China Maglev

[Anonymous]

What's the advantage of maglev? I'm no expert but logic to me sais that it must use energy to levitate the train before it gets its frictionless track. Does it save energy? And if it travels so fast this low in the atmosphre , it must push alot of air as compared with an airplane high in the thinner atmosphere. I wonder if it is realy a justifiable transport or if it is just a scam for Germans to unload technolgical investments on China (to get some of their money back). The TGV sounds like a much better system. Is maglev just exiting because its new or what could realy be its advantage???

[edblysard]

Not that much more than electric trains use now. The pluses are, less drag, quicker stopping, and very rapid acceleration. Its use for freight is currently limited, it main thrust is passenger trains. I think the discovery channel had a program about it a few years ago, limited, but it did show the concept had commerical applications. Plus, no wear or tear on tracks, due to no contact between train and rail, in fact, the thing runs on a concrete platform, almost a monorail design. It used induction magnets, alternating magnetic pulses to push it up, and propel it forward, and of course, the same principal to stop. The prototype shown had a aerodynamic shape, not unlike the tgv, just a little squatter. For a people mover, it would be great, no polution, so cities would welcome it, no need for air brakes, just cut power and it would stop. Less on site fuel consumption, just hook up to the local power grid. And I should mention it will be way more quite than any diesel, no motors or exhaust, the thing would make no more noise than an electric car...

[Anonymous]

This web site page explains Maglev about as well as any:
[url[http://o-keating.com/hsr/maglev.htm[.url]

Here's the story:
[url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm..._maglev_train_3[.url]
Shanghai Debuts Futuristic Rail System
Excerpt:
Shanghai hopes the line will burnish its image as a global business and technology center. The train is supposed to start carrying regular passengers sometime late next year, but a date has not been announced.
China's central Ministry of Railways will be weighing Shanghai's experience carefully as it moves forward with plans for a 800-mile high-speed link between Shanghai and the capital, Beijing.
A maglev train could make the trip in three hours, fast enough to compete with air travel. But the ministry is reportedly balking at the estimated $25 billion price tag, favoring cheaper systems like a homegrown version of Japan's "bullet train," according to state-run media reports.

$25 billion over 800 miles is around $31.25 million per mile. How does that compare with other transportation options? According to the Texas Department of Transportation.

Convential railroad (80 mph) per track = $1,839,250 per mile.
High speed railroad (200 mph) (double tracks)= $5 million per mile.
4 lane truck capable controlled access highway (payment only) = $3,105,000 per mile.
6 lane car only controlled access highway (payment only) = 1,093,000 per mile.

Average Right of Way per acre = $20,000 to $65,000
300 foot corridor will require 37 acres of right of way per mile = $740,000 to $2,405,000 per mile (4 or 6 lane Highways)
75 foot corridor will require 10 acres of right of way per mile = $200,000 to $650,000 per mile (Double Track High Speed Rail)
38 foot corridor will require 5 acres of right of way per mile = $100,000 to $325,000 per mile (single track of convential rail)

Adding right of way costs to track and payment costs:

Double track high speed rail = $5.2 to 5.65 million per mile
6 Lane car only controlled access highway = $1.8 to 3.5 million per mile
4 Lane truck capable controlled access highway = 3.8 to 5.5 million per mile.
Then you additional overpass and interchange costs to highways.
Overpasses, bridges over water, and interchanges costs are added upon these basic construction costs.

Corridor Interchange cost per interchange:
Double-diamond = $10,143,000 (Corridor crossing local roads)
Major hwy. fully directional = $79,233,000 (Corridor crossing Interstate)
Corridor “Y” = $1,622,880,000 (Corridor Joining 3-way)
Corridor fully directional = $1,267,728,000 (Corridor Crossing 4-way)

That's the cost of each interchange, assuming one interchange every 5 miles or so. Those are significant added costs for corridor highways.

Remember, the costs associated with each I list below assume a 1200 foot long bridge over the highway, or the full corridor over the obstacle.

Grade crossing for the Corridor without Interchanges:
Railroad = $11,200,000
Farm to market = $3,480,750
State/US hwy. (2-lane) = $4,709,250
Paved county road = $2,661,750
River = $68,970,000
Stream = $34,485,000
Small creek = $1,301,250

The entire planned corridor will average one of these per mile.

As you can see, the actual costs for highways I listed earlier contained only the right of ways, payments, and grading costs. Add to those obstacle grade seperations and interchanges, the cost for interstate controlled access highways is easily twice what I listed above.

DART's initial starter system of 22 miles of light rail lines, which included a long tunnel, a new bridge over the Trinity River, and a pedestrian mall along Pacific and Bryan Streets downtown averaged $20 million per mile. After the recent expansion, increasing its light rail lines to 41 miles, DART's average price has been reduced to $16 million per mile. All of this in an urban setting.

