Slashdot Log In
Maglev On the Drawing Boards
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Nov 27, 2007 07:57 AM
from the float-like-a-butterfly dept.
from the float-like-a-butterfly dept.
longacre sends along a Popular Mechanics article on the growing interest in magnetic levitation trains in the US. It's unclear how many will actually get built here, at $100 million per track mile. (In recent years we've discussed maglev projects in China and Germany.) The article has a map of many proposed transportation projects in the US, some of them maglev, and a video of a General Atomics maglev prototype in action. On a related note, an anonymous reader recommends this article on a proposed maglev wind-power turbine, said to offer the promise of replacing 1,000 conventional wind turbines.
Related Stories
[+]
Technology: Chinese MagLev Train Opens Next Week 392 comments
lupa1420 writes "The Guardian reports on the launch next week of the world's fastest train, 430kph, in China, which uses magnetic levitation technology. Includes instructions on how to make your own maglev demo at home."
[+]
Entertainment: Germany To Build New Maglev Railway 297 comments
EWAdams writes "According to the BBC, the Bavarian state government has announced that it has signed an agreement with Deutsche Bahn, the German state railway system, and the Transrapid consortium, to provide a maglev railway between central Munich and its airport. The only other maglev in full operation at the moment is in Shanghai, again as a city-to-airport service. The cost of the system is estimated at $2.6 billion. No completion date has been announced."
[+]
Entertainment: Sci-Fi Tech We Could Have Right Now (For a Price) 526 comments
PlainBlack writes "Possibility isn't limited by technology. And it's certainly not limited by human imagination. What makes something impossible is the lack of cold, hard, cash. Wired blog takes a look at 10 science fiction technologies we could build, if they weren't so expensive. 'New York-L.A. Maglev Express - Cost: $70bn (Based on established construction costs). At $70bn, it's tantalizingly affordable by the standards of this roundup: a train that could beat airliners from one side of the country to the other. Many agree that Maglev has enormous potential. Bite-sized examples are in operation all over the world. Birmingham, England, had the first in the 1980s, though the promise of airliner-like speeds on land is still unrealized. The British system sped along at a pathetic 26MPH and was designed to get air travelers to the planes, not to outrun them.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
How much is that in ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Geez. As if finding money to throw around was ever a problem for politicians. And building a coast-to-coast maglev line would be a much less dangerous waste of money than some other, er, projects.
Re:How much is that in ... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've seen numbers anywhere from 5 to 12 billion dollars a week. It's hard to calculate exactly because there's a mess of hidden costs--medical and the like.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
(based on spending requests), (200,000,000 total/year). The cost of the war in Iraq and Afganistan combined is 3,000,000,000/week (triple your estimate), with 80% of that being for Iraq.
My source is: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/28/AR2007082801984.html?hpid=topnews [washingtonpost.com] and based on bills the white house wants passed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I know its popular to blame the war for everything (Score:4, Insightful)
How many votes per mile of track can a Congressman buy?
Answer that instead.
The amount of money just wasted in earmarks alone could solve a multitude of problems, from medical care, rehabilitation for our vets, maglev, NASA, and more. You name it, we have the money for it.
The problem is, not all of the above garner vote buying opportunities.
The real reason the Iraq war annoys Congressmen is that it deprives them of money they could have used in directed vote buying campaigns. Instead of a monument to a living Congressman (read: new pool in your neighborhood or library - etc) it went overseas and is lost to them. Now it does garner votes in a negative way but Congressmen prefer postive vote buying expenditures.
Now the problem I see with the maglev tower is, who is going to want it in their backyard? It looks more palatable than a windfarm but its so damn tall that that the land area may be moot versus the "sight pollution". Of course we already have giant cooling towers but this thing looks larger.
