Flying Trains 115
leb writes: "Engineers in Japan are developing trains that really do fly. Using the 'wing-in-ground' (WIG) effect, in which a high-pressure cushion of air forms underneath flying objects as they approach the ground, they believe they will be able to create trains that use only a quarter of the power required for magnetically levitated (maglev) trains. Read about it in this New Scientist article." This is rather nifty, but it isn't as cool as the flying train at the end of BTTF III. Put a flux capacitor on this baby, and we'll talk.
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
URL correction (Score:1)
enjoy
Woohoo! (Score:2)
I'm going to go play with 'X-Plane' [x-plane.com] (which is at least half a hardcore aerodynamic engineering sim) and design myself a ground-effect car. And see what sorts of terrain I can fly it over :) vroom, whoosh! I think it's sort of pointless to design in a non-ground-effect tail seeing as the thing is supposed to _not_ actually take off fully. I'm thinking in terms of three wings and flat plates for the sides, perhaps some form of drag rudder.
I wonder if you could make the 'slots' for the Japanese train version in x-plane? It is sort of technically possible but would be absurdly hard to get the tolerances close enough...
More ground effect fun (Score:2)
Anybody have a long steep hill, some bicycle wheels and aircraft spruce or aluminum tubing? No engine required! You just have to live near a big, _straight_ hill ;) oh, plus you'll have no brakes of any sort due to not even touching the ground, so busy streets would _not_ be the place to try this ;)
COOL! (Score:2)
cool! (Score:1)
rbf aka pulsar
A few minor corrections... (Score:2)
"Flipping over backwards" is not typical of overloaded airplanes. The most common thing is to simply not be able to climb out of ground effect. This is most common in hotter, more humid, and higher altitude environments than the pilots are used to, as each of these factors reduces the density of the air; reducing the density of the air then reduces thrust and lift capacity at the same time.
Taking off tail-heavy is very easy will make the aircraft difficult to control, and may cause a stall, particularly at low speed. However, it is more likely to cause a stall at approach to landing, as most aircraft store lots or all of their fuel in the wings, and as they use up fuel their center of gravity shifts slowly backwards. While the horizontal stabilizer ("tailwing") has sufficient effectiveness to prevent at stall at cruise speed, the airplane will be more likely to stall when it slows down for approach to landing, and will be hard to control in any case. Fortunately, certified aircraft generally have significant margin of error.
Finally, I strongly doubt that the fat man you saw put your plane in danger. The crew will feel no compunction about asking folks to move around whenever there is a weight and balance problem; I've been on quite a few flights when this has happened. In this case, he might have been undercounted, but not completely ignored for W&B calculations. There is an "FAA standard passenger" that can be used for these calculations so that they do not have to ask you to stand on a scale, and at a minimum it is likely that he had been accounted in this manner. If they were very close to the W&B envelope, they would have known it and would likely have re-run their calculations.
Folks interested in reading some of the best technical writing ever created and in learning more about the theory of flight should read Stick and Rudder by Wolfgang Langeweische. Only beware, as aviation is an addictive persuit, and you might get hooked. :-)
PPSEL (Private Pilot, Single-Engine Land); Experimental Pulsar N456LT [redhat.com]
TGV at 515km/h (Score:1)
--
BeDevId 15453
Download BeOS R5 Lite [be.com] free!
Re:TransRapid by the Germans (Score:2)
Inductrack (Score:5)
See:
"Inductrack" [llnl.gov]
Maglev: A New Approach, Scientific American (January 2000) - article not available online.
"Track to the Future," [popularmechanics.com] Popular Mechanics (May 1998), pp. 68-70.
5-10 cm? (Score:2)
-jwb
Re:Too much infrastructure required (Score:3)
-jwb
Close - but no cigar (Score:2)
In this case, the wing simply needs to be wider than the designed flight altitude (Altitude measured from ground level, not sea level) to take effect of Ground Effect. It does not have anything to do with the total length of the train or traincar.
Wing in Ground? (Score:4)
Essentially, this means that a wing, such as one on an airplane, gets double lift when the wing is as close, or closer, to the ground (vertically) as the wing is wide (horizontally). In other words, if a wing is 75 feet wide, and the plane is 75 feet or less from the ground, the wing will be able to generate twice the normal (above 75 feet) lifting force.
