, however, the profit margin will hurt greatly as well as facing risk of losing one's market leader position by nurturing Chinese competitors from end to end. 
The high octane game ended surprisingly well to the Chinese - the final contracts are not only similar in structure with the aim to offer maximum assistance to domestic partners in digesting and maturing foreign technologies (e.g. from the 60 train set orders Kawasai won, three would be built in Japan, six kit sets would be assembled in China and the remaining 51 would be made and assembled in China), but also set a new low cost benchmark for the HSR industry.
Siemens was the only one who decided to stood its ground - but not for long. Due to its high asking price, it was the only train maker not awarded any contract in 2004. The following year, Siemens reshuffled the bidding team and lowered its price to win a 60 train set order in the 350km/h category. 
As a group, the major train companies 'lost out' on maintaining their competitive advantage by failing to squeeze out maximum profits to maintain their lead for the next-gen HSR to fend off the inevitable assault from the very competitors they helped raised. 
Conclusion: 
China has significantly reduced its partnership with western train makers in the on-going HSR expansions. The reliability and speed of domestic trains have steadily improved to a satisfactory level, often exceeding the specs of the original train sets designed by western train makers. Although China's overseas HSR bids have yielded mixed results so far, it has leaped over hurdles that would otherwise take decades to overcome. 
One can say that China bought its way to become a serious contender in the HSR industry. Even with a deep pocket, this is still easily said than done without an uncompromising goal and a highly efficient governing structure.

钱多，对日本的敌意，以及对博弈论策略的良好适应。
首先说一点背景故事。
中国想要将其大规模的铁路网络升级到日本和法国的标准，这种想法由来已久。领导层一开始就知道：无论谁中标，这都将是一块巨大的蛋糕，因为在这个行业，中国高速铁路覆盖范围方面的潜力史无前例。

参与投标的规则一开始就设定的十分明确：任何希望参与这项浩大工程投标的公司，都必须向中国本国的合作伙伴转移他们的技术。
虽然把尖端技术转移到一个拥有巨大工业实力的发展中国家，也许听起来像是搬起石头砸自己的脚，但会计师们很快发现，即使一家公司转让其所有技术，该项目的利润仍将超过下一代HSRs的研发成本(庞巴迪宣布了这一想法，它早在1998年就开始转让技术)。

钱多：
仅仅2010年，铁道部在新建铁路的投资就超过1000亿美元。第二年也就是2011年，又投资了1000亿美元。如果与军费开支相比，铁道部的排名是世界第三，仅次于美国和中国，位于俄罗斯之前（2013年是870亿美元）。

随着这么多的资金投入，这一工程已经成为现代的淘金热，西门子、阿尔斯通、庞巴迪和川崎纷纷而至。

对日本的敌意：
一开始，整个项目都计划采用新干线的成套列车（川崎）。一经公布，这个决定就被愤怒的民族主义者推翻，他们根据日本尚未解决的二战暴行，收集了超过100万个签名来反对这项交易。

结果导致招标流程重启，并开始青睐欧洲和北美的公司。招标结构也发生变化，它决定不采用胜者通吃的做法，而是让所有参与者都获得一块蛋糕，来降低风险，同时让国内列车制造商在技术转移方面能够获得的利益最大化。

对于中国的列车制造商而言，多亏了这项结构调整，他们现在可以获得所有种类的高铁技术，而不是只能获得日本列车制造商的那种技术。

博弈论：
外国竞标者们彼此之间出现了一个《囚徒困境》教科书所说的局面：为了获得更低的条件，在技术转让方面坚持己见，或者拒绝，这样可以产生最大的利润，却存在错失整个投标的风险。然而如果满足中国人所有的要求，利润率会受到很大的打击，还面临着从头到尾培育中国竞争对手，进而失去其在市场中领导地位的风险。

这场一触即发的游戏最终对中国人出奇的有利，最后的合约不仅与前面的结构相似——目标是在消化和熟悉外国技术方面为国内伙伴提供最大的帮助（例如，川崎中标的60台列车订单中，三列将在日本生产，六个车组将在中国组装，其余的51个将在中国制造并组装），而且为高铁行业设定了新的低成本基准。

