Slashdot Mirror


Transrapid (MagLev) Test Successful In China: 405

theBunkinator writes "Use your favorite translator (+ unit converter) to read about the first successful beyond 400km/h (~250MPH) test of the MagLev train in China. News Blurp in German at tagesschau.de. The offical Transrapid site is bilingual, with choice of German/English. Pictures & Video, too. Beats the Autobahn any day. Probably beats a plane in many situations as well."

9 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Does not beat the French TGV by Tsk · · Score: 5, Informative

    which is described here. And it's network described here

    --
    none Yet.
  2. TGV by Maxwell42 · · Score: 5, Informative


    Please note that you can already travel at 300Kmh using the TGV (Train à Grande Vitesse, 'High Speed Train'), in France, since since 1980...
    Not 400Kmh, but it works very well.

    More informations can be found here.
    (There is a nice flash map of the french railways).

  3. For sake of comparison by sam_handelman · · Score: 5, Informative

    The cruising speed of a typical commercial jutliner is about 550 mph.

    The speed of sound is about 761 mph (sea level, bleah bleah.)

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  4. Not cost-effective by BadDoggie · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here in Munich, we dodged a bullet as the Transrapid idea from the airport to city center was killed. The current S-Bahns can be sped up to 160km/h (from a current 80-120, generally), which would take the travel time down to 16 minutes versus the expected 10 for the Transrapid. This requires no more land, no additional building disruptions (lots of construction and really bad traffic here in Munich), and, even more importantly, the S-Bahn can do the job for half the cost and one-fifth the energy.

    The Transrapid would've cost us about $38 million per kilometer and additional annual costs of $215K. For comparison, ICE train tracks (Inter-City Europe express tracks) cost $16.5 million per km and around $165K annually.

    It gets worse. There's a 30km test track in Emden, and the train has never been up to it's supposed max speed of 500 km/h. The distance from the Munich airport to the city center is only about 20km, and the thing needs 5km just to get up to 300 km/h. Planned costs were set at $1.6 billion (with a "B" as in, "bwooaaaahhh!") -- expected costs around 50% more. Planned completion was 2006 and expected 2008-2010.

    Munich dodged a bullet, but now faces over a year of public transport hell as the main through-tunnel for all S-Bahns is upgraded to increase capacity from 20 to 30 trains an hour. (All S-Bahn trains pass through this tunnel, resulting in massive delays whenever there's a problem even near the tunnel, which extends some seven stations, 5 in the tunnel and end points.) To make things worse, the video schedule displays along the lines run Windows and crash at least once a week. Luckily, the trains don't.

    woof.

    1. Re:Not cost-effective by Nehemiah+S. · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because it takes an hour to get to the airport, 2 hours to get through security, then another hour to get your baggage, rent a car and get out of the destination airport.

      If you could take the subway to the rail station, in, for instance, NYC, then take a maglev to chicago (750 miles) at 250 miles per hour, then go from the rail station to downtown on the El, you are talking about a 3.5 hour trip, doorstep to doorstep. As opposed to 5 or 6 on an airplane, even if it only takes 1.5 hours flying time.

      I wouldn't want to go from NY to LA on a train, but for transit amonst the centers of the east coast megacity, I don't think they can be beaten- unless airplanes get a whole lot more time-efficient (they may be, in Europe, but they currently suck here in the US).

      --
      ... and there is no doubt, that one day he will be
      where the eye of his telescope has already been
  5. Before any gets into "why not in US?"... by Insightfill · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's often a Simpson-esque rally in the US press whenever another country pulls this sort of thing off. People often ask "Why can't we just covert/reuse existing railways."

    The problem becomes one of how you define straight. These tracks need to be really straight for long lengths to get such numbers, and while your typical subway or Amtrak route looks straight, that's only when viewed at lower speeds (under 60MPH). Even then, lots of these routes are shaky. Take it up to over 100 and suddenly, it's not so straight anymore.

    Anyone who's taken their car to really high speeds on public roads can usually attest that a straight road at 70 isn't as straight at 120.

  6. Transrapid in Germany... by Hanno · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...has been highly controversial over here. The state-funded Transrapid consortium has developed a high-trech train and then, when asking the German government for a track to deploy it live, suddenly found that actually noone in Germany cared for it.

    Germany, being a rather small country, yet with a very high density of population, has a very good and highly accepted high-speed railtrack system. (Japan and France are still far better, but still.) The Transrapid offers very little time benefit per direction, yet requires massive construction work for its tracks. Most people here say - why bother? Why do we have to pay billions of tax Euros for a 30 minute benefit?

    The Transrapid consortium has struggled during the last years to find an excuse on where to build its track in Germany and why, and so far, plans are still going back and forth.

    --

    ------------------
    You may like my a cappella music
  7. TGV is faster, but only in test conditions. by h4mmer5tein · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yes the French TGV has gone faster, but only under specific test conditions after over 2000 hours of work on the track and engine.
    This story implies that the maglev was running at the same speeds it would operate at commercially. There's a big differance between that and the world speed record. To quote TGV themselves from their site

    "Running at over 500 km/h (311 mph) with a specially prepared trainset on brand new track is an accomplishment, but one should not expect such speeds to be possible in commercial service anytime soon."

    If the maglev speeds are reproducable in a production - ie passenger carrying - environment then this is a major achievement and certainly seems to be what they are aiming for.

  8. More like 60-80m (use the two-second rule!) by Ethelred+Unraed · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, I don't know about germany, but here in america we certanly driver closer then 170 meters! Perhaps 170 decimeters :P

    Ever learn the two-second rule for driving? The trick is, you're supposed to always be at least two seconds behind the car in front of you, three or four seconds if the roads are slippery or it's raining or dark (or all three).

    You measure this by using bridges, signs, etc. as benchmarks -- wait until the car in front of you has passed the landmark, count "one-onethousand two-onethousand", and only then should you reach the same landmark. If you pass it beforehand, you're too close.

    So suppose you're driving 120 kph (the usual speed limit on the Autobahn, if there is one defined). 120 kph ~= 33 m/s. So by the two-second rule, you'd have to be at least 67m away from the car in front of you.

    Suppose you're doing a more typical speed on the Autobahn (even when there's a speed limit, it usually is roundly ignored). Most people drive around 140 kph (though you usually are getting run over by Mercedes and BMWs doing 200). That's a minimum distance of about 78m, assuming it's a bright sunny day with dry roads.

    If it's raining, you should double that; near or below freezing, at least double that again; low visibility, double that once more. IOW if it's raining, freezing and foggy, you probably shouldn't be on the road at all. ;-)

    Seriously, if you follow the two-second rule and keep in mind that you're supposed to double it in some circumstances, you're never rear-end anyone, and probably never get rear-ended either (since the person behind you *also* has more warning as a result).

    Cheers,

    Ethelred

    --
    Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.