This can create a lethal effect on overloaded or badly balanced (front to back) aircraft: The wings will generate double-lifting force while within the ground-effect zone, but as soon as the plane gets above the ground effect layer, the plane will flip over backwards and splatter all of the runway. Not a fun way to die. Always do those Weight-And-Balance calculations carefully!
One time I was on a puddle-jumper (20 seater deal prop) going from Omaha to Minneapolis. We had gotten on the plane and were waiting to begin taxiing to the run way. The door was closed. Suddenly, they open it back on and let this digustingly fat man on the plane. He must have been 500 pounds or more. The only place he could sit was on a bench all the way at the back of the plane. (The back of the plane is the worst place for weight in the first place, the tailwing doesn't create a whole lot of lift) Since he was on so late, I doubt he made it into the W&B calcs. I love to fly, but this time I about got up and got off the plane. I stayed on and was pretty scared while we passed through the ground effect zone. There has to be a significant chance (at least 10%) that we could have flipped over. One person could have moved the wrong way, or something in the luggage compartment could have shifted and we would have been a textbook case of why obsessive-compulsive people should be kept away from both McDonalds and small airplanes! :)
Re:Inductrack (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be strangely ironic that the first practical passenger train application of maglev comes in the USA of all things? Imagine a maglev train using Inductrack that can go from Chicago to Minneapolis-St. Paul in under 100 minutes.
Re:Yawn. Old hat. (Score:2)
So, it is not surprising that the UK rail system is subject to delays, breakdowns, and extremely lethal accidents (sorry, we don't have money to fix that broken signal, we have to pay dividents, you know).
The British Rail privatization is a showcase to the world of why thatcherism is a scourge, and a lesson that (fortunately) stopped dead similar projects worldwide.
It is safe to say that thanks to the eye-opening experience of the british rail privatization, the people of England decided to kick out the little tory shopkeepers from the House of Parliament, and bring back commonsense to government (a State is NOT a business, and cannot be run as such).
--
Yawn. Old hat. (Score:5)
Yawn... Old hat. Can't you slashdotters have a look at history? Otherwise, you'll be condemned at repeating it... badly.
First, a brief word about ekranoplanes (a.k.a. Wing-In-Ground effect) [tudelft.nl]. Here is an actual picture [tudelft.nl] of such a beast in flight (Gerry Anderson fans will be delighted by this one [tudelft.nl]). They have been around for almost 40 years, having been devellopped in the defunct Soviet Union . You may look at this page [tudelft.nl] for historic information, as well as pictures of enormous ekranoplanes [tudelft.nl] as well as the 400 ton Lun ICBM launcher [tudelft.nl] . For those who worry about greenhouse gas emissions, there is also a pedal-powered WIG [tudelft.nl] !!! Oh, yes, those craft are already covered by a Canadian regulation [tc.gc.ca], proof that they've been around long enough to rouse the attention of regulators...
Now, about trains. Nothing really new, there either.
In the 1960's, french engineer Jean Bertin [citeweb.net] (1917-1975) pursued the développement of his ill-fated Aérotrain [citeweb.net] , which, 30 years before the recently-canned german Transrapid maglev [maglev.com], almost reached the realization stage (both in a commuter rail line [citeweb.net] betwen Paris and the western sububurb of Cergy, and a line between Lyon and Grenoble for the 1968 winter Olympic games). Bertin's Aérotrains ran on a single inverted T concrete rail, and used a cushion of air for sustentation. An early prototype, the Aérotrain expérimental 02 [citeweb.net] (which looks like it was inspired by this [ed.ac.uk]), reached the speed of 400 km/h in 1966 and 422 km/h in 1969 (not an impressive achievement, since at that time, the rail speed record was achieved in 1955, when an ordinary locomotive pulling four totally normal cars reached the speed of 331 km/h on a perfectly standard railroad line). More pictures are available here [citeweb.net].
Despite that, Jean Bertin built more prototypes, and a 20 km long rail line (which still runs accross the countryside [citeweb.net], completely abandoned) on which a much bigger "train" [citeweb.net], which ran not much faster [citeweb.net]than today's TGV [unipi.it]s do (note that the record certificate is issued by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale [fai.org] , and not the Union Internationale des Chemins de Fer [uic.asso.fr] ...).