Conclusion: High speed rail is much cheaper than building new 4 lane interstates.
Maglev systems are more expensive than electrified high speed rail.
Maglev systems appears to be faster: 260 mph compared to high speed electrified trains of 186 mph.

[Anonymous]

Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia is currently building a maglev system as a people mover around campus. If you're interested go to the Norfolk newspaper at http://www.pilotonline.com and search the archives for Old Dominion University.
gdc

[cabforward]

i support any transportation concept that reduces highway congestion, pollution and other downsides to the current systems in place.

having said that, the child is not yet born who will even read about an approved plan to start building a commercial maglev system in the u.s., much less ride on one.. govts. run r.rs. in other countries; a good idea is what they say it is, and they have the money to put into what they say is good.. the japanese and chinese govts. have deemed maglev as the way to go, and they sign the checks..

i agree with them, but the thing is, r.rs. here are private and unionized and that's the rub.. r.rs. will not spend that kind of $$ to improve a primarily passenger-oriented service.. our govt. is so slow in attaching itself to a new idea, we'll see aliens on the white house lawn before we buy tickets on the n.y.- chicago maglev ltd.. unions wont care for it because it might appear that operations will require fewer employees to operate and maintain a maglev system.

the capital-intensive nature of r.r. and especially maglev systems will become a primary deterrent for investigating the potential of maglev to improve rr.'s bottom line.. there is far too much invested in conventional r.r. tech., and too much satisfaction with the way things are now, for someone to say, hey, guys, maglev is sharp.. what say we drop a few million into a study that would show us current vs. maglev tech.? that guy would end up punching tickets on the l.i.r.r.--during the holidays..

[Anonymous]

I think MAGLEV technology has a great deal of promise for future applications but it's not going to replace the steel wheel on steel rail anytime soon,especially in freight haulage.
It's fascinating to think that the Chinese may soon be operating a MAGLEV system,even while they still have some mainline STEAM locomotives(being phased out)!

[Anonymous]

You are right, the private railroad companies are too happy with slow 30 mph track. As long as they move their freight the distance in the time they quote, they are happy.

However, it won't take long into this century, the 21st, before the 19th century rail road tracks and railroad companies become obsolete. After Union Pacific purchased Southern Pacific there was an incredible log jam of backed up freight all over Texas. And after a few years things have not gotten much better.

The state of Texas is expecting to double its growth in the next 30-40 years, from the 20 million that live here today to 40 million. Therefore, the state of Texas Department of Transportation has developed a transportation plan for the 21st century. The plan has been signed off by the currrent Republican governor and the Transporation Commission. The plan is called the Trans Texas Corridors. The state has placed the plan on a web site:
http://dot. state.texas.us/ttc/ttc_home.htm

Quite frankly, the state of Texas Department of Transportation is not impressed with the capability of the private railroads: Amtrak's Texas Eagle and Sunset Limited speeding through the state at an average below 30 mph is not very impressive. The railroad tracks were built over 100 years ago, many have been abandoned, and the state Department of Transportation does not figure that the private companies will be able to maintain today's slow speed of 30 mph. Face it, the private railroad companies have let their track ROT!

If the railroad lines are already congested to the point of being maxed out, as the railroads claim, just how in the future do you expect the private railroad companies will be able to move twice the traffic? They won't!

Most of the private railroad companies have seen their days in bankruptcy court. They cannot sustain the traffic they have now at more than an average speed of 30 mph. Since the state of Texas Department of Transportation is going to have to get involved, the state plans to build new tracks and allow any railroad to use the tracks for a fee. And what a plan it is: double track for 150-180 mph high speed rail, double track for 100 mph commuter trains, and double track for 70 mph freight trains. It won't be long before the days of private railroad companies owning their own tracks and servicing their own little monopolies are over in the state of TEXAS!

Case in point, Burlington Northern Santa Fe does not service Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. These three large cities are at the mercy of the Union Pacific! Not for long!

[jsanchez]

I remember reading a study by the French showing that the TGV was far more energy efficient and cheaper to build than Maglev, the French originaly considered maglevs or even monorails before coming to the realization that steel wheel on steel rail technology had never really been developed to its fullest potential, they have tested TGV's at 300+ mph. TGV type systems have been built in many parts of the world from Spain to Korea, maybe one day in the states, who knows. I know the Pittsburgh area is wanting to build a Maglev from downtown to the airport, but I think the taxpayers would be better served by connecting the airport to the popular lightrail system. Do you really need a train to go 200mph on 20 miles of expensive to maintain elevated track?