I cannot wait for another 20+ years for JR Shikoku to come out with a Shinkansen line. They have to act fast, however, knowing Japanese government is very bureaucratic, I worry JR Shikoku may run out of time.

I wish I could visit Shikoku sometime. Underestimated, unexplored pearl of japanese archipelago, which seems always being left behind.

Considering that the Seikan Tunnel is built in the 1960s and took around 20 years, i think the technology we have now can pretty short the time to construct the Kitan Tunnel. If the Hōyo Tunnel becomes a problem, at least they can use the original Shikoku Shinkansen plan but construct at least till Matsuyama.

I understand the financial situation is very dire, and while the distances are not that great, some of these routes have clear terrain challenges. I wouldn't expect a tunnel from Wakayama Prefecture to Awaji would stand up to a rigourous cost-benefit analysis... the local governments around Osaka can't even convince the government to get on board with a Shinkansen that runs through Tennoji and south to near Kansai Airport (but these would be a part of the same plan potentially) - so that leaves the existing Seto-Ohashi Bridge as the likely true gateway to Shikoku for the Shinkansen. Takamatsu would seem to be an obvious first choice, but the time savings may be limited as the current Marine Liner doesn't take that long, therefore the additional ticket cost may not be appealing for many passengers. Matsuyama is the other obvious choice, as the route is coastal to at least near Imabari, the city is large (by Shikoku standards) and there are substantial time gains to be made up - especially if tunnelling through and approaching Matsuyama from the east. Tokushima may be too close to Takamatsu to go to the effort (but would be an obvious stop if the Shinkansen did come via Awaji), and the terrain challenges to reach Kochi are substantial. It's a lovely proposition to build the Shinkansen to all four prefectural capitals, but it is no small challenge to devise a plan that can generate a return on such a large investment.

Maybe Shikoku Shinkansen can be built as an extension of Chuo Shinkansen, as there are plans to extend it to Kansai Airport. This way, the trip from Tokyo to Fukuoka can be shortened enough to win against airplanes, even if costs are cut to make it run 400km/h. Chuo shinkansen alone may not be enough to win passengers because Fukuoka Airport is within the city. It will have the same effect on Oita, and possibly Miyazaki.

The long awaited Shikoku Shinkansen

Thank you very much for sharing your very informative and very interesting video with us.

They should build the plan as proposed by the Shikoku alliance, but the "horizontal" section should be as in the master plan of 1973 so that you can predispone it to build the direct connection with Kansai Airport for the future when JR Shikoku will be in a better financial situation.

Very interesting video. Thank you.

To me seems like the first Shikoku line plan is the best straight and fast it also seems to have the most advantage compared to the other two

Hopefully, they will build Shikoku Shinkansen as a backup of the Sanyo Shinkansen, using the lower deck (with reinforcement, which is much cheaper than building a whole new route) of the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge. Most of Shikoku's population, although small, is in the northern part of the island anyway, especially Takamatsu and Matsuyama. Also, Oita, Miyazaki, and Miyakonojo and decent-sized cities in Kyushu that would be well-served by a Shinkansen. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/o5h8ncxmnZayknk.html

本当にありがとうございます。

Thank you !

Personally, the route to Takamatsu and Tokushima may not be so necessary, Okayama to Takamatsu takes just 1 hour on a rapid train and Takamatsu and Tokushima are connected by a limited express that takes less than 1h 20 mins, so the time saving the Shinkansen would provide may not be justified. Especially when you consider passengers coming from Okayama may have to transfer at Utazu. But Matsuyama and Kochi are more than 3 hours by limited express from Okayama, so a Shinkansen here may be justified. But what about the local governments? Existing railways along the Yosan Line? Imagine converting the whole 200km Yosan Line into a third-sector company, who would do it?

Having rewatched this video after reading up on various videos I really think the transkoku shinkansen from Wakayama through to Oita and then with an extension in Kyushu by constructing the East kyushu route to Kokura could have a great potential for profit. Especially since the Sanyo Shinkansen will eventually be at capacity it will be important to have alternate routes. And maybe eventually it would be possible to have trains run from Nagasaki to Hakata, Kokura, Beppu, Oita, through Shikoku to Takamatsu, Wakayama and Osaka and would make the route very viable in my opinion. But once again this will cost so much, involve so many prefectures and will make the original tokkaido shinkansen seem cheap!

absolutely needed, and with fast turn-around considering the population decline issues.

