15 ms·

Japanese railway company starts testing 249mph bullet train speeds

104 points by pulisse 7y ago

petee 7y ago
What an ugly train -- when form has no [apparent] function. Considering there are more naturally shaped vehicles traveling far faster, I'm curious why they decided to go with the Goofy/Platypus look
- innocenat 7y ago
  Noise reduction. Platypus shape make two smaller tunnel booms instead of one big boom.
  - bpatel576 7y ago
    I don't even care what it looks like. When I see a nation investing in high speed rail, it makes me frustrated that we are lagging so far behind with transportation.
    - tomohawk 7y ago
      For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Unfortunately, TSA security theater adds major delays, as does antiquated FAA air traffic control procedures. Major improvements could be had if we could get government out of the way and allow innovation. Moving to high speed rail would also raise the profile of rail, and likely make it a stronger target of TSA, so you'd likely have the TSA induced delays for it just like for flying. High speed rail might make sense on east coast (NY to DC is about 230 miles), but you'd never get the rights of way to lay the kind of track you'd need to approach 200 mph. They gave up on expanding the interstate system in this area many years ago for this reason.
      - wbl 7y ago
        Trains can't crash into buildings: the TSA does not make delays for the hell of it.
        mikeash 7y ago
        I wouldn’t be so sure about that. https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2011/02/26/screening-passengers-savannah-amtrak-station https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2011/02/26/screening-passengers-sav...
        sneak 7y ago
        Considering that the TSA misses more than two thirds of weapons passing through their checkpoints (they have improved - it used to be 95%), we can safely say that TSA does indeed make delays for the hell of it. They are not increasing air safety in any meaningful capacity. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2017/11/09/tsa-misses-70-of-fake-weapons-but-thats-an-improvement/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2017/11/09/tsa...
        cheerlessbog 7y ago
        To be fair they don't need to find them all just enough to deter.
        sneak 7y ago
        That’s not accurate. If two people carry weapons onto planes and one gets caught and the other hijacks the plane and flies it into a building, well - the TSA has failed in their task. The sole reason this hasn’t happened in a while is that nobody is really making any efforts to mass murder with airplanes, TSA or no TSA. We should probably just shut it down and save the money at this point.
      - geezerjay 7y ago
        > For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Unfortunately, TSA security theater adds major delays, as does antiquated FAA air traffic control procedures. That's quite the contradiction. Additionally, it seems you're failing to take into account that high-speed railways also enable suburban and even urban services, which are not possible with airways.
      - djsumdog 7y ago
        > For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Um .. Russia? Lower population density, larger land mass and vastly larger and superior high speed rail infrastructure. No sorry, for US distances we're still super behind.
        tomohawk 7y ago
        I doubt I'd get on board a Russian jet. Here in the US where jet travel is safe, it makes no sense to get on board a train when you can fly there so much more quickly. Adding in high speed trains doesn't change that. They're just too slow to make a difference.
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      Virgin Trains Florida (formerly Brightline) now has a three line high speed system and it should complete to Orlando by 2023. California kinda fucked theirs up royally, sadly. I really wish they hadn't, because then at least the US would be on track to having two major new high speed rail systems. If Florida's system is successful, I can see Virgin Trains pushing to get lines extended to Atlanta and Nashville. I think once people really saw it in wide use, demand would go up and we'd see the East Cost AmTrak corridor upgraded as well.
      - reaperducer 7y ago
        Virgin recently bought the Las Vegas ↔ Los Angeles high speed rail company. We'll see what happens there.
      - ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
        In my mind what California needs more than a high speed intercity network is a medium speed high capacity train system between cities and surrounding commuter settlements.
  - melling 7y ago
    “How a kingfisher helped reshape Japan's bullet train” https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p074bhmx https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p074bhmx
- nabla9 7y ago
  It's the exact opposite. The form is designed only for the function and not for visual look. The design goal was to minimize the shock from entering tunnels.
  - petee 7y ago
    Thank you; the article failed to mention it at all
snvzz 7y ago
I find annoying that title states mph instead of 360kph, not just because kph is the correct unit, but because Japan uses kph, too.
- melling 7y ago
  The original story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19876968 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19876968 Ars rewrites stories for Americans. Of course you’ll use mph. That’s how you draw in readers.
- IronBacon 7y ago
  Not to be that guy, but kph doesn't look more correct, km/h it's the SI defined unit, or maybe kmph.
  - esoterica 7y ago
    The SI unit is meters per second, not km/h.
    - the8472 7y ago
      power of ten prefixes are part of the SI
viseztrance 7y ago
The title is misleading. These trains will have an actual operating speed of 360kph (224mph). In contrast, the fastest shinkansen trains (hayabusa) currently operate at 320 kph. It's still a solid speed increase but not as ground breaking.
- melling 7y ago
  China has 19,000 miles of high-speed rail, with a lot more on the way. If they use the technology, they’ll be saving billions of riders many hours a year.
  - AFascistWorld 7y ago