Bertin's Aérotrain technology almost got selected in place of the current TGV [unipi.it], but at the last minute, State support was withdrawn from the Société Bertin. The Aérotrain (and any other newfangled guided transportation system such as maglevs [maglev.com] and monorails [monorails.org] - we're in the real world, here, not in Disneyland [monorails.org]) suffered most from gross incompatibility with existing rail lines (necessary to enter the core of cities) and an extremely heavy implementation of switches, which precludes their widespread use and thus reduces the flexibility of their rail networks.
Jean Bertin never recovered from the shock of losing State support; he died a few months later, despite having built a prosperous engineering company [bertin.fr] which still thrives in high-technologies.
Throughout the Aérotrain's history, the French National Railroads [www.sncf.fr] (SNCF)'s attitude was extremely interesting. Despite all the media hoopla that surrounded the Aérotrain and the political interest, it did not say anything at all. Not a single word either for or against the Aérotrain was uttered in official french railroad circles. But during that time, the SNCF worked hard at perfecting what is seen today as the epitome of high-speed travel technology, the TGV [unipi.it].
So, it is quite safe to say that this oldfangled flying "train" [newscientist.com] will certainly not fly very far, because the theorical speed limit of ground travel, the speed of sound, is within reach of conventionnal steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, which without much pain, ran at 515,3 km/h [unipi.it] on May 18th 1990 (gee! Almost 10 years ago!!!).
(What is the speed of sound at 20C at sea level anyway???)
--
Re:Flying Trains (Score:1)
Oh wait, it's called an airplane, and it demonlished the passenger rail industry some time ago.
Re:Yawn. Old hat. (Score:2)
<br><br>
Absolute rubbish. Perhaps wheel-on-rail *can* reach that speed but the power dissipation due to friction would be substantial. The difference with both WIG and induction motor designs is that they promise to achieve such speeds with relatively little energy expenditure.
<br><br>
It's inevitable that energy expenditure will become a major driving force in transportation technology in the century ahead. Because of diminishing fossil fuels. Because of restrictions on air pollution. And also because of noise levels (steel wheels on tracks are pretty loud) and the need to limit the production of waste heat in densely populated areas.
<br><br>
In the UK most train cancellations and delays are caused by track problems and mechanical failures.
These technologies are also attractive to train operators because removing the train's wheels( thus eliminating complexity and decreasing mechanical stresses on the track) would increase reliability and decrease ongoing maintenance costs.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Re:Yawn. Old hat. (Score:2)
I agree that the way BR was privatised was a criminal waste of public assets for just the reasons you say. Mind you, if it had been handled better (if the public hadn't been robbed) separating rail infrastructure from train operations might have worked out. It might still work out, in the long term. Similar moves within the power industry (gas and electricity) have already brought benefits in terms of reduced prices to customers through competition.
I look forward to seeing the British telco industry sliced up in a similar way (I doubt we'll see any significant reduction in call costs until that happens, notwithstanding recent announcements from BT, Altavista etc).
I sympathise with your extreme dislike of Thatcherism; I was just as outspoken as you on that particular subject back when it still mattered. But since then I've become just as unimpressed with New Labour. We'll never see a sensible, moderate government in this country until (and if!) proportional representation is introduced. I want no more damn ideologues! Give me government by consensus - and I mean pluralism, *not* the tyranny of the majority that we have now.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Consider MODERN TECHNOLOGY (Score:1)
I agree with you that trains can be noisy... if they used technology that is outdated by 40 years, as it is the case in the US. I took Caltrain [caltrain.org], in Silicon Valley, and from personal experience I can say that it is difficult to board when you carry luggage or you have difficulties in walking (high, steep stairs), it is slow, and it is quite noisy.
However, there are some countries whose technology in the area is much more advanced than the American one, although the obstacles to modern trains in the US are more political than technological [sciam.com].
As explained in this Scientific American article [sciam.com], it is possible to build trains that reach high speeds without making too much noise, using aerodynamics and a clever profile for the track. Small details, such as how to conduct power from the feeder cables to the locomotive, are important.