西门子是唯一决定坚持其立场的投标者，却没有坚持太久。由于它提出的报价太高，它成为2004年唯一一家没有获得任何合约的列车制造商。第二年，为了获得一项60列350km/h类别成套列车的订单，西门子重组了投标团队，并降低了它的报价。

主要的列车制造公司作为一个团体，由于未能获取最大的利润，所以失去了他们的竞争优势，进而难以维持他们在下一代高速铁路中的领先地位，将不可避免的面临竞争对手的打击，而那个竞争对手正是他们扶持起来的。

总结：
在持续中的高铁扩张大潮中，中国已经显着的减少了它与西方列车制造商的合作。国产列车的可靠性和速度已经得到切实的改进，达到令人满意的水平，参数通常会超过西方列车制造商设计的原型成套列车。虽然中国在海外的高铁竞标得到的结果各不相同，但它已经跨越了那些需要几十年才能克服的障碍。

可以说，中国是通过自己的方式成为高铁行业的有力竞争者。即使拥有雄厚的财力，如果没有一个毫不妥协的目标和高效的管理结构，能否实现这一点依然很难说。

Vivek Kumar, Transportation Enthusiast
Let me tell you an observation deep-rooted in Chinese history which spans quite a few century. Buddhism was founded in India around sixth century BC and it made its way to many countries in Asia and Eastern Europe. It is believed that, Buddhism was introduced in China through the silk route in around 1st century CE. The form of Chinese  Buddhism what we know of today is called ‘Mahayana sect’ is most well-known, highly practiced and most literature/scripture enriched Buddhism we have. While this may not be a direct analogy, but it gives us the sense of the capability of ‘reverse engineering’ in the DNA of Chinese population.  
Come 2015, today China is the High-speed railway (HSR) leader around the globe, both in technology and operation. China has the world's longest HSR network with over 19,369.8 km (12,035.8 mi) of track in service as of December 2014, which is more than the rest of the world's HSR tracks combined. This is not due to an overnight planning but a result of meticulous and shrewd planning over the years. Meteoritic rise of Chinese HSR industry was due to the culmination of many social, demographic, economic, industrial and technical reasons. I will try to list out some of them which majorly influenced HSR industry in China. Also, the reasons are ordered in such a way that it will help in understanding China’s journey from HSR development to a dominant player.
1.      Geographical Need: China with vast land area, mid-level GDP ($4500 per capita in 2010), substantial population density in central and eastern provinces, and large number of well-spaced cities with more than 0.5 million population is an optimum candidate for high speed rail.
2.      Rebalancing growth: Much of celebrated Chinese development was limited to its eastern and southern coast provinces which produced a skewed growth geographically. So, Chinese policy makers are focusing on balancing the growth and HSR is one way to bring the mobility to undeveloped part of the nation. High-speed rail link to connect China's provincial capitals｜Markets｜Business｜WantChinaTimes.com
3.      Market dynamics: China’s integration in global market by its accession to WTO in 2001 after its own two century long self-imposed closed door development required rapid development of its rail transportation system. To maintain the competitiveness in trade, it required faster transportation of raw material as well as human resource throughout the country
4.      Social and cultural events: Two major international events, Olympics in 2008 and World Expo in 2010 sped up the HSR construction needs in China. Historically, HSRs of Japan, France, Germany and Spain were all developed under similar opportunities. 
5.      Decisive leadership: China was once the hub of innovation marked with inventions such compass, printing, gunpowder etc. However, bureaucratic feudalism robbed the innovative capability of China until Deng Xiaoping took charge. With a re-focus on science and technology coupled with batteries of universities and labs, China was ready to understand, digest and produce new technologies in-house. Under MOR’s policy of promoting privatization and competition, rolling stock factories and research centres were given independent status and split into two large corporations, CNR and CSR. These two later became the forefront of Chinese HSR technology. 
6.      Availability of public fund: In the period when HSR network was starting to take shape in China, there was no shortage of money for such large scale infrastructure project. While, other countries shied away from investment in HSR, China pumped billions of dollar every year in HSR construction. In 2008, china had around $2000 billion of foreign reserve. 
7.      Technology transfer:  Chinese government had clarified three principles of transferring technology from foreign ventures investing in Chinese HSR construction. A. Import state-of-the-art technology; 2. Joint design and production; 3. Establish local brands. As, Henry Lu pointed out, foreign companies agreed to such demands in the promise of huge untapped market. However, little to their knowledge, they were digging their own grave. China Merging Trainmakers Adds to Pressure on Siemens
'Made in China' high-speed trains going global | Asia | DW.DE | 03.07.2014
8.      Technology ‘acquisition’- In 2005, the German conglomerate Siemens formed JV with China National Railway Corporation (CNR) on a contract to supply 60 passenger trains for the Beijing-Tianjin high-speed railway. The first three trains were built in Siemens’ German plant. The remaining 57 trains were made in China at CNR’s plant in Tangshan. Siemens also brought 1,000 CNR technicians to Germany for training. However, in March 2009, Siemens announced a follow-on project to provide 100 trains for the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed railway. The Ministry of Railways denied the deal’s existence, saying that the project would use Chinese technology. In the end, CNR was awarded a US $5.7 billion contract and Siemens was contracted to supply US $1 billion in components. Here, we see the shrewd acquisition of technology. Also, it was reported that with reverse engineering, Chinese companies were able to increase the running speed of trains, thus adding another attribute to Chinese HSR industry.
9.      Technology Diversification: Unlike South Korea and Spain that have imported technology from a single foreign country, China has imported equipment from many countries and companies, and thus have multiple technology providers. It gave Chinese HSR industry a breath of knowledge of technicalities and selected the best from multiple sources. Additionally, having a state-owned company with all possible know-how helps in new international bids for HSR construction. 
10.    Low cost, high tech: China's centralised technology ownership, cheap labour and abundant raw material has allowed it to become the cheapest HSR provider. The construction cost of Chinese HSR is roughly $17m to $21m per kilometre, compared to $25m to $39m of Europe companies. The Chinese state negotiates attractive export terms for its fully-owned HSR tech unlike their rival where different technologies are owned by different companies. 
11.   Customer Acquisition: China’s deep financial pocket ensures that it is able to provide financial help for construction to prospective customer of HSR. This is a brilliant strategy to knock out competitors. China part financed Ankara-Istanbul HSR by $750m in loans from China, including $500m in loans with favourable terms. Also, China is offering free HSR study to India, its arch-nemesis. China to offer aid for India high-speed rail study

