Virginia MagLev Project Back on Track

Raven42rac writes "After much delay, the $14 million Maglev train project is back on track at Old Dominion University in Virginia. All the petty lawsuits have been settled, and a much needed $2 million grant has been approved. Let us hope that this sets a precedent to Americans to not litigate ourselves out of the science and technology markets due to petty disagreements and greed. We do not need to be our own worst enemy. I, for one, would much rather ride a Maglev monorail with others, than drive a gas-guzzling car by myself. (And I apologise for the pun in the headline.)"

Comments

Petty Lawsuits?

[MrRTFM]

I'm glad the project is back on track again, but the 'petty lawsuits' were apparently contractors who weren't paid.

Hardly petty in my opinion - I'd be sueing if I wasn't paid for work I'd done.

Re:Petty Lawsuits?

[Anonymous Coward]

I work for one of the contractors who hasn't been paid, not a cent.

It isn't petty to us - the contractors have been snowjobbed for almost two years by American Maglev, Old Dominion University, and the Federal Government.

The project wasn't bonded, and it is a violation of state law for a state project to proceed without a bond. It was infuriating to listen to ODU officials blow smoke telling the contractors that they would be paid, while denying it is their project.

They need to hurry

[harmonics]

Shelbyville already has one.

-h

Car vs. Maglev?

[heironymouscoward]

Maglev is extraordinarily expensive, noisy, and an engineering solution to what is a civil problem - commuting.

If maglev is what it takes to move people off the roads, I pity our civilization.

What about ordinary (cheap) trains, faster conventional trains (like Europe's TGVs) or living closer to work, or working more via Internet, or carpooling?

The best way to avoid commuting is for people to move back into the cities, to walk to work, to downsize the huge companies into smaller human-sized organizations, to live on a human scale. The best way to connect large countries is through high-speed trains that use conventional rail technology. It does not happen today for one simple reason: the artificially low cost of travelling by car and by air (thanks to subsidies on roads and on fuel).

Re:Car vs. Maglev?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Maglev is extraordinarily expensive, noisy, and an engineering solution to what is a civil problem - commuting.

Maglevs are extraordinarily expensive to build and run, yes, but probably less so than (or on par with) conventional high-speed trains, otherwise nobody would fund such ventures.

But they are definitely not noisy compared to a conventional train. Have you ever lived near a TGV line? no, I didn't think so.

What about ordinary (cheap) trains, faster conventional trains (like Europe's TGVs)

TGVs aren't that much cheaper. About half the price in fact, mainly due to the reuse of existing technologies and French government subsidies. What they really have for them is the ability to roll on the pre-existing infrastructure, which Maglevs can't do.

or living closer to work, or working more via Internet

Yes, let's produce cars, baked bean cans, houses and pencil cases on the great Internet.

Fact: people who can work remotely are a minority.

or carpooling?

But you say below that road travel is an artificially low-cost mode of transportation? surely you don't mean to cram more people on the road...

The best way to avoid commuting is for people to move back into the cities

But you say below that you want to scale back the size of organizations and live on a human scale. Surely you don't mean to cram more people in the same tiny spot of land...

to walk to work

Make the cities big enough and people won't be able to walk to work. You contradict your arguments over and over.

to downsize the huge companies into smaller human-sized organizations, to live on a human scale. The best way to connect large countries is through high-speed trains that use conventional rail technology.

Yes that's true For now. I suspect if nobody looks for better solutions though, we'll still be stuck with conventional trains a hundred years from now though.

It does not happen today for one simple reason: the artificially low cost of travelling by car and by air (thanks to subsidies on roads and on fuel).

This is changing fast. Do you know how much gas costs in Europe these days? and it's still rising.

NOTE: before you take me for an overweight Californian who can't walk across the street without his car, or an oil-producing Texan, let me precise that I don't own a car and go around by bike and public transportation, including trains.

Re:Car vs. Maglev?

[cubicledrone]

Maglev is extraordinarily expensive, noisy, and an engineering solution to what is a civil problem - commuting.


You know, I always find it entertaining when it is suggested that trains are so expensive and such a problem. In Japan, they have trains that are 50 years ahead of our best technology, and they don't seem to have much of a problem with them.

Of course, they also built the longest suspension bridge on the planet and put an airport on water. Maybe they have fewer people saying "it'll never work." Who knows?

If maglev is what it takes to move people off the roads, I pity our civilization.

What it takes to move people off the roads is to move past the 19th century workplace where managers insist on five million lunchpail-carrying peons crawling through the door on their knees to punch a timeclock at the exact same moment. That is the cause of traffic, pollution and waste from automobiles. Period.

t does not happen today for one simple reason: the artificially low cost of travelling by car and by air (thanks to subsidies on roads and on fuel).

