Topic: China tests 3,000-kph ‘super-Maglev’ train concept (Read 2422 times)

The problem is already solved.  It is called limit your acceleration.  It is simple and effective.  The nice thing about a train (as opposed to say a car or plane) is it follows a fixed track.  With a programmed acceleration and deceleration curve, all the g forces over the entire trip becomes deterministic.

Money estimation of such mega-projects is only one part of the issue. You know, during Great Depression the U.S. government made jobless people busy (and paid them some money indeed) by building roads. So this path has been treaded before (no pun intended)...

Constructing a tunnel in the Bering strait? That will be extremely expensive. The 50 km Channel Tunnel cost the British some $8 billion. This tunnel will cost somewhere around $100 billion and $200 billion.

They said about 200 km tunnel under the Bering strait. BTW, the bridge on the picture would be demolished by ice pretty fast...

Sounds awesome... but I have no idea how they are going to cross the Bering strait.

A suggestion:

Incoming Pekin-Newyork train!

Wow that is seriously fast.
Impressive.
But I am not so sure how safe that travel can be.

I would be surprised if the g-force "problem" weren't solved prior to a hard launch. It's possible to convert the impact felt on humans by converting that energy into something else. For example, you may be able to get the chairs to convert SOME of the "impact" into some type of gyration, which could allow for the trains to even recoup some of that energy. Alternately, and this is clearly too cool to be practical, chairs could ride their own in-train rails, where the seats all roll back which slopes upward (and has chair locks and must have brakes) while accelerating -- you could even make it into a roller coaster. When done accelerating, the track uses a hydraulic mechanism to flatten the ramp which is raised the reversed way when it's time for deceleration.

So anyway.... you go on a 1850mph train, and you have inclined, gyrating seats falling backwards at maybe 5mph on a rollercoaster-type track where your seats also slowly swivel around to face the rear. I bet we could get used to that after only... Idunno, 20 rides?

You don't have to waste the space needed for the "seat tracks," either. Instead, you use the overhead storage for collapsible equipment necessary to run, for example, the dining car, which is set up once the train's mostly finished accelerating. -Or, get really fancy/lazy and have four seat tracks per aisle side -- two seat tracks for normal sitting, and two powered tracks (one for "incoming" traffic and one for "outgoing") which move seats to the "dining car" or piss pots at the button-press of a passenger. Dining becomes more convenient, so people are more likely to purchase $10 microwave hot dogs.

I guess once you've gone that far into extravagance, though, the train may's well just fuckin' fly and have two pneumatic tubes per seat with a little bill changer for the eating and excretion.

You misunderstand. I am not saying we should stay at home all the time, but I do believe the modern world is too travel-heavy. Our cars put a massive strain on the environment incomparable to the minute disturbances caused by telephone or Skype. Shouldn't we focus on what's important? Is physical presence such a big deal that we must compromise efficiency and environmental responsibility just to be physically present at a business meeting?

That time there were less people who were willing to pay for high-speed travel. Also, there were safety concerns. But that is not the case anymore. Time has taken precedence over money.

The only G force you would feel are during acceleration and deceleration and of course cornering and all of these will be designed in a way that so that they'll never exceed let's say the level of a plane take off at most, for me the challenges at such speed are related to air friction and all the effects that it will cause especially at ground level, so one way to reduce or solve this is by making a depressured tube and trying to achieve near vacuum conditions)

dammmn thats exciting, i can't wait for north america to have more trains, it just makes so much more sence then the current , trucking and bussing system we have going

Yeah, why travel the world and try out new cultures and smells and sounds and sights and sensations when you can sit at home and see it on Skype or watch it on YouTube!  Jesus, we need to get out and travel more as a society and get away from just relying on digital communications.

When reading similar news and talking about G's, something like this inevitably comes to mind...



Gravity train

I really think that as a society, we should move goods and not people. People can be "virtually present" (e.g. Skype) and this suffices for most circumstances. It seems so wasteful to invest in moving people when we have phone lines that can do it faster and better...

The issue with acceleration won't be speeding up or slowing down, it would be cornering at 3000kph. Modern high speed trains use a tilting track or active tilting mechanism so that the acceleration around a corner pushes you down as opposed to the side, but even then the radius of a corner going 300kph is on the order of kilometers. Going 10 times that fast would require a corner radius 10 times larger to maintain the same sensation in the train.

You'd likely spend some time at 3000kph, and a lot of time slowing down for even small corners and then getting back up to speed.

Money is king.  We've progressed as a society where we can cheaply get a person from A to B, for little cost.  Why exactly are we halving travel time by a small fraction over a tremendous cost, again?

The first Maglev was to be birmingham London if memory serves but was discarded because of costs
Technology is pretty old

That's the assumption this will be cheaper than the airlines.  Fixed infrastructure routes, with a single company / entity with a monopoly, results in price gouging.  They may even charge a higher rate than an airplane since they could market it as being more convenient than taking an airplane to a foreign designation.

Monopolies have never benefited anyone - it's the reason why the train network in the USA feels a century old compared to China and Europe.

Also even 300 kph is the exception rather than the rule.  Most high speed trains are a lot slower than that.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-10-fastest-trains-in-the-world-2012-11?op=1

Normal High-speed trains in China are having maximum speeds of 300 kmph to 350 kmph. For example, for travelling from Shanghai to Beijing (1,320 km), you will have to spend 4 hours 55 mins in a High Speed Train.