我来讲述一个对中国历史的深入观察，横跨了好几个世纪。佛教在公元前6世纪建立于印度，并流传到亚洲和东欧的很多国家。据信，佛教是公元一世纪左右沿着丝绸之路进入中国的。我们今天所知的中国佛教形式被称作“大乘佛教”，是我们拥有的最广为人知，最受赞誉和经典/着作最为丰富的佛教流派。虽然这并不是一个直接的类比，但这让我们认识到中国人的基因之中存在“反向工程”的能力。

说到2015年，今天中国是全球高速铁路的领导者，在技术和运营方面都是如此。中国拥有全世界最长的高铁网络，2014年12月有超过19369.8km（12038.8英里）的铁道在运行当中，比全世界其他国家的高速铁路加起来还要多。这并不是一夜之间的计划带来的，而是经年累月的细致精明的计划的结果。中国高铁工业陨星般势不可挡的崛起是有趣社会、人口、经济、工业和技术等多种原因组合的结果。我会尽量列举出一些对中国高铁行业影响较大的行业。同时，这些原因的排序也有助于理解中国从高铁发展到主导地位的历程。

1、地理需求：中国拥有辽阔的土地面积，中等的国内生产总值(2010年人均4500美元)，中部和东部省份人口密度大，拥有大量间距适度的人口超过50万的城市，是高铁的最佳选择。

2、再平衡的增长：中国许多值得庆祝的发展点都局限于东部和南部沿海省份，在地理上产生了扭曲的增长。因此，中国的政策制定者正致力于平衡经济增长，而高铁是将流动性带到中国欠发达地区的一种方式。连接中国的省会城市的高速铁路线路。