    No it does not work like that, not everybody needs and can afford top speed, rails and trains and the wear and tear cost significantly more. Even in China only a few popular routes and during holidays have high attendance rates, the Shanghai-Beijing route has a profit of around 1 billion usd and is considered big news, most routes struggle to pay interest. According to China Railway, from 300 km/h to 350 km/h will increase resistance by 40%, power consumption by more than 50%. China already has trains with similar speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuxing_(train) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuxing_(train)
    - cheerlessbog 7y ago
      > power consumption by more than 50%. If generation gets cleaner and cheaper that's less relevant. We only know one way to power aircraft and CO2 is intrinsic to it.
    - melling 7y ago
      2 billion rides a year. That’s an efficient way to move that many people. Better than cars and jets. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China
CPLX 7y ago
Meanwhile, we still can’t take the subway to LaGuardia despite a few billion dollars in recent renovations.
- bamboozled 7y ago
  That is pretty unbelievable honestly
  - sneak 7y ago
    The Las Vegas monorail is on the same side of the strip as the airport. It doesn’t go to the airport. These systems are working as intended. It’s about extracting money from travelers, not time savings or energy efficiency. I would be astounded if there weren’t overt or covert flows of cash from the taxi companies to the decisionmakers that blockade these projects.
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      I was really surprised the monorail didn't get to the airport. I suspect Taxi companies originally lobbied to make it that way.
      - Gibbon1 7y ago
        In the US the Airports, Taxi companies, Muni's buses, and commuter rail systems are all Balkanized fiefdoms. They all really need to be under one thumb.
    - jrockway 7y ago
      I don't think New York's system is about extracting money from travellers. JFK has a train which you pay for; that one might be about extracting money from travellers. (I don't understand why rail passengers pay a $5 fare, but cars driving to the airport don't pay a $5 toll.) LGA has several express buses, one linking it to the N/W and Manhattan, the other linking it to the 7/E/F/M/R. The bus that goes to N/W and Manhattan is the "obvious" choice but is terrible and slow, the bus that goes to the 7/E/F/M/R makes 0 stops on the way to the subway and is very fast. Since the MTA added that route, going to or from LGA has been significantly less terrible. It is not a train, but it's efficient and cheap for the MTA to operate. It is crazy that there is no train directly to the airport, but it's more about NIMBY-ism and cost than any real desire to screw people. People live in the neighborhood around the airport; they don't want their house torn down so some tourists don't have to take the bus. Whether that's right or wrong, I don't know... but in the meantime the express bus does OK.
cheerlessbog 7y ago
Faster trains make longer distances competitive with air travel. Assuming a similar price per mile, the cutoff is T * deltaV where T is the extra time to travel to and from the airport and get through security and deltaV is the difference in speed. Assuming 3 hours and 250mph (500 - 250) the cutover is 750 miles. Reality is less simple as price varies as well. In Europe the cutover (in time and price) seems about 200 miles [1] although the CO2 emissions are up to 30x higher by air. Of course speeds are lower, maybe 150mph which would suggest a 450mi cutoff. [1] https://m.dw.com/en/trains-vs-planes-whats-the-real-cost-of-travel/a-45209552 https://m.dw.com/en/trains-vs-planes-whats-the-real-cost-of-...
- innocenat 7y ago
  With the under construction Hokkaido shinkansen extension to Sapporo, a 360kph train along Tohoku shinkansen has estimated travel time of 4 hours from Tokyo to Sapporo, making it competitive with air travel.(Approx. 1100km by rail track)
  - asutekku 7y ago
    Tokyo to sapporo with a plane is still only only one and half hour. Granted you still are required to spend some time at the airport.
    - SECProto 7y ago
      Tokyo Station to Haneda is 25 minutes transit, Chitose Airport to Sapporo Station is a 45 minute train ride, and you would want at least 20-30 mins before boarding to get through security (even in Japan). Add in a few minutes walking/waiting for trains and it takes that 1.5 hour plane ride up to 3.5 hours minimum.
    - innocenat 7y ago
      The market is less of people in southwestern Tokyo and Yokohama (closer to Haneda), and more of people in northern Tokyo and Saitama -- those that board at Ueno or Omiya station.
- 7y ago
AFascistWorld 7y ago
The question is, will it have a sustainable operating cost.
dear 7y ago
Why the US has no high speed rail? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaf6baEu0_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaf6baEu0_w
seattlebarley 7y ago
hyperloop btfo
elamje 7y ago
I don’t understand why a Hyperloop is the next logical step. Making a low pressure tube is probably pretty hard at scale. Every design is trying to minimize air resistance. Why not wrap already existing high speed rail lines with a cheap air barrier then create a wind tunnel inside rather than a vacuum? If you could move air at a similar speed to the train you could achieve wind resistance that is effectively negligible or even negative. Am I thinking about this wrong? Is the energy required to remove all air from a tube significantly lower than pushing air through the tube while a train moves?
- AlbertoGP 7y ago
  I guess that the air resistance against the air barrier would be even higher: if the air is moving at the speed of the train, you have the same friction per surface unit than you would have with static air against the moving train, only your area is now much bigger. You do save the energy needed to part the air aside as the train moves forward, since the air barrier would have a constant cross-section. I don’t know how that compares to the increase in friction due to greater surface. Finally, other aspect I just realized: when you try to stop the train, you have a rush of air pushing you at several hundred Km/h, and that would be an enormous mass. You could enter a side branch which would then close behind the train and have a smaller mass of air to slow down. I’m not an engineer and have no experience on the subject, but my hunch is that it could easily end up being even more difficult.
- Faint 7y ago
  I bet air rushing through 100 mile tunnel has _much_ more resistance than half a mile long train rushing through air at same speed. There is much more interface between a wall and moving air at the former case.