The TGV has commercial speed around 300 km/h (180 mph). It departs from a city center at slow speed, revs up to cross the suburbs, departs from tracks shared with other trains and goes into some special track (with smooth curves). It then revs up to cruise speed. The reverse steps are taken at the end. Cities that high-speed tracks do not reach are not lost: the train simply goes at the speed of normal trains (100 mph for instance). On the latest generation of TGVs, the ride is extremely smooth: you barely feel any vibration.
A run of a shortened stock TGV reached more than 500 km/h in an 1990 experiment. Engineers are working on increasing the commercial speed to 400 km/h.
The idea is that trains run from city center to city center; no more clogged highways to reach airports dozens of miles outside of the city! A businessman going from Paris to Lyon takes the train a few metro stations from his office and arrives 2 hours later near the offices of his business partners.
high-speed routes (Score:1)
You should perhaps consider what was done with the TGV in France. The TGV is an inter-city train. Its most used route is Paris Lyon (two biggest cities in France, 500 km apart). The TGV takes about 2 hours to do the trip. It goes into high speed (a little less than 300 km/h) in the countryside.
The idea is that going to the airport in Paris (CDG or ORL), flying and coming back from the airport in Lyon takes a long time because of the urban commute times, check-in delays and airport congestion. The train stations are located in the middle of the cities; taking the train is just a matter of reaching the station (taxi, metro, bus, car...), punching the ticket and sitting down.
The idea is therefore to use high-speed trains between cities several hundred miles away between which exists a lot a passenger traffic. Noise is not that a problem since high-speed is reached in the countryside; furthermore, I can tell you that TGVs are not that noisy (good aerodynamics).
Stop for the train (Score:1)
--
Re:Eighty-Eight Miles Per Hour!!! (Score:1)
Re:Already in Germany (Score:2)
That's a maglev train. As the article said, this new train doesn't use magnets - it's a totally different way of levetating (using ground effect).
This train will ride between Berlin and another town, I think. It may eventually ride in other countries like the Netherlands too.
Didn't the project get cancelled recently as being to expensive, and not compatitive with the ICE - the German high speed train?
-- Abigail
Re:Dimensions? (Score:2)
Odd side note is that the train would have to have an upper limit on speed otherwise it would take off. Unless there was a top part to the track....
-cpd
Flying trains (Score:1)
Re:Eighty-Eight Miles Per Hour!!! (Score:1)
I feel I have done my duty. Thank you, and good night.
The sun is going down, I say we follow it out of town- We've been here for far too long.
Eighty-Eight Miles Per Hour!!! (Score:2)
Thats one thing that kinda pissed me off about Austin Powers 2. I mean, come on! Yeah, your time machine is this car, they were talking about meeting your past self (a la back to the future), and then theres no 88 mph, flux capacitor, OR flames coming out from the wheels?
Sheesh. Some movies are just so unrealistic.
The sun is going down, I say we follow it out of town- We've been here for far too long.
"WIG Effect"? (Score:2)
Re:noise (Score:1)
Re:noise (Score:1)
Re:noise (Score:2)
Fix for broken link (Score:4)
Re:TransRapid by the Germans (Score:1)
Re:More ground effect fun (Score:1)
Re:Dimensions? (Score:5)
(a) the ground effect is a very well understood phenonomenon, much more so than MAGLEV. In fact, the Russians/Ukrainians have built massive WIG aircraft, that were probably gonna be used for rapid troop landings. A quick Google finds this page [tudelft.nl].
(b) WIG has nothing to do with turbulence. In effect when a wing is closer to the ground, the space between the underside of the wing and the ground acts as a nozzle, i.e. increases air pressure much more so than the wing can do by itself (roughly 2x). Increased air pressure => higher lift (although I am over simplifying here).
(c) You don't have to have a large wingspan to take advantage of the ground effect. It just so happens, that when you fly slow, you can't produce as much difference in air pressure with a small wing, so you need a large one (again, I am over simplifying, but close enough). I.e. if you have lots of small wings, like these Japanese are trying to do, you're gonna get pretty much the same effect.
(d) The pterodactyles did not use the WIG effect... I mean come on, do you ever see illustrations of pterodactyles soaring at 2' off the ground?
