5 ms·

“superconductive magnetic levitation railways at 500 km/h” With the Shanghai maglev in 2001, it looked like this was a given. Instead, it’s still too expensiv

“superconductive magnetic levitation railways at 500 km/h” With the Shanghai maglev in 2001, it looked like this was a given. Instead, it’s still too expensive? Anyone predict the US still wouldn’t have a bullet train in 2025?

badc0ffee 2y ago
Amtrak's Acela started in 2000, and it's sort of high speed. It's hobbled by FRA rules (weight and strength minimums far in excess of what is used in Europe).
rzz3 2y ago
460km/h seems close enough to count for the article’s prediction, especially if the mentioned population difference is considered acceptable. IMO predicting the future shouldn’t just be about predicting the future of the USA. Many countries are more advanced in their respective ways than the US.
- melling 2y ago
  Yes, the speed is fine but it only exists on one commercial route. Something is holding up mass adoption. Likely the cost. This sort of technology would be significant if widely adopted.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Not just the cost of building it - though that is significant, but also cost as in the needed energy. Wind Resistance goes up by square of speed and so running high speed at ground level is cost (and environment) prohibitive. There is one other cost - acceleration time - no amount of money could get NYC subways to that speed - the next stop arrives before you get up to speed. It makes more sense to focus our money on slower speed trains that are still fast enough and use much less energy.
    - melling 2y ago
      The average speed of the NYC subway is 17mph (27km). Maglevs that went smoothly at 62mph (100km) would be a big improvement. Medium speed maglev trains are also a thing: https://crrczelc-europe.com/medium-low-speed-maglev-changsha/#:~:text=CRRC's%20medium%2Dlow%20speed%20maglev,systems%2C%20signaling%20and%20BEL%20locomotives. https://crrczelc-europe.com/medium-low-speed-maglev-changsha...
      - bluGill 2y ago
        Maglev are less efficent than steel wheels at those speeds. Of course proper maintenance would make the subway smoother and help a lot. france has run regular trains almost to almost 575km/h - though if you really want higher speeds maglev is better but nyc couldn't use those speeds on the subway (though other rail should go faster in the city for service reasons)
        melling 2y ago
        Yeah, everyone knows you wouldn’t run a nyc subway at 300 mph. Where do you get maglevs ant low speed are less efficient? They are frictionless. Of course, I don’t even care if they are. You know what they’re more efficient than? Cars! Building medium-speed and high-speed maglevs are part of the solution to getting people out of cars. They are building them in China. Let’s see how far they get. China built almost 30,000 miles of HSR before the US finished any. Maybe maglevs will turn out to be one of those things that just doesn’t work in America but works everywhere else.
      - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
        That's not the only one, here is another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_System_Bögl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_System_Bögl , interestingly they also have an option for containerized freight.
School-Cotton 2y ago
> Anyone predict the US still wouldn’t have a bullet train in 2025? I predict the US will still not have a bullet train in 2055 either. The US just has very little institutional ability to build new/improved infrastructure.
- bluGill 2y ago
  CA HSR is likely to have at least one section open by then just proving you are wrong. That I'm only willing to predict one section and not the enough to be useful proves your analysis of why is correct.
BirAdam 2y ago
For the USA, there are two complications. First, it’s expensive due to imminent domain considerations. Second, there’s a lot of nimbyism in local town halls. So, even when the cost can be overcome, people will scream about it and get it stopped.
- toast0 2y ago
  Eminent domain, not imminent. There's no connection to time, but the state has the absolute power to seize property; in many countries (including the US) this is limited by constitution and regulation to specific purposes and to require just compensation. Another factor in the US is that our railroads are generally freight oriented. Routing to have three ground based networks is challenging (road, freight rail, passenger high speed rail), especially in urban areas where right of way is expensive and also over mountain passes. A lot of urban freight rail lines are currently unused; some of them become greenway rail trails, others sit unused and may be at risk of encroachment, but often the alignment isn't useful for high speed rail anyway.
  - m4rtink 2y ago
    For the record basically all of Shinkansen in Japan is new standard gauge rail, as "normal" trains in Japan are narrow gauge. And they still manage. In some places you might have shinkansen, multiple private narrow gauge networks, metro and regular roads going through the same piece of land.