104 points by pulisse 7y ago

What an ugly train -- when form has no [apparent] function. Considering there are more naturally shaped vehicles traveling far faster, I'm curious why they decided to go with the Goofy/Platypus look

innocenat 7y ago
Noise reduction. Platypus shape make two smaller tunnel booms instead of one big boom.
- bpatel576 7y ago
  I don't even care what it looks like. When I see a nation investing in high speed rail, it makes me frustrated that we are lagging so far behind with transportation.
  - tomohawk 7y ago
    For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Unfortunately, TSA security theater adds major delays, as does antiquated FAA air traffic control procedures. Major improvements could be had if we could get government out of the way and allow innovation. Moving to high speed rail would also raise the profile of rail, and likely make it a stronger target of TSA, so you'd likely have the TSA induced delays for it just like for flying. High speed rail might make sense on east coast (NY to DC is about 230 miles), but you'd never get the rights of way to lay the kind of track you'd need to approach 200 mph. They gave up on expanding the interstate system in this area many years ago for this reason.
    - wbl 7y ago
      Trains can't crash into buildings: the TSA does not make delays for the hell of it.
      - mikeash 7y ago
        I wouldn’t be so sure about that. https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2011/02/26/screening-passengers-savannah-amtrak-station https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2011/02/26/screening-passengers-sav...
      - sneak 7y ago
        Considering that the TSA misses more than two thirds of weapons passing through their checkpoints (they have improved - it used to be 95%), we can safely say that TSA does indeed make delays for the hell of it. They are not increasing air safety in any meaningful capacity. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2017/11/09/tsa-misses-70-of-fake-weapons-but-thats-an-improvement/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2017/11/09/tsa...
        cheerlessbog 7y ago
        To be fair they don't need to find them all just enough to deter.
        sneak 7y ago
        That’s not accurate. If two people carry weapons onto planes and one gets caught and the other hijacks the plane and flies it into a building, well - the TSA has failed in their task. The sole reason this hasn’t happened in a while is that nobody is really making any efforts to mass murder with airplanes, TSA or no TSA. We should probably just shut it down and save the money at this point.
    - geezerjay 7y ago
      > For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Unfortunately, TSA security theater adds major delays, as does antiquated FAA air traffic control procedures. That's quite the contradiction. Additionally, it seems you're failing to take into account that high-speed railways also enable suburban and even urban services, which are not possible with airways.
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      > For distances in US, what we have is already superior. Um .. Russia? Lower population density, larger land mass and vastly larger and superior high speed rail infrastructure. No sorry, for US distances we're still super behind.
      - tomohawk 7y ago
        I doubt I'd get on board a Russian jet. Here in the US where jet travel is safe, it makes no sense to get on board a train when you can fly there so much more quickly. Adding in high speed trains doesn't change that. They're just too slow to make a difference.
  - djsumdog 7y ago
    Virgin Trains Florida (formerly Brightline) now has a three line high speed system and it should complete to Orlando by 2023. California kinda fucked theirs up royally, sadly. I really wish they hadn't, because then at least the US would be on track to having two major new high speed rail systems. If Florida's system is successful, I can see Virgin Trains pushing to get lines extended to Atlanta and Nashville. I think once people really saw it in wide use, demand would go up and we'd see the East Cost AmTrak corridor upgraded as well.
    - reaperducer 7y ago
      Virgin recently bought the Las Vegas ↔ Los Angeles high speed rail company. We'll see what happens there.
    - ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
      In my mind what California needs more than a high speed intercity network is a medium speed high capacity train system between cities and surrounding commuter settlements.
- melling 7y ago
  “How a kingfisher helped reshape Japan's bullet train” https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p074bhmx https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p074bhmx
nabla9 7y ago
It's the exact opposite. The form is designed only for the function and not for visual look. The design goal was to minimize the shock from entering tunnels.
- petee 7y ago
  Thank you; the article failed to mention it at all