3、市场动态：在经历了长达两个世纪的自我封闭发展之后，中国在2001年加入WTO，它在全球市场上的整合，需要中国的铁路运输系统实现快速发展。为了保持贸易的竞争力，它需要在全国范围内加快原材料和人力资源的运输。

4、社会文化活动：2008年的奥运会和2010年的世博会，这两项重大国际活动加快了中国高铁建设的步伐。历史上，日本、法国、德国和西班牙的高铁都是在类似的机遇下发展起来的。

5、果断的领导：以指南针、印刷、火药等发明为标志，中国曾是创新中心，但官僚封建主义掠夺了中国的创新能力，直到邓小平上台。随着中国重新把重点放在科技上，再加上大学和实验室的大量投入，中国已经做好的准备，在国内理解、消化和生产新技术。在铁道部促进私有化和竞争的政策下，机车车辆工厂和研究中心被赋予了独立的地位，并被分成两大公司，CNR（中国北车）和CSR（中国南车）。这两家公司后来成为中国高铁技术的前沿。

6、公共基金的可用性：在中国高铁网络开始成型的时期，并不缺乏如此大规模的基础设施项目所需的资金。尽管其他国家不愿投资高铁，但中国每年在高铁建设上投入数十亿美元。2008年，中国拥有约20000亿美元的外汇储备。

7、技术转让:中国政府明确了外国企业投资中国高铁建设的技术转让三原则。A、进口最先进的技术；B、联合设计和生产；C、建立本土品牌。正如Henry Lu所指出的，外国公司面对巨大的有待开发的市场前景，同意了这种要求。然而，他们没有想到的是，这只是在自掘坟墓。
中国合并火车制造商增加了西门子承受的压力
“中国制造”高铁走向全球

8、技术“收购”——2005年，德国企业集团西门子与中国铁路总公司签订了一份合同，为京津高速铁路供应60列客运列车。一开始的3列火车是在西门子位于德国的工厂制造。剩下的57列火车则是在中国北车位于唐山的工厂生产的。西门子还将1000名中铁技术人员带到德国进行培训。然而，2009年3月，西门子宣布将为京沪高铁后续项目提供100列列车。但中国铁道部否认该交易的存在，并称该项目将使用中国技术。最终，中国北车获得了一份57亿美元的合同，西门子获得了10亿美元的零部件供应合同。在这里，我们看到了对技术的精明收购。此外，据报道中国企业通过逆向工程，能够提高列车的运行速度，从而为中国的高铁产业增加了另一项属性。

9、技术多样化：不像韩国和西班牙从一个国家进口技术，中国从多个国家和公司进口设备，因此有多个技术提供商。这让中国的高铁工业获得了技术方面的知识，并从多个渠道中挑选出最好的。此外，拥有一家拥有所有可能的技术诀窍的国有企业，有助于新的国际高铁建设项目竞标。

10、低成本、高技术：集中的技术所有权、廉价的劳动力和丰富的原材料使中国成为最低廉的高铁供应商。中国高铁的建设成本约为1700万至2100万美元/公里，相比之下，欧洲企业的建设成本则为2500万至3900万美元。中国政府凭借其全资拥有的高铁技术，可以就具有吸引力的出口条款展开谈判，不同于他们的竞争对手——不同的公司拥有不同的技术。

11、客户获取：中国雄厚的财力确保其能够为未来客户的高铁建设提供资金支持。这是一个击败竞争对手的绝妙策略。中国为安卡拉-伊斯坦布尔高铁提供部分资金支持，即7.5亿美元的贷款来自中国，其中包括5亿美元的条件优惠的贷款。此外，中国还向印度提供免费的高铁研究，而后者是其主要的竞争对手。“中国为印度高铁研究提供援助”

Xun Wang, Chinese national living in the US (9 years & counting)
Because the leaders decided that this is a good field for China to go into strategically. China's internal transportation system relies heavily on railway systems due to the massive number of passengers it needs to carry. Moreover,  the Euro-Asia continent has the majority of the world's most important countries (except for the US of course). Having a comprehensive high-speed railway network on the continent would allow China to project its economical and military power far more easily and cheaply than the US, while bypassing most of US's global naval presence. 
Then, one of the best things for having an authoritarian government is that once the it decides to do something, it never receives resistance in execution. High speed rails, nuclear bombs and human space flights are all good examples that China developed using a fraction of the time and cost compared with western countries. Of course, silly projects like the Three Gorges Dam also got the green light far too easily.

