Passenger Trains > Take my Maglev... please!

The Japan Time News

"Japan may waive maglev train technology license fees in deal with U.S."

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/04/13/national/japan-may-waive-maglev-train-technology-license-fees-in-deal-with-u-s/


"The government is considering providing Japanese magnetically levitated
train system technology to the United States without license fees, a
government source said Sunday."

"Tokyo is considering the possibility in order to realize a maglev
high-speed train service linking Washington and Baltimore, Maryland, the
source said."


Interesting - what does it mean? Are they saying that once the short
segment is built, the US could have the option to finish it on it's
own if it wanted to? (Like that would ever happen) Or does it even
go a step further and save us the trouble of backward engineering the
system like China often does without permission?

Personally - I think Japan has a better shot at a system that isn't
already built - Vegas to LA for instance. Or wait for FL to become
receptive.

/Mitch

Absurd. The Japanese must think Americans are suckers. Why can't they give or sell us the concept of on time and frequent service, with easy connections?

korotaj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Absurd. The Japanese must think Americans are
> suckers. Why can't they give or sell us the
> concept of on time and frequent service, with easy
> connections?

Not at all.

"on time and frequent service, with easy connections"
was not enough. The licensing fee is the icing on
the cake for an America on a diet.

They also unofficially offered loans worth about 4.79 billion
dollars to help bring about the service, which is expected to
require about 9 billion or so of investment.

Suckers? No. Absurd? Not at all. They WANT the business
and hope to establish the viability of their system which
they likely hope to export in the future.

Still - I believe building a somewhat redundant system is
not the way to go, especially if Acela speeds up in the
near future.

But, then again - it'll run right in to the Capitol. Right
into DC. "on time, frequent service"?, nah - politics. They
no what they are doing.

/Mitch

You would think they would want to serve a much longer route with this sort of service. DC and Baltimore aren't that far apart. Maglev is a joke that has been around for decades and never been really successful...

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

MojaveBill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You would think they would want to serve a much
> longer route with this sort of service. DC and
> Baltimore aren't that far apart. Maglev is a joke
> that has been around for decades and never been
> really successful...


They do - Washington DC to Baltimore is only the
beginning of a route that would continue on to
Boston.

Maglev is no joke - it''s fast and frictionless
(floats) and can climb grades that bullet trains
can not.

Until the technology is built in quantity and
proven (as would be the bet that Japan is making
on pushing it's US proposal), until then, it
will be cost prohibitive. None-the-less, they
are going forward in building a system of their
own.

/Mitch

The Japanese are saying: "if you like your maglev you can keep it, period!"

Fritz in HSV, AL

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They do - Washington DC to Baltimore is only the
> beginning of a route that would continue on to
> Boston.
>
> Maglev is no joke - it''s fast and frictionless
> (floats) and can climb grades that bullet trains
> can not.

I'm curious what a realistic estimate would be for going all the way, Boston-NYC-DC?

While I try to be objective about Maglev and don't oppose it because it is not a train, it is something that requires a transfer if you travel to points off of the line.

I didn't realize that it had good grade climbing (and descending) abilities. What is the practical maximum grade? I guess you need guideways in both directions. I wonder how wide the typical ROW required would be?

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Maglev is no joke - it''s fast and frictionless
> (floats) and can climb grades that bullet trains
> can not.
>

Both of those come with caveats....

It is frictionless (if we ignore the small e/m friction) as far as wheel to rail friction is concerned. But it is not frictionless as far as air resistance is concerned. And at high speeds, air resistance is the predominant friction to consider. Wheel to rail friction is relatively insignificant at that point.

It can climb higher grades because of the induction drive. But same induction drive can be used in regular trains too if one chooses to do so. So that claim is somewhat bogus. Of course the reason that such is not use is because of the increased cost of the track structure.

Absent superconducting magnets, maglev is a big loser. The system must constantly feed power into the coils to keep the train levitated. This in addition to the power needed to propel it.

Then, the guideway has to be kept very clean of debris, as even small stuff can have serious negative impacts if hit by the train--much more so than conventional rail. Think accident in Germany. And of course the faster you go, the more perfect the guideway alignment needs to be. Will definitely put people to work!

Jishnu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is frictionless (if we ignore the small e/m
> friction) as far as wheel to rail friction is
> concerned.

Yes, let's ignore that as it is likely trivial.

> Wheel to rail friction is relatively
> insignificant at that point.

Not from a maintenance standpoint. That's mostly
the point I was making. No wear and tear. No
contact.