snvzz 7y ago

I find annoying that title states mph instead of 360kph, not just because kph is the correct unit, but because Japan uses kph, too.

melling 7y ago
The original story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19876968 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19876968 Ars rewrites stories for Americans. Of course you’ll use mph. That’s how you draw in readers.
IronBacon 7y ago
Not to be that guy, but kph doesn't look more correct, km/h it's the SI defined unit, or maybe kmph.
- esoterica 7y ago
  The SI unit is meters per second, not km/h.
  - the8472 7y ago
    power of ten prefixes are part of the SI

viseztrance 7y ago

The title is misleading. These trains will have an actual operating speed of 360kph (224mph). In contrast, the fastest shinkansen trains (hayabusa) currently operate at 320 kph. It's still a solid speed increase but not as ground breaking.

melling 7y ago
China has 19,000 miles of high-speed rail, with a lot more on the way. If they use the technology, they’ll be saving billions of riders many hours a year.
- AFascistWorld 7y ago
  No it does not work like that, not everybody needs and can afford top speed, rails and trains and the wear and tear cost significantly more. Even in China only a few popular routes and during holidays have high attendance rates, the Shanghai-Beijing route has a profit of around 1 billion usd and is considered big news, most routes struggle to pay interest. According to China Railway, from 300 km/h to 350 km/h will increase resistance by 40%, power consumption by more than 50%. China already has trains with similar speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuxing_(train) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuxing_(train)
  - cheerlessbog 7y ago
    > power consumption by more than 50%. If generation gets cleaner and cheaper that's less relevant. We only know one way to power aircraft and CO2 is intrinsic to it.
  - melling 7y ago
    2 billion rides a year. That’s an efficient way to move that many people. Better than cars and jets. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China

CPLX 7y ago

Meanwhile, we still can’t take the subway to LaGuardia despite a few billion dollars in recent renovations.