badc0ffee 2y ago

Amtrak's Acela started in 2000, and it's sort of high speed. It's hobbled by FRA rules (weight and strength minimums far in excess of what is used in Europe).

rzz3 2y ago

460km/h seems close enough to count for the article’s prediction, especially if the mentioned population difference is considered acceptable. IMO predicting the future shouldn’t just be about predicting the future of the USA. Many countries are more advanced in their respective ways than the US.

melling 2y ago
Yes, the speed is fine but it only exists on one commercial route. Something is holding up mass adoption. Likely the cost. This sort of technology would be significant if widely adopted.
- bluGill 2y ago
  Not just the cost of building it - though that is significant, but also cost as in the needed energy. Wind Resistance goes up by square of speed and so running high speed at ground level is cost (and environment) prohibitive. There is one other cost - acceleration time - no amount of money could get NYC subways to that speed - the next stop arrives before you get up to speed. It makes more sense to focus our money on slower speed trains that are still fast enough and use much less energy.
  - melling 2y ago
    The average speed of the NYC subway is 17mph (27km). Maglevs that went smoothly at 62mph (100km) would be a big improvement. Medium speed maglev trains are also a thing: https://crrczelc-europe.com/medium-low-speed-maglev-changsha/#:~:text=CRRC's%20medium%2Dlow%20speed%20maglev,systems%2C%20signaling%20and%20BEL%20locomotives. https://crrczelc-europe.com/medium-low-speed-maglev-changsha...
    - bluGill 2y ago
      Maglev are less efficent than steel wheels at those speeds. Of course proper maintenance would make the subway smoother and help a lot. france has run regular trains almost to almost 575km/h - though if you really want higher speeds maglev is better but nyc couldn't use those speeds on the subway (though other rail should go faster in the city for service reasons)
      - melling 2y ago
        Yeah, everyone knows you wouldn’t run a nyc subway at 300 mph. Where do you get maglevs ant low speed are less efficient? They are frictionless. Of course, I don’t even care if they are. You know what they’re more efficient than? Cars! Building medium-speed and high-speed maglevs are part of the solution to getting people out of cars. They are building them in China. Let’s see how far they get. China built almost 30,000 miles of HSR before the US finished any. Maybe maglevs will turn out to be one of those things that just doesn’t work in America but works everywhere else.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
      That's not the only one, here is another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_System_Bögl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_System_Bögl , interestingly they also have an option for containerized freight.

School-Cotton 2y ago

> Anyone predict the US still wouldn’t have a bullet train in 2025? I predict the US will still not have a bullet train in 2055 either. The US just has very little institutional ability to build new/improved infrastructure.

bluGill 2y ago
CA HSR is likely to have at least one section open by then just proving you are wrong. That I'm only willing to predict one section and not the enough to be useful proves your analysis of why is correct.

BirAdam 2y ago

For the USA, there are two complications. First, it’s expensive due to imminent domain considerations. Second, there’s a lot of nimbyism in local town halls. So, even when the cost can be overcome, people will scream about it and get it stopped.

toast0 2y ago
Eminent domain, not imminent. There's no connection to time, but the state has the absolute power to seize property; in many countries (including the US) this is limited by constitution and regulation to specific purposes and to require just compensation. Another factor in the US is that our railroads are generally freight oriented. Routing to have three ground based networks is challenging (road, freight rail, passenger high speed rail), especially in urban areas where right of way is expensive and also over mountain passes. A lot of urban freight rail lines are currently unused; some of them become greenway rail trails, others sit unused and may be at risk of encroachment, but often the alignment isn't useful for high speed rail anyway.
- m4rtink 2y ago
  For the record basically all of Shinkansen in Japan is new standard gauge rail, as "normal" trains in Japan are narrow gauge. And they still manage. In some places you might have shinkansen, multiple private narrow gauge networks, metro and regular roads going through the same piece of land.