因为领导人认为，这是中国进行战略性投资的良好领域。中国的国内运输系统严重依赖铁路系统，因为中国有大量的乘客需要承载。此外，世界上大多数最重要的国家(当然美国除外)分布在欧亚大陆。如果这片大陆拥有广泛的高速铁路网络，可以让中国能够比美国更轻松、更廉价地投射其经济和军事实力，同时绕过美国在全球的大部分海军存在。

那么威权政府最好的一件地方，就是一旦它决定要做什么，它在执行过程中就永远不会受到阻力。中国开发高速铁路、核弹和载人航天飞机，所投入的时间和成本，与西方国家相比都微不足道，这些都是很好的例子。当然，像三峡大坝这样不明智的项目也十分容易通过批准。

Jian Zhou, Director at Asia Pacific (2010-present)
Some of the countries might have technic of HSR but that’s it. (Germany, France, etc.)
Some of the countries might have vast land for HSR but that’s it. (Russia etc.)
While China has everything that needed for the development of HSR, you name it:
HSR technic learned from other countries or developed by itself. (not everyone does)
Unrivalled capabilities of infrastructure, such as tunnels, bridges, railways stations, etc.
Industrial size to support supply chain of HSR. (unique in China)
Capital support to build HSR (comparable only in US or Japan)
High efficient and decisional system for programme. (communist system)
Vast land for construction. (comparable only in US or Russia)
Huge amounts of, hardworking, well-trained and cheap labors (unique in China)
Strong demand and sizable market. (comparable only in large population countries)
Strategy need of the Belt and Road (Eurasia)
…….

有些国家可能拥有高铁技术，但仅此而已。(德国,法国,等等)。
有些国家可能拥有大量土地可以建设高铁，但仅此而已。(俄罗斯等。)
然而中国拥有发展高铁所需的一切，你可以挨个数：
借鉴国外或自主开发的高铁技术。(不是每个国家都肯做这件事)

无与伦比的基础设施能力，如隧道、桥梁、火车站等。
支持高铁供应链的产业规模。（中国独有)
建设高铁所需的资金支持。(只有美国或日本能与之相比)
高效决策系统。(共产主义制度)

广阔的建设用地。(只有美国或俄罗斯能与之相比)
大量的勤劳、训练有素、廉价的劳动力。(中国独有)
需求旺盛，市场规模大。(只有人口众多的国家存在)
一带一路的战略需要(欧亚大陆)
……

Paco Canker, Europhile, multilingual, controversial. Nature, marketing, photogapher
China is still quite far away from becoming a HS rail player worldwide. Indeed, they have only secured low traffic, non High Speed lines in Africa and Asia only to this date. Nothing fancy or state of the art yet.
Now, we should differentiate what we mean by “High Speed Trains”. For the sake of a clear understanding, there are two main constituent parts to it: Rolling Stock (the physical train) and the signaling system (the brains of the train that allow high speeds and no accidents by providing real time safety between one train and the other every 2.5 minutes or so).
If we talk about rolling stock, it is kind of true what I have read in this thread: the transfer of technology by blind European supplier (Siemens, Alstom, Bombardier) has allowed Chinese companies to build their own trains almost without help now. They still must/should pay royalties to the EU suppliers if they are to sell these trains outside Chinese territory.
If we talk about signaling technologies, then the Chinese are a bit lagging behind, mainly because the world standard (ERTMS) is a European standard (though widely accepted globally with thousands of km of lines in service in all 5 continents) and the Chinese railway system is a national system that is not interoperable and deemed less advanced than the European standard. ERTMS, or European Rail Traffic Management Systems has been developed by the EU industry (Siemens, Alstom, Bombardier, Ansaldo STS, Thales) to accommodate the highest safety standards and the biggest capacity limits possible at the highest operational speeds. The world “interoperable” should be understood in 2 different manners here: interoperable country-wise (ie, a train from country A can travel freely in country B and C from the signaling point of view - this is the case TODAY between France and Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands, Austria and Hungary *Eurostar between Paris, London and Brussels is still based on TVM technology) and interoperable industry-wise (ie, an ERTMS on-board-equipped train by supplier A can run on an ERTMS-equipped trackside by supplier B, or even further, a piece of equipment from supplier A can be replaced by supplier B, ending with decades of supplier-locked customers paying high fees just to keep an obsolete technology alive. Both these reasons are driving customers worldwide to opt in for ERTMS as their signaling system of choice, something that the Chinese industry cannot do today. The Chinese systems is based on a local CTCS signaling system solution, based partially upon ERTMS equipment but certainly not interoperable in both senses of the meaning. No other country has yet opted for CTCS anywhere.
Therefore, I believe we are still quite far away until we see a railway project fully run with Chinese technology in a developed country. Certainly, we may Chinese-built see rolling stock first. But not a complete system. And not in an advanced country. But this will hit European suppliers nonetheless.