We really need a new Mahattan project for our generation - one that frees us of fossil fuel generated power. Of course our next problem will be heat pollution - all that power does have a side effect (green power or not)
Parent
Free 747s for everybody would be cheaper. (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus, what about all the new power cables and power stations it would need. A project this big would cause a worldwide shortage of copper (which would push the "price per mile" through the roof).
America is simply too big for this sort of project. Building vast stretches of maglev track doesn't add up.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Freeways cost as much per mile (Score:3, Informative)
One also has to kee
Why get so fancy? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sometimes it feels like Americans are trying to put the cart before the horse when they don't even have anything to put on the cart.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How is maglev better anyway? So you reduce your rolling friction to zero, what do you save? 1% of total operating power? You'd spend a lot more if your using electromagnets to keep the 'lev' action going...
On the subject of maglev windmills- I fail to see any real savings here. Windmills are hard to turn because they're doing work (ie creating power with a generator), the actual friction involved is very low.
If you want a train/subway, just build the damn thing. Same goes for windmills.
Re:Why get so fancy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, the French TVG is also about that fast, so that advantage no longer really holds much weight until the technology improves. Maglev right now is pretty much a "bright shiny thing" to make the public all doe-eyed so they don't mind the pork as much. (Much like the "Hydrogen Economy")
You might not have noticed, but America is a pretty big country. If you want to cross it, you have three options: Plane (~500MPH), Train (~80MPH) or car/bus (~60MPH). Assuming you're not making the trip for the scenery, the choice is pretty much a no-brainer.
A fast train, ~300MPH, would make trans-continental travel easier. Even if it took twice as long, it would still be same-day travel and I'd prefer to take a high speed train than an aircraft (unless I *had* to get there in 6 hours). If a viable Maglev train could cover the distance at the same speed as the jet, though, then there is no advantage to flying at all.
=Smidge=
Parent
Re:Why get so fancy? (Score:5, Insightful)
True, but a significant portion of intra-US trips take place within the northeast, the most densely populated part of the country. Washington-Boston is 450 miles; New York-Chicago is 800 miles. There's also a lot of intra-West Coast travel -- LA-San Francisco (400 miles), LA-Phoenix (375), San Francisco-Seattle (800 miles).
One of my pet peeves is that many Americans, when told about how Europeans are much more likely to travel by train, reflexively point out how big America is. It's true, but when Europeans travel from, say, Madrid to Warsaw, they fly. It's the sub-1000-mile trips on which trains can be competitive with both air and car travel if they're upgraded to high-speed standards -- something that can be done far more cheaply and easily than building a maglev. And with trains being far less polluting per passenger than either cars or planes, and air travel being an increasingly unpleasant experience, it's high time to invest in upgrading rail corridors.
Parent
Re:Why get so fancy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Additionally, these mountains tend to have pretty steep pitches, meaning that low-enough grades for rail transport are few and far between.
Out East, where the density of population is higher and the land considerably flatter, trains can maintain speed. It can make sense in that case. But here, where a lot of the daily flights are literally one-day business trips, spending 6 hours each way on a train between Seattle and San Francisco turns a one-day trip into at least a 3 day affair.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
With the train you could place a bomb of sufficient size anywhere along the tracks set to detonate at the right time to take out the train. Not saying this can't be solved, but we do have to be careful.
Still, I think that it'd be an excellent idea, especially if you relax baggage restrictions as compared t
Re:Why get so fancy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can we drop this terrorism bullshit already? It's very tiring.
I say this as somebody who daily used the train that got blown up in Madrid (though wasn't on it at that time), had a classmate die there, and a friend who was in it, but wasn't hurt. I don't give a damn about the terrorists. I still use that same train.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why get so fancy? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope it continues to increase. There is currently a bill [kidk.com] that will give Amtrak a much needed funding increase. Before all the trolls start saying that rail is wasteful consider carefully that any road in the U.S is subsidized heavily. Amtrak has done an amazing turnaround over the last 8 years despite the airline and road construction lobbyists trying to kill it. If Amtrak had even a small amount of the funding that airlines and interstates have recieved during this period we could all have an economical and comfortable travel alternative. I hope they build one or more of the Maglevs simply because I live in Chattanooga (Choo-Choo). We don't even have passenger rail service and haven't since 1970. As anyone who has been to Europe, or ridden on a well managed Amtrak line can attest to, rail is comfortable and fun. For me riding the rails is not as much just getting there, but enjoying the ride.