Also, why is the station that serves Kansai International Airport located in Sennan? Isn't that actually Izumisano?

They should do both lines to create network effects

Such a shame about the Akashikaikyou bridge, it would be perfect to run the train through it. I hope Shikoku gets its Shinkansen and is able to save its train lines. There is a special charm to the diesel trains running through the countryside. I would like to move there one day.

The huge amount of use of the Shinkansen between the major cities of Honshu make it a very viable service. But, before considering construction of a Shinkansen route to Shikoku, shouldn't demand and need for a Shinkansen be the major consideration? If the demand doesn't exist, the cost cannot be justified. Compare that with the traffic between Tokyo, Nagoya, Kyoto and Osaka. The difference is huge.

Thank you for this video! I just wonder, is it possible for the Chuo Shinkansen to extend southward to Wakayama, then it'll cross to Tokushima via Awaji? And how will it fare if paired with the "eclectic plan" via Okayama?

my bucketlist is to ride on shikkannsan, and i always wondered why they werent on this island and tell myslef that i would weight to go to japan untill after they came on the island so i could ride it all around. HGow about Tokushima to Kochi- to Matsuyama - hopefully they also build the line to the top of Hokkaido.

Also, can't they lay an immersed tube instead of a bored tunnel?

Hey Takeshi! Miss your videos, anything new in the pipeline?

Thank you very much for all the information. When I lived in Japan I resided on Kyushu Island and took the Kyushu/Sanyo Shinkansen quite often. However, accessing Shikoku from Kyushu only by rail is rather inconvenient and not to be recommended for day trips. Because of that, the construction of the Shikoku Shinkansen with the eventual addition of the Trans-Kyushu Shinkansen would result in a large boost for the touristic sector in Shikoku. Furthermore, Tokushima and Kagawa Prefectures would gain some attractivity for resettling commuters that work in the Keihanshin region. In your opinion, would it be possible that construction costs would be lowered and construction time would be accelerated by going for a bridge/tunnel hybrid, just like the Tokyo-wan Aqua Line is, between Wakayama and Awaji? By this, the ports of Kobe and Osaka wouldn't be cut off from the open sea.

Oita - Yufu hot springs - Shin Tosu - Hakata might be more feasible than running in Aso volcano

Hi Takeshi. If this "Eclectic" Shinkansen plan proposed by the Shikoku Shinkansen development alliance is approved by the Japanese government how long will it take to build and what will the total financial cost be?

Can't they easily strengthen the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge to add Shinkansen tracks, as the George Washington Bridge in New York had an entire lower deck added by stringing another set of cable (bringing the total to 4)? The towers only required slight modification as that's the easy part.

The plan to tokushima seems problematic. I could see coupled trains running from Shin-Osaka to Shikoku-chuo and splitting in 2 for Kochi and Matsuyama but the Tokushima spur seems like quite a big backtrack. How long would it take compared to ... a boat to the area near Kansai airport for example? To be fair it does seem like the least worst plan, it just isn't perfect. I think tokushima understands that if they approve this plan they use their only chance at having a shinkansen. But they must also realise they might not even have one at all if they wait too long...

Sounds very complicated. I guess with the financial pressures they will opt to avoid new undersea tunnels, so the "eclectic" plan is what I bet will be most likely to happen. I wonder what operations would look like on a three-branch Shinkansen.

frankly I worry more about JR Hokkaido than Shikoku

The trans route can be done first

hmmm i feel like they should build and open in phases to cover cost and time, the tunnel costs will always remain a problem because it will always be high no matter how much you talk about it. Sadly there's no benefit during COVID-19 to open a section that only covers the island. Since there's no advantages to the like if it does not connect to the main land. Truly a persistent problem. Now you need to make decisions that speak for the future.

Shikoku deserves this investment, it's far too neglected

I probably won't be popular here, but the most important disadvantage you forgot is that any plan will be destructive for the environment and what makes Shikoku special and unique (and also attractive in this day and age). But we unfortunately know that this has never been a concern for the Japanese government. Honestly, Shikoku doesn't need the shinkansen. The advantages are minimal compared to all the negative consequences.