Why were traditional rails chosen over maglev?

[kkid]

UltraSpeed trains just like those in Singapore were rejected as an alternative to HighSpeed rail. Why was this? Was it merely more costly?

[youtube]NmCGySum36w[/youtube]

From this video, UltraSpeed seems far better and future proof.

With HS2, won't we have a situation by the time that it is complete that it will be a dying technology again?

 

[Geezertronic]

Any alternative system such as this is not compatible with the rest of the UK rail network, or HS1 and European rail networks so would be an isolated system that is the white elephant the anti-HS2 brigade want the rest of the HS2 project to be.

An isolated system wouldn't offer any value at all in my opinion

 

[SS4]

UltraSpeed trains just like those in Singapore were rejected as an alternative to HighSpeed rail. Why was this? Was it merely more costly?

http://youtu.be/NmCGySum36w

From this video, UltraSpeed seems far better and future proof.

With HS2, won't we have a situation by the time that it is complete that it will be a dying technology again?

A system touting the benefits of UltraSpeed will portray it as far better and future proof! You don't see adverts on tv saying their competitors have a better product than they do! There is a lot to be said for simplicity in design and manufacture.

I'm more interested in what you mean by "dying technology again" though.

 

[rebmcr]

"UltraSpeed" and "High Speed" are just names. The real difference is Maglev vs. conventional rail, and as Geezertronic says, the incompatibility would far outweigh the benefits.

Not to mention that maglev is not only harder to maintain, but expensive to power. Last I heard, the Singapore vehicles' speed had been lowered to save electricity costs anyway.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Also, DBs projected intercity maglev between Hamburg and Berlin and also between Munich and it's airport have both been abandoned as too costly

 

[Yew]

Realistically 250mph is plenty fast enough for the size of Britain.

 

[kkid]

Realistically 250mph is plenty fast enough for the size of Britain.

SIngapore is far smaller than all of Britain though, they used it.



Also, for the comment saying that the powering costs are so high. The youtube video (I know it is going to be bias) says that it is much more energy efficient than cars and air travel though.



I see the point with incompatibility with Europe and the rest of the UK though, I suppose that would be a major issue. One of my main arguments supporting HS" (Although I am actually against it overall - I still need to be fair and understand both sides of the argument) is that it enabled links between Europe and much more of Britain.

 

[SS4]

Also, for the comment saying that the powering costs are so high. The youtube video (I know it is going to be bias) says that it is much more energy efficient than cars and air travel though.

All rail is more energy efficient than cars and air travel so it seems rather a disingenuous claim to make

 

[kkid]

All rail is more energy efficient than cars and air travel so it seems rather a disingenuous claim to make

so compared to HS2 and normal crappy rail it is more energy efficient then?


Nevertheless, surely it would not be so high as to reduce speed if it is still one of the most energy efficient means of transport?

I'm more interested in what you mean by "dying technology again" though.

In 20 years, high speed rail will be nothing new (It isn't really anything new now). By then new technologies could be out in other countries and the UK could be in a position again where it has one of the slower transport networks.

 

[Monty]

Maglev is hideously expensive to maintain, and to the fact existing rail vehicles are in compatable makes this proposal a non start. Not only does HS2 allow existing trains to use the line it also opens to the possibility of trains built to the European loading gauge to run right into the heart of Britain. As gordonthemoron has previously mentioned DB, who where a big proponent of Maglev in Europe have given up on it and I do believe the test track featured in the video you have posted has been closed and scrapped.

 

[kkid]

Maglev is hideously expensive to maintain, and to the fact existing rail vehicles are in compatable makes this proposal a non start. Not only does HS2 allow existing trains to use the line it also opens to the possibility of trains built to the European loading gauge to right straight into the heart of Britain. As gordonthemoron has previously mentioned DB, who where a big proponent of Maglev in Europe have given up on it and I do believe the test track featured in the video you have posted has been closed and scrapped.

Sorry, I'm not a train person. What is DB?

To me, DB means database

 

[Kali]

Because there's no economic benefit going over 250mph for the sort of distances we're looking at. I am still looking for the reports with the evidence, unfortunately - I believe it was a result of DB ( Deutsche-Bahn ) looking at maglev, though.

 

[Monty]

Sorry, I'm not a train person. What is DB?

To me, DB means database

Deutsche Bahn, Germany's state railway company.

 

[edwin_m]

The link below is a report for UK Government reviewing Maglev against conventional rail:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives....supportingdocs/railwhitepapermaglevreport.pdf

 

[kkid]

The link below is a report for UK Government reviewing Maglev against conventional rail:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives....supportingdocs/railwhitepapermaglevreport.pdf

I can't believe I actually just read this in a government report...

Unsurprisingly, this report concludes that the proposed Transrapid system contains no
“magic”. The technology complies with the laws of physics

 

[SS4]

so compared to HS2 and normal crappy rail it is more energy efficient then?

