India's Mumbai-Ahmedabad High-Speed Rail (MAHSR) project, started in 2017 with Japan's collaboration, has faced multiple delays and is now expected to be partially operational by 2026, with full completion likely after 2030.

Key Issues and Delays:

1. Land Acquisition Problems – The project required 1,396 hectares of land across Gujarat and Maharashtra, but delays in acquiring land, especially in Maharashtra, stalled progress for years.

2. Political Issues – A change in Maharashtra’s state government in 2019 slowed approvals and cooperation. The new government under Uddhav Thackeray was less supportive of the project.

3. Construction Delays – While work in Gujarat is progressing, Maharashtra’s construction was delayed due to legal disputes and bureaucracy.

4. Cost Escalation – Originally estimated at ₹1.08 lakh crore ($15 billion), the cost has increased due to inflation, land acquisition delays, and currency fluctuations.

5. Technology and Local Manufacturing – India lacks experience in high-speed rail, and there were delays in training Indian engineers and setting up manufacturing for Japanese bullet train components.

Current Status (2024-2025):

• Gujarat Section (352 km): 100% land acquired, work in progress.

• Maharashtra Section (156 km): Delays in land acquisition, construction slow.

• Expected Completion:

• First phase (Surat to Bilimora) by 2026

• Full line (Mumbai-Ahmedabad) possibly after 2030

Comparison with China’s HSR:

• China completed its first HSR (Beijing-Tianjin, 117 km) in less than 3 years (2005-2008).

• India’s 508 km HSR has taken over 7 years, and only part of it might be operational by 2026.

Would you like details on the Japanese Shinkansen technology being used or a comparison with China’s high-speed rail system?

Comparison: India vs. China’s HSR in Laos & Indonesia

Key Takeaways

1. China completed its projects much faster:

• Laos: Built 1,035 km in just 5 years.

• Indonesia: Completed 142 km in 7 years (delayed due to cost issues but still faster than India).

• India: Still under construction after 7 years, with full completion uncertain.

2. China used local resources efficiently:

• Laos railway is a hybrid (passenger + freight), making it more commercially viable.

• Indonesia’s HSR was delayed due to political disputes, but still faster than India’s.

3. India's HSR is much more expensive:

• India’s per km cost: $30-$35 million/km

• Laos railway per km: $5.7 million/km

• Indonesia per km: $51 million/km (high cost but completed faster)

4. Funding structure matters:

• India: Japan provides 0.1% interest loans, but land issues and slow construction hurt progress.

• China: Uses state-backed financing with local partnerships, ensuring faster completion.

Final Verdict

• China’s HSR projects in Laos and Indonesia were built faster and cheaper than India’s.

• India’s land acquisition problems and government inefficiencies cause major delays.

• China is exporting HSR successfully, while India is still struggling to build its first.

Would you like more details on the Chinese HSR technology used in these projects?

Will India's HSR Be a Financial Burden?

Yes, India’s HSR is likely to be a financial burden, just like China's HSR in terms of operating losses. However, there are key differences that might make India's situation worse:

1. China’s HSR Model: Losses, But Strategic Benefits

China's HSR loses money in direct operation, but it is subsidized for long-term economic benefits:
✅ Boosts GDP: Generates jobs, tourism, and urbanization.
✅ Supports industries: Increases demand for steel, cement, and engineering.
✅ Cheaper travel: Government subsidies keep fares affordable.
❌ Massive debt: China Railway Corp. has over $900 billion in debt (though it is manageable due to government backing).

2. India’s HSR: Financially Riskier

India’s HSR faces worse financial challenges:
❌ Limited ability to subsidize losses – India’s government already struggles with high fiscal deficits.
❌ High ticket prices may limit passengers – Estimated fares are around ₹3,000-5,000 ($36-$60) one way, too expensive for most Indians.
❌ No freight revenue – Unlike China, India’s HSR will not carry freight, making it harder to recover costs.
❌ Slower economic impact – India lacks supporting infrastructure (like last-mile metro connectivity), reducing the overall economic benefits.

3. Will India’s HSR Make or Lose Money?

• Break-even is unlikely for decades – Japan's Shinkansen took 20-30 years to become profitable.

• India's passenger base is price-sensitive – If fares are too high, fewer people will use it.

• Government may need to cover losses – If subsidies are needed, it will increase India’s financial burden.

Final Verdict

India’s HSR is likely to lose money, just like China’s. But unlike China, India’s weaker finances and inability to subsidize losses effectively will make it a heavier burden on the government. If ticket prices are too high, it may fail to attract enough passengers, leading to huge financial strain.

Would you like a detailed breakdown of India's projected HSR revenue and expenses?