Slashdot Mirror


Germany To Build New Maglev Railway

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."

22 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. Monorail! by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    They will be like North Haverbrook.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Monorail! by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know, it sounds more like a shelbyville idea.

  2. Monorail Cat. by Clanked · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will it be cat friendly?

  3. Good for Bavaria by ucla74 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Imagine how wonderful it would be to have such a system between, say, JFK airport and Grand Central Station. But that makes way too much sense, from almost any view, to ever have a chance of actually happening in my lifetime.

    1. Re:Good for Bavaria by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is far more likely that if such a system gets built, it will be General Atomics. GA's is not only American, but it is a fraction of the price/mile. Of course, it is not as fast. The transrapid does 300 MPH+, whereas the GA will be 250. But the GA is expected to cost about the same as a monorail (5-10 million/mile), whereas transrapid cost 30 million/mile just in china.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  4. Luv it... by djupedal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Maglev in Shanghai (built by the Germans) is great fun. The ride takes less than 10 minutes, and you hit a top speed of 433kph - smooth as glass.

    You can frequently find Japanese tour groups that will ride back & forth between the airport and downtown, like it was a theme park ride :)

    When the Shanghai Maglev first went online, ridership was fairly low. The ticket cost is a bit high in local terms... Today, with the Olympics right around the corner, ridership means the train is usually full.

    Plans are in place to build the next one as a longer leg, perhaps between Shanghai and Nanjing.

    1. Re:Luv it... by grainofsand · · Score: 4, Informative

      Whilst the Shanghai maglev is indeed a great train ride experience, it does not actually terminate anywhere near "downtown" Shanghai. It terminates about 15 kms from the Lujiazui central business district and does not cross the Pudong river to the Puxi side (Huaihai Road or Nanjing Xi Lu) business districts.

      The reality is that the Shanghai maglev is poorly used because it fails to deliver travelers to where they want to go. The Shanghai maglev would be a spectacular success if it actually terminated in one of the major business districts in Shanghai. But it does not.

      As it stands, it is a white elephant. A trimuph of engineering and an amazing proof-of-concept - but a terrible piece of transport planning.

      --
      A dream is good. A plan is better.
    2. Re:Luv it... by fdicostanzo · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      Synergies are basically awesome, and they're even better when you leverage them. -PA
  5. Halbach Arrays by StCredZero · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Halbach Arrays would allow them to build a magnetically levitating train without active control of the magnets. The track would be nothing more than a series of aluminum or copper rings. The levitation doesn't work when the train is stationary, but secondary wheels only designed for low speed on a prepared surface could handle this. (Failure mode away from stations would be for the train to drag its belly. It could be designed to ear up the track, but ensure the passengers safety.) Electromagnetic drag also decreases as the speed of the train increases.

    The resulting track and train would both cost a fraction of what they are currently spending. Both the levitation and guide magnets would be totally passive.

    1. Re:Halbach Arrays by students · · Score: 4, Informative

      My impression from the article was that the merit of the chosen design was a passive train. Making the track passive instead would greatly increase the weight of the train and hence the energy cost of getting up to speed.

  6. Ripoff.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    At 2.6 Billion that is only about 2-weeks of Iraq war.

    Which would you rather have? A shiny new Maglev or 2-weeks of war. Those Europeans have a warped sense of priorities.

  7. Stupid wasteful idea by mce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having flown several times into and out of Munich before, I know what the current connection between the airport and the city is like: a complete nightmare. So I fully understand that they want to do something about it. But this maglev project of theirs is a complete waste of resources, economically (way too expensive) and technically (way to many dedicated material inputs). What they really should do, IMHO, is upgrade the rail connection to use standard high speed ICE trains. That's a lot cheaper and about just as effective.

    This Maglev is only worth it for really long distances, like the Hamburg-Berlin line they once planned. But then again, there are good reasons why that is not working out. In short, I love the technology, but after about 30 years they should at long last admit that it was a practical failure and can the thing. But certain people can't admit mistakes and certain others (e.g. someone the Germans will be able to identify as soon as I write "Edmund" :-) ) are looking to build a monument for themselves at all cost (that idea totally fits his personality and current cereer status, by the way).