Nevertheless, surely it would not be so high as to reduce speed if it is still one of the most energy efficient means of transport?

Whether or not it should run more slowly for efficiency savings is unrelated to cars and aircraft. I don't have stats to hand to check if Maglev is more efficient than HS2 though.


In 20 years, high speed rail will be nothing new (It isn't really anything new now). By then new technologies could be out in other countries and the UK could be in a position again where it has one of the slower transport networks.[/QUOTE]

Great Britain is not a big area and does not need a super fast system. Keeping up with the Joneses will damage the economy. What we are is a densely populated country and that means we could do with more lines between population centres. They could be present crappy rail but you may as well build a high speed line

 

[starrymarkb]

Am I not right in thinking the difference between the fastest Maglev run (Japan) and fastest wheel and rail run (France) is only about 5mph?

And yes Siemens and Thryssnkrupp (sp) have abandoned their Maglev Test Track, it was due to be demolished earlier this year..

 

[LexyBoy]

Also, this:

 

[Geezertronic]

Also, this:

Was there seriously only one track back in the day? Even in my youth I remember it as two track

 

[Darandio]

SIngapore is far smaller than all of Britain though, they used it.

That doesn't make it sensible though.

 

[HSTEd]

Am I not right in thinking the difference between the fastest Maglev run (Japan) and fastest wheel and rail run (France) is only about 5mph?

And yes Siemens and Thryssnkrupp (sp) have abandoned their Maglev Test Track, it was due to be demolished earlier this year..

Well it is.... but the difference is that the Maglev can do that speed operationally and the wheel-on-rail thing required all sorts of horrendous modifications.

If the TGV man turns up he will happily explain what they did to the V150 set.


As to Ultraspeed.... I am not entirely sure the additional expense was justified by the relatively minor (absolute) decrease in travel times, although I don't buy the whole "Classic Compatible" argument.....
Because if you do London to Manchester in ~35 minutes who cares if there are no through trains to places like Liverpool and such?
Just provide cross platform interchange to the onward services and you still come out insanely far ahead.

In defence of Maglev, while Transrapid appears to have largely been shelved, construction is now comitted on the Chūō Shinkansen in Japan.
And there is questionable need for a Transrapid test track now that there is an operational corridor to test stock on.

 

[Pugwash]

UltraSpeed trains just like those in Singapore were rejected as an alternative to HighSpeed rail. Why was this? Was it merely more costly?

[youtube]NmCGySum36w[/youtube]

From this video, UltraSpeed seems far better and future proof.

With HS2, won't we have a situation by the time that it is complete that it will be a dying technology again?

As far as I am aware there is no Maglev in Singapore.

 

[HSTEd]

The operational maglev route is in Shanghai, it supposedly connects the centre of the city to the airport but does no such thing because that would be too expensive.

 

[LexyBoy]

Was there seriously only one track back in the day? Even in my youth I remember it as two track

Wasn't it only two track when converted to conventional running (2003 according to Wikipedia)?

 

[tbtc]

so compared to HS2 and normal crappy rail it is more energy efficient then?

If you're here to soak up information for some project then fair enough, but I'm not sure what you're hoping to add by referring to "crappy rail"?

 

[asylumxl]

I can't believe I actually just read this in a government report...

Even more amusing when you consider the "Father of Maglev" was British.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Laithwaite

 

[eMeS]

Also, this:

Well, being an engineer I just had to give that a try, and it was the most wobbly journey I've ever experienced. I found it somewhat nauseous - perhaps OK if one were used to sailing?

 

[Be3G]

Bear in mind that when discussing faster and faster methods of transport, it becomes a case of diminishing returns, because you need to double the speed each time to halve the journey time, and half of an already halved amount is clearly not going to be as noticeable a difference either.

For example, consider a 400 mile journey from London to Scotland…

At 50mph, it takes 8 hours
At 100mph, it takes 4 hours
At 150mph, it takes 2 hours and 40 minutes
At 200mph, it takes 2 hours
At 250mph, it takes 1 hour and 36 minutes

So as you can see, for every 50mph you add to the speed, you're only saving increasingly small amounts of journey time.

 

[dysonsphere]

Theres a very simple problem no one has mentioned, try doing points in maglev I dont think anyone has come up with a cost effective method.

 

[Jatos]

I was wondering about that! I fail to see MagLev will in practice provide any substantial benefits to be honest!

To be honest, I can imagine in time a hybrid rail/MagLev system, that would make sense to me, thing is, you could also use the motor system of which I can't think of the name of, and use MagLev tec to make the train perhaps lighter of the rails.

There are many things that could be experimented with as the need for speed increases, but I can't see the kind of MagLev systems we have seen so far working. I also think for MagLev to start been used a lot, we would need far less costly power (both financially and environmentally) - that I also can't see happening any time soon.