It is a sad state when a supposed first world country like the U.S tries to kill travel alternative like rail. When all the planes were grounded after 9/11 the trains kept rolling. When gas goes to 4.00/gallon they will be rolling. That is reason enough to support passenger rail. Oh, if anyone with Amtrak happens to read Slashdot, why the hell does a city like Chattanooga, Tn which was once one the largest rail capitals in the world, not even have a passenger service? That is a disgrace. We want rail service and we want it badly. Norfolk Southern and CSX also lobby against passenger travel because they want the mainlines all to themselves for frieght. Be it maglev or diesel electric passenger service Chattanooga should have an alternative to driving or flying. We didn't get the song Chattanooga Choo Choo for just any old reason.
Build it, and they will come. With flying becoming even more of a hassle, and fuel prices on an ever higher trajectory passenger traffic rail will continue to increase. On a train you can go to the dining car and have room to stretch out, have wifi and a nice cocktail. Chattanooga not having passenger service is the greatest single disgrace our city has at this time. It is part of our heritage. It truly is heartbreaking, so Amtrak, build it or at least open one line to Atlanta. The future is bright for rail folks. One way or the other the economics are starting to make sense again.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This also allows for backward and forward compatibility. Old trains ca
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In addition, the Japanese have a number of different models including a Maglev, and a number of monorails. Japan is increasingly moving to monorails (which are rail based), and away from the standard twin rail system. Why? Because the twin rail system is dirt cheap to build on land, but a small earthqua
Too expensive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe this technology is still 20 years away from being feasible at all. Why not spend money on regular trains and install extra isolated windows in cities at only a fraction of the cost?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've had a fascination with maglevs since Popular Mechanics did an article in the early 1990s or late 1980s. Finally, I made it to the World Fair in Aichi in 2005 and saw the Linmo ("Linear Motor"). Actually, I rode it. It was awesome. Not the "awesome" that kids use when they do well on a test, but the "awesome" from waiting for something and then unexpect
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing you actually meant a much higher population density.
Need track upgrades, but not this (Score:5, Insightful)
How do you even spend that much? (Score:3, Funny)
-jcr
Re:How do you even spend that much? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Maglevs are just techno-posing (Score:2)
Personal Rapid Transit [csmonitor.com] systems would seem to be much smarter.
They fit in with the western "everything personalised" thinking. Because they are a monorail based syste
Re:Maglevs are just techno-posing (Score:4, Insightful)
A monorail is far from ideal.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
While I love the landscape/cityscapes in Europe, in any city that hasn't shut down their growth an elevated platform is probably the simplest/cheapest solution for growing the mass transit. Certainly there are obstacles (power lines, obstructed views, etc) but they are many orders of magnitude less than the obstacles faced by an underground system.
I just have this image of a subway being built under an old European city, them discovering another city buried underneath the '
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an extreme case ; I can spend up to 20 hours a week commuting, but for me there is no correlation between being in the office and being more productive ; I got much more done this weekend at home than I did in the first two days of this week.
So ; yes, if people cared about aesthetics less, PRT in cities would be ideal. Hell, it would be pretty good on the suburban scale in places like
Not yet (Score:2)
Of course, a comprehensive plan of improving infrastructure isn't nearly as sexy as a fancy, space-age flying train.
Transportation in the 21st century... (Score:2)
What is it with the US these days... (Score:2)
Why even waste money talking about maglev trains when they could improve existing infrastructure using technology a generation or two ahead of the antiquated stuff we have in the US and get the same result using five percent of the money?