bamboozled 7y ago
That is pretty unbelievable honestly
- sneak 7y ago
  The Las Vegas monorail is on the same side of the strip as the airport. It doesn’t go to the airport. These systems are working as intended. It’s about extracting money from travelers, not time savings or energy efficiency. I would be astounded if there weren’t overt or covert flows of cash from the taxi companies to the decisionmakers that blockade these projects.
  - djsumdog 7y ago
    I was really surprised the monorail didn't get to the airport. I suspect Taxi companies originally lobbied to make it that way.
    - Gibbon1 7y ago
      In the US the Airports, Taxi companies, Muni's buses, and commuter rail systems are all Balkanized fiefdoms. They all really need to be under one thumb.
  - jrockway 7y ago
    I don't think New York's system is about extracting money from travellers. JFK has a train which you pay for; that one might be about extracting money from travellers. (I don't understand why rail passengers pay a $5 fare, but cars driving to the airport don't pay a $5 toll.) LGA has several express buses, one linking it to the N/W and Manhattan, the other linking it to the 7/E/F/M/R. The bus that goes to N/W and Manhattan is the "obvious" choice but is terrible and slow, the bus that goes to the 7/E/F/M/R makes 0 stops on the way to the subway and is very fast. Since the MTA added that route, going to or from LGA has been significantly less terrible. It is not a train, but it's efficient and cheap for the MTA to operate. It is crazy that there is no train directly to the airport, but it's more about NIMBY-ism and cost than any real desire to screw people. People live in the neighborhood around the airport; they don't want their house torn down so some tourists don't have to take the bus. Whether that's right or wrong, I don't know... but in the meantime the express bus does OK.

cheerlessbog 7y ago

Faster trains make longer distances competitive with air travel. Assuming a similar price per mile, the cutoff is T * deltaV where T is the extra time to travel to and from the airport and get through security and deltaV is the difference in speed. Assuming 3 hours and 250mph (500 - 250) the cutover is 750 miles. Reality is less simple as price varies as well. In Europe the cutover (in time and price) seems about 200 miles [1] although the CO2 emissions are up to 30x higher by air. Of course speeds are lower, maybe 150mph which would suggest a 450mi cutoff. [1] https://m.dw.com/en/trains-vs-planes-whats-the-real-cost-of-travel/a-45209552 https://m.dw.com/en/trains-vs-planes-whats-the-real-cost-of-...

innocenat 7y ago
With the under construction Hokkaido shinkansen extension to Sapporo, a 360kph train along Tohoku shinkansen has estimated travel time of 4 hours from Tokyo to Sapporo, making it competitive with air travel.(Approx. 1100km by rail track)
- asutekku 7y ago
  Tokyo to sapporo with a plane is still only only one and half hour. Granted you still are required to spend some time at the airport.
  - SECProto 7y ago
    Tokyo Station to Haneda is 25 minutes transit, Chitose Airport to Sapporo Station is a 45 minute train ride, and you would want at least 20-30 mins before boarding to get through security (even in Japan). Add in a few minutes walking/waiting for trains and it takes that 1.5 hour plane ride up to 3.5 hours minimum.
  - innocenat 7y ago
    The market is less of people in southwestern Tokyo and Yokohama (closer to Haneda), and more of people in northern Tokyo and Saitama -- those that board at Ueno or Omiya station.
7y ago

AFascistWorld 7y ago

The question is, will it have a sustainable operating cost.

dear 7y ago

Why the US has no high speed rail? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaf6baEu0_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaf6baEu0_w

seattlebarley 7y ago

hyperloop btfo

elamje 7y ago

I don’t understand why a Hyperloop is the next logical step. Making a low pressure tube is probably pretty hard at scale. Every design is trying to minimize air resistance. Why not wrap already existing high speed rail lines with a cheap air barrier then create a wind tunnel inside rather than a vacuum? If you could move air at a similar speed to the train you could achieve wind resistance that is effectively negligible or even negative. Am I thinking about this wrong? Is the energy required to remove all air from a tube significantly lower than pushing air through the tube while a train moves?

AlbertoGP 7y ago
I guess that the air resistance against the air barrier would be even higher: if the air is moving at the speed of the train, you have the same friction per surface unit than you would have with static air against the moving train, only your area is now much bigger. You do save the energy needed to part the air aside as the train moves forward, since the air barrier would have a constant cross-section. I don’t know how that compares to the increase in friction due to greater surface. Finally, other aspect I just realized: when you try to stop the train, you have a rush of air pushing you at several hundred Km/h, and that would be an enormous mass. You could enter a side branch which would then close behind the train and have a smaller mass of air to slow down. I’m not an engineer and have no experience on the subject, but my hunch is that it could easily end up being even more difficult.
Faint 7y ago
I bet air rushing through 100 mile tunnel has _much_ more resistance than half a mile long train rushing through air at same speed. There is much more interface between a wall and moving air at the former case.