I personally think this is a very interesting idea. Maglev is cool and all, but this can work just as well. If I had to find a weak spot it would be the total cost of ownership (TCO) of these things versus a Maglev train... with a maglev, electromagnets may cost more at installation, but after that you're pretty much done spending. OTOH, aircraft (particulary aircraft *engines*) are notoriously expensive to maintain...
engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.
Go to www.skytran.net (Score:1)
The core of his system relies on Inductrack - the rest seems off the shelf. Right now it is a "competing" alternative to the Transit 2000 Plan [transit2000.com] for Phoenix, Arizona - though I think neither will go over well with the voters.
Does this inventor's implementation seem feasible?
Re:TransRapid by the Germans (Score:1)
Reminds me of the high-speed connexions : they all praised fiber-optics, but it is the cheap old copper cable that enables ADSL.
Re:TransRapid by the Germans (Score:1)
Well I would say they have even more this problem, precision is at least as important for these systems than for regular tracks for high-speed train. Plus the cost of maglev per km is way higher than regular quality tracks.
Although I must say maglev is cool
Re:Dimensions? (Score:1)
nature of innovation (Score:4)
This proves an interesting reminder of the fact that "innovation" - an overused term - is so much more than the ability to spawn new ideas fully formed from your brain. Some of the most brilliant advances we have seen and will see are the fortuitous combination of two seemingly unrelated facts or areas of study. That's real genius: the ability to see patterns where a less perceptive person might see none.
I hope someone points to initiatives like this one the next time funding for pure science research is on the block. The quest for knowledge is almost never totally without payoffs.
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
Re:whoa...trippy (Score:1)
The Russkis have been "flying" a monstrous ground-effect vehicle for years over one of their huge lakes up Siberia-way. Never gets over 50 feet or so above the water, has jet turbines stuck on every possible horizontal surface (and a few vertical ones as well)
Already in Germany (Score:1)
Re:Too much infrastructure required (Score:1)
But be that as it may, since Japan has so much costal water, and mountain ranges, I seriously doubt that the canals go where the trains want to go. If you need to move a boat along a costal area, you get a sea-faring barge or run close to the cost with a river/costal barge. Most of the canals, then, will be perpendicular to the coastline, while the trains will run parallel to it.
-
This train uses ground effects (Score:1)
-
Too much infrastructure required (Score:3)
Something you can use on existing track designs would be optimal. Instead of vertical wing sections, shorter diagonal sections should extend from the undercarriage.
The train tracks and siderails in Japan look a lot like ours. They're too close together for one of these and another train to pass, and they frequently travel through urban areas, where the extra right of way is going to be a bitch to acquire.
-
Re:Smallish problem? (Score:1)
It's easy to imagine the WIG analogues. Since the vertical wings guide the trains by following the side rails of the tracks, implement WIG switches and crossovers like this:
There may be other issues (like widths of the tracks - but that issue hasn't stopped multi-lane highways from enter most urban areas; you just get creative in where you put them) but the switching and crossovers should be the same as currently tracks, just on a slightly larger scale.
Smallish problem? (Score:3)
WIG Effect? Bah. I have better. (Score:1)
void recursion (void)
{
recursion();
}
while(1) printf ("infinite loop");
if (true) printf ("Stupid sig quote");
Yikes. Formatting. (Score:1)
void recursion (void)
{
recursion();
}
while(1) printf ("infinite loop");
if (true) printf ("Stupid sig quote");
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
-----------------------
Hmm... (Score:2)
-----------------------
Re:noise (Score:1)
Does the german maglev use superconductors? From what I figured, it doesn't use them, at least not in the track. But I'm not sure at all.
-
Re:noise (Score:2)
What do you mean? Electromagnets generating noise? Uh, maybe electromagnetic noise, but I doubt you can hear that with your ears only...
They may hum slightly due to vibrations, but nothing near a fan. The main cause of noise from Maglevs is shockwaves. Anything (ok ok, not spaceships
And anyway, the track magnets are turned off when the train isn't there.
-
Dimensions? (Score:3)
I personally don't think that this idea will ever take off (forgive the pun). Maglev is a much better understood effect and is easily controlled - the WIG craft would have to take off. Surely there is a hell of a lot of chance that serious faults will occur during lift off? It will probably need a lot of work before being produced and used by civilians, and even then I don't believe that it will be as good as maglev. Maglev will be much improved once superconductors reach the boiling point of nitrogen.