中国离成为世界级的高速铁路玩家还有很长的路要走。到目前为止，他们的确只在非洲和亚洲获得了低流量、非高速的线路。还没有什么独特的或者技术先进的东西。

现在，我们应该区分“高速列车”是什么意思。为了一个明确的理解，它有两个主要组成部分：车辆(物理的列车)和信号系统(列车的大脑，令其可以实现高速度和无事故，为大约间隔2.5分钟的列车提供实时的安全性)。

如果我们说的是机车车辆，我在这篇讨论中读到的东西大体属实：盲目的欧洲供应商(西门子、阿尔斯通、庞巴迪)的技术转让，让中国企业现在几乎无需帮助就能建造自己的列车。如果他们要在中国境外销售这些列车，他们仍然必须(应该)向欧盟供应商支付特许权使用费。

如果我们说的是信号技术，那么中国人就有点落后了，主要是因为世界标准(ERTMS)是一个欧洲标准(却在全球范围内被广泛接受，并在所有五大洲的数千公里的线路上运行)，而中国的铁路系统是一个国家系统，不能交互操作，而且被认为不如欧洲标准先进。ERTMS，或称欧洲铁路交通管理系统，由欧盟企业(西门子、阿尔斯通、庞巴迪、安萨尔多STS、泰利斯)开发，用于满足在最高运行速度下的最高安全标准和最大容量限制。这里的“交互操作”一词应从两方面理解：国家层面的交互操作（也就是，从信号的观点来看，A国的一列列车应该可以自由的在B国和C国运行，现在法国和西班牙、比利时和荷兰，奥地利和匈牙利就是这样，而巴黎、伦敦和布鲁塞尔之间的欧洲之星依然基于TVM技术）和企业层面的交互操作（即A供应商生产的配备ERTMS车载设备的列车可以在B供应商生产的配备ERTMS设备的轨道上运行，甚至更进一步，A供应商提供的设备，在这家供应商关门几十年之后也可以被B供应商取代——锁定的客户为了继续使用过时的技术将会支付高额费用，这是中国企业现在无法做到的。中国的系统基于本国的CTCS信号系统解决方案，部分基于ERTMS设备，但在两个层面上肯定都不能实现交互操作。目前还没有其他国家选择CTCS。

因此，我认为，在发达国家看到一个全面使用中国技术的铁路项目之前，我们还有很长的路要走。当然，我们也许能先看到中国制造的车辆，而不是完整的系统，也不是在发达国家。尽管如此这依然将打击欧洲供应商。

Jack Lee, works at China
The techinques of high-speed railway in China has been developped for a long time, but the exporting is "suddenly".
Chinese have considered serveral alternatives to ease the problems of domestic transportation-- as you may know, the largest annual human immigration in the world troubled Chinese government for a long long time. Experts have tried magnetic suspension railway, which is too expensive (there is still a running business line from Shanghai to Pudong airport, at a speed from 300-500 km per hour); and high-way, which is still fast developping; and the high-speed railway.
China's high-speed railway is not a simple copy of similar techiniques from other countries. The main attributes of China's high-speed railway  include cheap and robust. It relies on less regulations and standards, therefore, it is possible for the same tech to be applied from north to south, from east to west of China. This is the guarantee to export the tech to other part of the world. 
And then, things suddenly happened.