It would be awesome for trains like that to connect every country. I could go to Greece from the US in about 3 hours. Even if it went through Russia it would still be faster than the airplane. It's also insanely fuel efficient in comparison, and safer.

http://news.msn.com/science-technology/ny-to-la-in-45-minutes-teslas-elon-musk-has-a-plan

This idea has been theorized in the United States for several years.  Although I think the Chinese will be the first ones to implement this new technology.

I'm not sure that picture is going to be it lol.

wtf??? looks dangerous its like a mini toy train.

How fast are high-speed rail lines though?


This does look dangerously exciting. I'm all for faster mediums of transportation as long as theyre obviously safe. Its a shame we'll never see a mode of transport in our lifetime that would easily let us whizz to anywhere in the world in a matter of hours. So much out there to see and unless you're rich and have a lot of free time its unlikely you'll ever get to see even a small percentage of it.

These trains will probably have swivelling seats.  You face forward while accelerating, then the seats rotate and you face backwards while decelerating. 

The chances of dying in a High-speed rail accident, is much lower when compared to that of traveling in a normal car. Millions of people commute on High-speed rail every day. And how many accidents do we get to hear?

Absolute zero. I imagine theyd be completely obliterated instantly.

At max speed yeah it would be none (or survival would be unrealistic = "miracle").  Even airliners, the only crashes which have a chance of survivors is ones where the conditions allow the pilot to slow the plane down enough that impact speed is "low" (<100 kph).  I am no Dorian, but my understanding is these types routes are dedicated (no crossings with roads) and maglev makes derailment less likely.  I doubt the risk of death is any higher than flying.   Also I don't think the speed makes is more dangerous.   Even in cars (seat belts, airbags, crash cages, etc) a head on collision at 100 kph is generally fatal.   So 1,000 kph vs 3,000 kph it probably doesn't matter.

You're right, this wouldn't be that useful on shorter distances. But if you had to travel let's say a few thousands kilometers with only a few stops, this would be great. I wonder what chances one has for survival if the train crashes at maximum speed. None?

Be funny if they accidentally created a time machine. How fast do you actually need to go to travel in time? lol.

I agree. I'd likeo travel on it if it's proved safe though.

Exciting but very dangerous....

Well 1G = 1 earth gravity = 9.8 m/s2.  Velocity increases by 9.8 m/s every second.  Doing some math and that works out to 35 kph /s.   So if the train accelerated at a sustained 1G it would go from 0 kph to 3,000 kph in 85 seconds (and take 35 km to get to that speed) but the train probably has much lower acceleration something on the order of 0.1G to 0.3G (similar to existing trains) so it will take many minutes (and hundred or more km) to get to top speed.*  

So if we assume it did accelerate at 0.3G it would take about 5 minutes (and 120km) to go from zero to 3,000 kph.  If the distance between stops was 240km the train would only reach top speeds for a second and then have to start accelerating back down to zero.  So higher speeds become more useful on routes which have fewer stops with more distance between them.  If the distance between two stops was less than 240km then the train would either need to accelerate harder or would reach a lower peak speed between stops.  Still very cool technology if they can pull it off.

If you were asking what can humans handle, well a lot more but it won't be comfortable so regs and common sense limit g forces to lower limits.  For:
Space Shuttle during launch and re-entry: ~3g
Formula One race car during breaking or cornering: ~9g peak
Apollo module during re-entry: ~9g
F22 (high performance air domination fighter): ~12g peak (for 30-40 seconds)
Skydiving (at moment of chute opening): ~20g


* This example is simplistic as it assumes constant acceleration but in reality as the train goes faster it encounters more wind resistance.  This means more and more energy is needed to keep the train from slowing down, leaving less energy available for acceleration.  In reality acceleration slows as the speed increases.  Still the point isn't to be super accurate but to get it to within a ballpark of what is can do.

Heard that they will first introduce this train along the Shanghai-Beijing route. Right now the normal high speed train takes around 5 hours to cover the 1,300 km+ distance. The new train might be able to complete the journey in less than 1 hour. 

I wasn't aware of this. Thank you for providing information. So what are the safe limits to acceleration? How long would it take for the train to reach its maximum speed?

G force is based on acceleration not speed.  You can go 1 million miles per hour and be under zero Gs.

So a train (would have to limit its acceleration) and that means 3,000 kph is only useful for long stretches where it has plenty of time to accelerate (safety) up to that speed.  Commercial aviation (for example 747) is limited to 1.3G under normal conditions for safety.

Seems like an accident waiting to happen. There's no margin for error at that speed.

Well... I am worried about the financial aspect.  

Even in China, they are very much expensive. Almost 2.5 times costlier than the regular train. A 500 km trip (High-speed rail, non-Maglev) will cost around $36, while normal train will cost you only $14.

Yes, I hate this. On my last trip to my college, it took me 15 hours in the bus to cover around 900-1000km. The bus was full, I mean really crowded. I felt so ill after arriving home. I can't wait for a project like this to become real.

This just seems dangerously fast.

You know, when I was studying, I used to spend 3 days to get back home for vacations. (2.5 days in the train, and rest in the bus). 72 hours to cover 3,000 km of distance. If something like this becomes real, then my travel time will get reduced to 2% of the original. 

What about the G force when travelling at 3000 kph? This is insane and yet amazing. I hate when I have to sit in a train/bus for hours just to get somewhere and then go back home. So much time is being wasted like that.

http://rt.com/news/158116-china-super-maglev-train

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2622516/Forget-high-speed-rail-future-train-travel-SUPER-MAGLEV-says-China-one-day-1-800MPH.html

Just a few days ago, we were discussing the Virgin Galactic... but here is even better. A train which can travel at speeds of 3,000 Kmph!!!!!!! That is 4 times the speed of Boeing 747.