> It can climb higher grades because of the
> induction drive. But same induction drive can be
> used in regular trains too if one chooses to do
> so.

Same goes for cog railroads. I don't know that I
understand you point. It's like stating a steam
engine could climb great grades if it's power
were used to power induction fields.

calzephyr48 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Absent superconducting magnets, maglev is a big
> loser. The system must constantly feed power into
> the coils to keep the train levitated. This in
> addition to the power needed to propel it.

Actually, only the segment of track that the train
is hovering over is powered.


> Then, the guideway has to be kept very clean of
> debris, as even small stuff can have serious
> negative impacts if hit by the train--much more so
> than conventional rail.

Lots of incidents of this issue with China's system?
Not one, as I understand.

> Think accident in Germany.

Human error. Two trains can not collide due to the
way the track is powered. The collision was between
an experimental test maglev and a maintenance vehicle.

It was later discovered that the failure was in not
setting an electronic braking system that would have
prevented the train from operating while maintenance
work was being carried out.

/Mitch

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jishnu Wrote:

>
> > It can climb higher grades because of the
> > induction drive. But same induction drive can
> be
> > used in regular trains too if one chooses to do
> > so.
>
> Same goes for cog railroads. I don't know that I
> understand you point. It's like stating a steam
> engine could climb great grades if it's power
> were used to power induction fields.


The difference is that one application already exists and the other that you posit is a poor strawman to make an unsustainable argument. LIM drives exist and are used in various systems where the track system is steel wheel on steel rail. It has nothing to do with steam engines or cog rails. The LIM drives are exactly the same whether they are used in monorails or birails or even rubber tired vehicles on concrete guideways.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While I try to be objective about Maglev and don't
> oppose it because it is not a train, it is
> something that requires a transfer if you travel
> to points off of the line.
>
> I didn't realize that it had good grade climbing
> (and descending) abilities. What is the practical
> maximum grade? I guess you need guideways in both
> directions. I wonder how wide the typical ROW
> required would be?

The approved route from Tokyo to Nagoya has a maximum grade of 4% or so. A　maglev set has a width of 3 meters, and a Shinkansen has a width of 3.3 meters, so width shouldn't be much of a problem, at least to my eyeballs when I visited the Yamanashi Test Center in Japan several weeks ago. The propulsion magnets are attached to the side of the guideway, and can't be too wide or it won't function too well.

The clearance between the magnets and the maglev cars are higher for the Japanese maglev than for the Shanghai maglev (Germany's TransRapid), and that necessitated the use of guideway magnets on the sides (instead of on the bottom), as well as use of stronger superconductive magnets. As Mitch and I have discussed in another Maglev thread already, Japan and Germany (and Shanghai) maglevs are different animals so the mention of TransRapid maglev's clearance issue isn't that relevant here. Technological knowledge isn't required to come to that conclusion, by the way - it's geography - earthquakes!

Curvature will be a problem. 8000 meter radius is the minimum for the Japan Maglev's approved route, while Shinkansen's original ROW has a minimum of 2500 meter radius, where with assistance of tilt technology, trains can travel 270 km/h through that. Fortunately, Japan Maglev will travel through "middle of nowhere" more than the current Shinkansen, and should be primarily used to shuttle passengers between #1 and #3 metropolis areas in Japan, Tokyo and Nagoya. Planning has already started for the connection to the #2 metropolis area, Osaka. Shinkansen will continue to connect the population-dense Tokaido corridor.

Thanks for the link to the article, Mitch. It seems Prime Minister Abe has a political motive here, so it's less about profits or "technological sharing" but more about offering tribute in exchange for political favor from the U.S., a subtle tactic to compete with the new economic monster, China. That's how I read this, after taking off my one dimensional thinking hat.

At least, Ambassador Caroline Kennedy got to joyride at more than 500 km/h, and she probably didn't have to pay 2500 yen! She's all smiles on photos posted on Japanese media sites.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/14 12:31 by cchan006.

korotaj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Absurd. The Japanese must think Americans are
> suckers. Why can't they give or sell us the
> concept of on time and frequent service, with easy
> connections?

Wish that concept was simply "sellable." It's not like we don't know how to do it. Many transit systems in the U.S. provide on time, frequent services with good connections already. Would be nice to see it taken to the extreme that the Japanese do, but I'm not holding my breath.

When the NEC becomes so congested that passengers who travel the farther endpoints (Boston - NYC, for example) are clamoring for a better alternative besides the airlines, then maybe we will be ready for maglev.