中国的高速铁路技术已经发展了很长时间，但出口是“突然”出现的。
中国人考虑过好几种替代方案，来缓解国内的运输问题，众所周知，一年一度的世界最大规模的人类迁移问题长期以来困扰着中国政府。专家们尝试过磁悬浮列车，但它太贵了（从上海到浦东机场依然有一条运行中的线路，速度大约是300-500km/h）；高速公路，依然在快速发展；以及高速铁路。

中国的高速铁路并不是简单的照抄出自其他国家的相似技术。中国高速铁路的主要特征是便宜和耐用。它依赖于比较少的法规和标准，所以中国从北方到南方、从东方到西方应用同样的技术成为可能。这是把这种技术出口到世界其他地方的保证。
然后，事情突然就发生了。

Anonymous
To develop 2010s technology from 2000s technology, it requires hard working and intelligence in which Chinese are as good as anyone else. To develop 2010s technology from 1970s technology, it requires technical transfer or miracle. China imported 250 kph technology from Japan and 350 kph technology from Germany, then developed its own 350 kph system which is no surprising. The Japanese and German technology are 20 years old. They are patenting 380 kph system as well.

从2000年的技术开发出2010年的技术，需要勤奋的工作和智慧，中国人在这方面不输任何人。从1970年的技术开发出2010年的技术，则需要技术转移或者奇迹。中国从日本引进了250kph系统，从德国引进了350kph系统，然后开发了自己的350kph系统，这并不令人惊讶。日本和德国的技术已有20年的历史。他们也在申请380kph系统的专利。

Richard Gadsden, I've been described as an "omnigeek".
When China was first establishing their high-speed railway industry, they contracted with the major players that were building high-speed rail: Alstom (France), Siemens (Germany) and several Japanese manufacturers including Hitachi.  Rather than simply paying these firms to build rail, the Chinese required them to partner with a Chinese manufacturer and turn over all the intellectual property and knowledge necessary for the Chinese manufacturer to be able to build high-speed trains independently of the overseas supplier by the end of the contract.  These contracts were typically ten years.  These contracts were very lucrative, and the international firms were happy to sign on.
The result is that there are now several Chinese manufacturers now that have been completely brought up to speed with the latest technologies and are now building their own trains to the same standards as the Europeans and Japanese.

当中国第一次建立他们的高铁产业时，他们与建造高铁的主要企业——法国的阿尔斯通、德国的西门子和包括日立在内的几家日本制造商——签订了合同。他们没有简单地给这些公司付钱，让他们建造铁路，而是要求这些公司与中国的制造商合作，交出所有的知识产权和必需的知识，让中国制造商在合同结束时，具备海外供应商的能力，能够独立建造高速列车。这些合同通常是10年。这些合同利润丰厚，上述国际公司很乐意签约。
其结果是，现在有几家中国制造商已经完全跟上了最新技术的发展速度，并正在生产与欧洲和日本相同标准的本国列车。

Vanitha Muthukumar
They have achieved that and now it gives them the confidence. Moreover, their highway projects in other countries has been well received. During my international consultations I do see countries on a global platform. And china has the infrastructure ideas, know how , man power who work at a fast paced rate, and work to precision. I have seen construction by Chinese workers and even their tiling work is excellent. 
They achieved the railway across Tibet and that in dangerous terrain. Nothing is impossible for china.

他们已经做到了这一点，现在这给了他们信心。此外，他们在其他国家的高速公路项目也很受欢迎。在我的国际咨询过程中，我确实看到各国站在一个全球平台上。中国拥有基础设施建设的创意，诀窍，人力——他们以快节奏的速度工作，而且工作精准。我看到过中国工人造的建筑，甚至他们铺瓷砖的工作都很出色。
他们在危险的地形上修建了穿越西藏的铁路。对中国来说，没有什么是不可能的。

Kevin Fitzpatrick, Historian of Religion in training.
Aside from the answers provided already, China is losing money for it.
I paid for a ticket in the US which took me about 150 miles, it was about 80 USD, In China, i went about 50 miles, it cost me about 10 RMB. 
China is willing to subsidize their passengers, in order to bring China modern transportation, and a better infrastructure, like how the US does with airliners, except this last longer, since the tracks are built on the ground.