  8. I work in the railway industry by epseps · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually for one of the companies involved in building the Maglev.

    Copper theft is a problem mostly in open tracks but this one would be closed. The computer systems used can monitor intrusions onto closed tracks but only usually monitor intrusions in closed areas on open tracks like where PLCs are located (the controlers that work things like switches and interlockings etc). Also most new tracks are often made accessable only by maintenence trains rather than just being able to "walk" out onto the tracks.

    In the cases of attempted copper theft on open tracks...I have some pretty gory stories that usually start with "what's that smell?"

    1. Re:I work in the railway industry by agingell · · Score: 4, Informative

      While in principle you are correct you will still have in the region of hundreds of Amps, 100Amps would be 2.5MW which just might power a train, it is still only about 3000 horse power.

      You increase the voltage to reduce the resistance losses (Power = I^2R) however you are limited by what can effectively be used in a safe manner with a pantograph.

      Even super grid wires which in the UK run at 450 KV still have large currents ~ 1,000Amps which is why they are so hot ~200 deg C when under load (this is actually what limits the max load as the wires sag as they get hotter and they must not fall below the minimum safe height).

      To put that into perspective 1000 Amps would be still under 0.5Gw and there is a 6GW power station in the UK, most are around 1GW.

  9. Re:I am strongly opposed to maglev techonology by jcr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Try a sack of iron filings instead.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  10. White elephants by Colin+Smith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They claim...

    The track between Munich and the airport is 37km; 23 miles long. A conventional express train (not even ICE) could do that easily in 20 minutes if it doesn't stop at each station. The maglev will do it in 10 mins.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to operate the Maglev over a distance which would allow it to save a significant amount of time? i.e. Actually inter city?

    Oh, and I don't believe those cost/mile figures for a second. Any of them.

    --
    Deleted
  11. Re:geek drawback.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    On the other hand, the Gloria Gaynor 8-track will survive...

  12. Re:Shanghai is Airport to .... uh, no where! by 808140 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Informative? What a load of BS. Where exactly would you have the Maglev take you? To your hotel? You do realize that Shanghai is a huge city and that different people have different destinations, right? The Shanghai maglev takes you to the Long Yang Lu metro stop, and from there you can go anywhere you want, essentially, in the city.

    Not to mention that the maglev costs 50 RMB and covers in 8 minutes a distance that a taxi costing 100 RMB would cover in 40. So especially if you're traveling alone, the maglev is by far the most convenient way to get in and out of Shanghai. If you're with your whole family and don't want to deal with public transportation, a taxi might be more convenient -- but it will most certainly be slower.

    Why yes, I lived and worked in Shanghai for almost 3 years, thank for asking.

  13. Re:Why not a good old electric train on tracks by jamrock · · Score: 4, Informative

    Insightful comment, and I agree with you. Maglev technology is really an answer in search of a question. Until high-temperature superconductors become economically feasible, power consumption, and the concomitant pollution from power production, remain prohibitive. Remember that many countries, including China, Germany, and the U.S.A., rely on coal for power generation, and the real cost of the ecological damage and pollution from mining and burning coal doesn't enter the minds of most.

    The real question, it seems to me, is why don't they invest those billions in new drivetrain, suspension, and rail technology. The French have achieved wonders with the TGV at a fraction of the cost, by continual refinement of well-proven engineering technology. And they've been in operation throughout France and much of western Europe for more than 25 years, without a single fatality over a speed of 160 kph. The recent successful trials during which a modified TGV set a speed record of 574 kph (357 mph), should be an indication of what is possible. The train had such refinements as more powerful electric motors, lighter axles, larger wheels, and in-cab signaling (the driver doesn't have to rely on trackside signals), and ran a route chosen with long, straight segments, and without sharp curves.