Its s
Re: (Score:2)
The reason articles like this are written is because it is more exciting to think about spending money on some gee-whiz new technology than any boring existing technology we know works.
To the ****** commenting on price (Score:5, Informative)
Google for the cost of highway construction and one of the gems you find is this http://www-pam.usc.edu/volume2/v2i1a3s2.html [usc.edu] link.
Read it and weep. 100 million per mile? Most costly project was 1 billion per mile and plenty of other projects are higher as well.
Now google a bit further and you find more "reasonable" costs of 20 million per mile being quoted but it makes it bloody clear that roads are very expensive indeed.
Yes sometimes they are cheap at a 1-3 million per mile, if the highway is simple and the conditions are ideal. This is however rarely the case. If you follow these kinds of projects you will also know that there are always complicating factors. For instance the straight road sections might be cheap, but the points where they connect to the rest of the road network, that is where the money really starts to bleed away. As for when you need a bridge or a tunnel. Just forget it.
Also offcourse not all highways are the same. One going through open desert vs one going through a city has huge extra costs in the form of safety, sound reduction and landcosts.
A further thing you might want to ask, how costly is maintenance, and what is the capacity of this network? It is less hassle to replace tradiotional rails then it is too resurface a road. How long is this 100 million per mile going to last you before more millions are needed to maintain it?
Then there is the question of what you get for it, if this 100 million dollar per mile track means you don['t have to construct/upgrade 10 road systems per say 20 million dollar per mile, then you are actually saving money.
But please slashdotters, next time you feel like posting about how costly something is, do a bit of research first. Although I really wish reporters would do it as well.
Screwed! (Score:2)
wind turbine story is hot air (Score:2)
And what's the deal with "1000 times the power"? The power is proportional to the swept area, so you'd need a windmill 33 times bigger. And its weight would go up as the cube of 33, which wul dbe mighty unweildly.
Maglev turbine: Drawbacks? (Score:2)
Germany (Score:5, Informative)
They can either put in a Maglev for 1.2 billion euro for a 10 minute trip, or build a normal express S-bahn for 1 million for a 20 minute trip.
Maglev really makes no sense at all, but what do I know, maybe its more of a Shelbyville thing
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
I feel a song coming up... (Score:2, Funny)
- It glides as softly as a cloud.
- Is there a chance the track could bend?
- Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
- What about us brain-dead slobs?
- You'll be given cushy jobs.
- Were you sent here by the devil?
- No, good sir, I'm on the level.
- The ring came off my pudding can.
- Take my pen knife, my good man.
I swear it's Springfield's only choice...
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!
- Monorail!
- What's it called?
- Monorail!
- Once again...
- Monorail!
- But Main Stre
Problem with mass-transit funding (Score:2)
Here in Pennsylvania, Gov. (Fast Eddie) Rendell wants to toll I-80 and basically send all of that revenue to Philidelphia and Pittsburgh. That's a pretty piss-poor way of selling mass-transit to the people when the bottom line is that it's just another tax subsidy for urban areas.
G
There are many more advantages to trains as well (Score:2)
Then there's the passenger experience. You could be cramped in an airline seat like veal, or
Amtrak and NJ transit (Score:5, Interesting)
Public transportation all over the world requires government funding. Here in the US we seem to think that private companies and capitalism are the answer for everything. Unfortunately for us, this system usually enriches a select few people, provides goods and services that are mediocre at best, and cost quite a bit of money for the users of those goods and services.
The Northeast is particularly bad. Years ago, my wife was commuting to North Jersey - for the cost of her monthly train pass, (nj transit and path) and her monthly parking pass - she could have bought a nice BMW. (Instead she drove a VW Jetta to the train station).
If these companies can't make the current economics work with that kind of revenue, maglev has no hope of ever becoming a reality.
-ted
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Get an honest answer from the Republican party and the oil lobbyists about why we invaded Iraq.