除了现有回答提出的东西，中国正在为这件事损失金钱。
我在美国买一张火车票，150英里的举例大约要花80美元。而在中国，50英里的举例大约花10元人民币。

中国愿意补贴他们的乘客，这是为了给中国带来现代化的交通，和更好的基础设施，就像美国在民航方面的做法，除了这持续的更长，因为铁轨毕竟是铺在地上。

Lynn Chen
I am not sure if China is losing money on the new trains, as I don't have their financial statements. But if you drew your conclusion from the comparison of ticket prices between China and US., then I can tell you your conclusion might be off. It's not about the cost per mile per rider but the cost per mile of total riders. I think I am fairly certain Chinese trains in general have higher occupancy than the US ones. Again, I have no data, just based on personal experiences and pure observations. 
On the other hand, I won't be surprised if Chinese government does subsides the train department just like the U.S. subsides theirs. After all, trains are considered part of PUBLIC transportations. Government needs to step in to maintain its coverage to more isolated areas in addition to the more profitable metropolitan areas, and it has nothing to do with the train being the newest technology or just old piece of metal, thus irrelevant to the original question asked by the author.

我不太肯定中国是否在新铁路上损失金钱，因为我没有他们的财务报表。但如果你通过中国和美国的车票价格就下结论，那么我可以说你的结论也许是错的。重要的不是每公里的花费，而是全部乘客的每公里花费。我很肯定中国的火车载客量要比美国高。再说一次我没有数据，只是基于个人经历和纯粹的观察。

另一方面，如果中国政府像美国那样补贴铁道部门，我是不会意外的。毕竟，火车被视为公共交通工具。政府需要介入，将它的覆盖范围扩大到更偏远的地区，以及利润更丰厚的大都市地区，而这与火车是最新的技术，还是只是一堆破旧的金属无关，因此与作者最初提出的问题无关。

Kevin Fitzpatrick
I actually do know they subsidize their trains. The inclusion of the monetary numbers is just to show how much they are. 
The US does not see trains as important, since the 1950s they have given in total less then 1 years subsidies given to air tavel. China is being smart and building infrastructure, rather then wasting their tax money on airlines.

我实际上确实知道他们补贴他们的铁路。总结里的货币数量只是为了显示补贴的多少。
美国并没有把铁路看的很重要，他们1950年以来给铁路的补贴总数甚至比不上给空运一年的补贴。中国很聪明而且在建设基础设施，而不是把他们纳税人的钱浪费在民航上。

Mang Sitlhou
I don't see losing high speed rail to China by foreign companies.China high speed is the kind of advertising to the world by advanced high speed rail companies.Now that the world knows high speed rail is a reliable transportation,high chances of demand by countries with large landmass.

我并不认为外国公司把高铁输给了中国。中国高铁某种程度上是在全世界面前给先进的高铁公司打广告。现在全世界都知道高速铁路是一种可靠的交通方式，那些陆地面积广阔的国家很有可能需要。

Frank Zhang
i wonder do you know the meaning of spring transportation (春运).we have soooo many peoples to be translated During that short period of time .

我好奇你们是否知道春运是什么意思。在那一段短暂的时间里，我们有太多人需要运送。

Chris Chen
much government support and innovation.

政府的大力支持和创新。

John Daniels, former Street Railway Motorman
By copying the technology of the French, German, and Japanese designs.

通过抄袭法国、德国和日本设计的技术。

Ercole Distefano
Aren't Japan and china the only countries that take high speed rail seriously? Japan doesn't have the land to build as many as china, seems kinda one sided.

日本和中国难道不是唯二的认真对待高铁的国家吗？而日本却没有土地来建设与中国一样多的高铁，这似乎也是一个方面。

Claudia Song
government's back

政府的支持。

Lin Wei, a man in China
During the spring festival,there are over one billion people coming home by train.Even we got the high-speed rail,  last time i still failed geting home in time.

春节期间，超过10亿人坐火车回家。即使我们有了高铁，我上次还是没能及时回到家。