    Revolution is sexy and makes the headlines, but the steady progress of evolution is not to be sneezed at. Hell, the x86 processor architecture is still alive and kicking, long after its demise was predicted. I guess nobody told Intel's engineers that it was obsolete, or that further refinements were impossible. Maglev makes headlines with its promise of a Star Trek future today, but TGV's simply keep on hauling millions of passengers in safety and comfort every year. On runs of three hours or less they have largely replaced air travel. Such routine, dependable, reliability is a remarkable achievement.

  14. Re:Why not a good old electric train on tracks by ReallyEvilCanine · · Score: 4, Interesting
    why don't they invest those billions in new drivetrain, suspension, and rail technology
    You answered your own question. It's not sexy. Maglev is sexy. This is truly a real-life version of Monorail. No one but Stoiber and his little group of cronies wants it built. The track costs are enormous, the route will require no fewer than three more tunnels and two bridges (or bridge extensions), there are some difficult easements to obtain along the route, the energy usage is extreme, ugly noise abatement walls will have to be built, annual track maintenance is more than double the standard rail tracks which the S-Bahn uses, and all of this for what? To shave a maximum of half an hour off the trip between the airport and the train station.

    Except no one will ride it. Most travelers aren't going to Hauptbahnhof. They're headed to Ostbahnhof, Marienplatz or Pasing. Once they arrive at the Hauptbahnhof they then have to transfer to the S-Bahn anyway. Not that anyone will ride the thing to begin with. The costs are so high that the ticket prices will be at least three times that of the normal S-Bahn. No local is about to shell out for that and neither would most of the foreigners.

    An express S-Bahn in conjunction with the existing S-8 route could be done with only one additional track, but even with a dual track would be a much better solution. The time could be cut from 60 minutes to 40, only 10 minutes slower than the expected maglev time at a cost savings of a few billion plus more than 120 million annually in track maintenance, a recurring cost which will also continue to rise.

    Anyone who believes the costs will actually stay anywhere near 2.6B is on drugs. This white elephant will end up costing us more than 5B. But it's sexy.

    I want to know just how much of a vested interest in the suppliers, operators and landowners those who have pushed this project have. Maybe we can have another neat scandal.

  15. Re:OK, lets try pricing out a highway by Lars+T. · · Score: 4, Funny

    There, I just saved the German taxpayer $1 billion dollars. By building a six lane highway from a railroad station to an airport. You must be American.
    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  16. Re:Why not a good old electric train on tracks by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Except no one will ride it."

    I would. you might be right that it wouldn't be popular among the normal commuters (not at 3x the normal price, anyway), but I've never been an a maglev, and would like to try it once.

    So...maybe you should see it as a touristic attraction.

    Ofcourse, you're probably right with the rest of your analysis. And indeed, it will probably cost 5 billion, if they predict 2.6 - those over-budget things happen a lot, with huge projects.

    That said, a small remark, though. When I see the argument 'current TGV trains can go almost as fast as maglevs, for far less money'...well, true, in a way. But that's NOW, and that's when our current state of investment is pretty low, just because of the arguments you brought up. But, the old trainsystem can only be optimized in a relatively small way anymore: it's more of a technical 'polishing' and optimizing...but at the end, no drastic improvements are possible, because it's a fully matured technology.

    When the jet-engine for airplanes was first build, they weren't all that faster then the old, matured and optimized classical engines neither. And they were costing a lot more, and were (are) more expensive in maintainance. If people then would have said; well, just let us continue the old way and optimize our current engines a bit further, the technology for the jet engine wouldn't be where it is today. It has proven to be a superior product in many respects by now. Maybe the same can be said of the maglev-development. Sure, it's more expensive to buy and to maintain, and it's currently not all that much faster than an ordinary high-speed train - but it's a NEW technology. That doesn't just mean it's more 'sexy', it also means it's at the beginning of its potential, not at the end, like our current, matured train-technologies.

    It's often worth to give a novel technology a shot, even, certainly in the beginning, it doesn't seem all that better and is often more expensive. Fighting against an established market/technology can be very difficult, but it can have its advantages in the long term too.

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---