Agreed.

Re:Car vs. Maglev?

[ProfitElijah]

Of course, they also built the longest suspension bridge on the planet and put an airport on water. Maybe they have fewer people saying "it'll never work." Who knows?

I do, and so do many others. They have an economy driven by needless construction, a government driven by bribery based on fixing construction projects, and a civil service who can retire into lucrative jobs provided by ... construction companies.

Japan spends about 9% of GDP on public works, compared with about 1% in the US. This is why nearly every single river and stream has been straightened and concreted. With about 99% of natural waterways now artificial, a lucrative business is emerging based around returning them to a pre-concreted state.

Japan Rail is an astonishingly impressive company, especially for those who know rail services in countries like Britain, where the infrastructure is breaking, warping, rotting and crumbling, and the trains don't run on time, or often at all. But we shouldn't forget the trillions of yen poured into the service before privatisation, and the fact that the government wrote off the debt several times

In fact, I think this is probably the right course for a government to take, but you shouldn't ascribe it to a can do attitude in Japan. There is no such thing, except when it comes to politicians and public servants conspiring with construction companies to gouge the public and line their own pockets.

Re:Trains vs cars

[PeeAitchPee]

It's debatable . . . I'm a business traveller and here in the US I have used the "trains" of several major cities to get from the airport to, say a downtown area or to other suburbs of the metro area. MARTA in Atlanta is great. A lot of business folks there live on the north side of the Perimeter but the airport is south of the city. Trying to get to the airport during rush hour is Russian roulette down I-85, but with MARTA you WILL make it in 45 minutes . . . just pay your 1.50 and read your book.

I've had similar experiences with the "L" in Chicago going from Midway airport to downtown. No rental car to pick up, park, fuel, or pay for, and like MARTA, there's a station downtown on every corner as well as one attached directly to the airport -- very cool.

IMHO, Baltimore's light rail sucks, unfortunately. It's more like electric streetcars on rails than a real train. For some reason, it's about twice as slow as any other metro rail system I've ever been on, and a bit more confusing to use if you've got to transfer to get to the way north suburbs.

The bottom line is that as a business traveler with a tight schedule, it's usually a lot easier to use the train to get close, and then walk or cab to your final destination. BTW, the key with all of these urban trains is don't take them by yourself after dark. Most go through sketchy neighborhoods and you will be panhandled and otherwise bothered at the very least.

Cars and the US

[mst76]

I've always found it interesting that in the US (with the possible exception of major cities) adults are almost always expected to have a car. The are many explanations for this phenomenon, e.g. lower population density, individualism, suburban sprawl, low gas prices, major urban development after the introduction of the car, bad public transportation. But for many explanations, it's not really clear what is the cause and what is the effect. There are of course positive (freedom, independence of time tables) and negative sides (environment, dependence on oil, health/obesity) to having cars for everyone.. But it's an interesting difference between the US and many (most?) other countries in the world.

Re:Cars and the US

[bigjnsa500]

The reason for a car is for transportation around the city. American cities are spread out, unlike European cities are more compact. Take my city for example, San Antonio. A city of 1.5 million, but its larger land wise than Dallas. Just to get from one side of the city to the next takes 25-30 minutes and that's not counting traffic.

I used to use public transportation (VIA) about a year ago. That same route I now take with my car, took 3 hours by bus.

Re:Cars and the US

[bhima]

The love affair that Americans have with their autos is difficult to express rationally, especially by Americans!

Here in Austria many people own cars, but many people ride bicycles. I think it is toss up between time & pride. It takes me two times longer to to drive into the city center (and park) than bike (and park for free). It takes me about the same time to ride to work as it does to drive. So I ride in the summer; the younger more virile guys ride all year rain, shine or snow. But here in Graz it's a reasonable thing, all the stores I want to shop at have a small branch nearby (5~10 min ride) the video store is a 3 minute walk and the Kino is 20 minute away.

I lived in the US for a time and didn't think it was so reasonable. The cities are designed to be car friendly to the expense of all other forms of traffic. The roads and parking are designed to accommodate huge vehicles (A fact many of my co-workers attribute to the poor driving the Americans exhibit, I wonder which came first). The city layout (zoning) is segmented; most people that work in town live in the suburbs, so every morning & afternoon a horrible mass migration occurs. It's outright dangerous to be in this without some sort of armored vehicle!

Whatever the US fascination is about it is NOT about freedom! I think it's more about using the cars they have! Or maybe it's a vicious cycle they can not escape from.

I wonder what will happen when the true price of energy comes to the US? I picture roving bands of Chicanos car jacking Ford gargantuan in order to pump the fuel tank out leaving their hapless owners on the side of the road calling the US version of a motoring club.