There, my (probably not-so-well-informed) two cents.
Re:noise (Score:1)
If I have to live next to trait tracks, do I want a loud noise once an hour, or a really annoying buzz 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year, or at least until the power goes out? I'd take the loud noise in a heartbeat. I'd take an apartment that wasn't near train tracks even sooner, but begger's can't be choosers.
Ummm... (Score:1)
So, either way, keeping the track clear is a bitch of a job
Public transportation == Mainframes (Score:1)
Using less energy than maglev makes it more eco-friendly
Bull. We have eco-friendly energy production methods and eco-friendly energy use methods. Stop throwing the problem under the rug. Change the most commonly used methods instead.
Re:"Obsessive-Compulsive" == Unfair (Score:1)
Making assumptions about someone's psyche based solely on their weight is among the most damaging and unfair judgements you can make. Discoveries concerning pre-diabetic chemical imbalances and other related advances in psychobiology and nutritional science show that inhibited reuptake of certain neurotransmitters and variations in the amount of sugar that is absorbed by different people is the *primary* factor in hunger-control mechanisms. These variations on brain chemistry -- NOT a lack of self-control or more serious neuroses -- are responsible for the eating habits of many, many overweight people. Their concomitant depression is, in my opinion, due in large part to the vitriolic treatment they receive from society as a whole and its members in particular.
Don't get me wrong -- I have a number of hours logged in a Cessna 172, and also fully understand the discomfort obese people can on occasion cause their neighbors. But direct your anger at the airline for failing to take late (and potentially large) passengers into account, not at the poor individual who has to live his life apologizing for a chemical imbalance he inherited through no fault of his own.
Size doesn't matter (Score:1)
--
Back to the Future (Score:1)
One can only hope these trains don't start sparking and going bezerk at eighty-eight miles per hour. Although it would be totally cool, it would still freak the bejeepers out of the passengers.
[Rails]? Where we're going we don't need [rails]! - Doc Brown, [paraphrased]
Also, did you know that BTTF IV and BTTF V are in planning. Too cool! I just hope they don't reck the awesomeness of the trilogy just to make money off of it. We'll have to wait and see. I hear its due to production after Jurrasic Park 3, so it'll be a few years from now.
haha, I can only imagine... (Score:1)
Are the Pros and Cons unbalanced? (Score:2)
This is obviously not something that is expected to help the daily communte, and would in fact be at a severe disadvantage in the metropolitan setting of any city. The noise of an object traveling in excess of 300KMpH at ground level is likely deafening and with most cities already having bylaws controlling when Aircraft may land or takeoff it is unlikely this may receive an exemption. Additionally it makes little sense to cross even the largest city with something like this since acceleration time to get up to cruise speed would reduce the benefit acrued.
That cross-country/continent part would be interesting though. North America was built on the back of "The Train". Replacing the existing North American train routes with one of these babies would make the train once more a viable travel solution. Certainly less costly economically and environmentally - especially if this:
He says the next step will be to reduce the speed at which the Aerotrain lifts off, so that the amount of time in contact with the track is kept to a minimum. That will cut friction and therefore overall energy consumption. The goal is to reduce pollution emissions to 36 grams of carbon dioxide per person per kilometre, compared with 122 grams for maglev trains.
is a trend which continues. What I would like to see are some costs analysis, estimating what the full scale train would cost to build and to run. Not to mention how much the infrastructure upgrades would be..
whoa...trippy (Score:1)
ICQ: 49636524
snowphoton@mindspring.com
Pollution measurement - any comparison figures? (Score:1)
Such as planes (large & small), your average family saloon, an SUV, a 50cc moped, etc...?
URL that works (Score:1)
Re:Dimensions? (Score:1)
Maglev has the benefit of using the Maglev "mechanism" to both levitate the train and move it forward -- replacing the track, wheels and engine of a traditional train. The WIG effect is used to replace the track and wheels. Propellers driven by electric, diesel-electric or turbine engines are needed for thrust. And yes, they will be noisy. Spend a few minutes on the ramp at the local airport. Better yet, talk to someone who has heard that hovercraft that takes passengers and cars across the English Channel. It uses BIG propellers to drive it forward. Maglev would have none of this noise.
One reason we are looking for an alternative to current wheel/track design has to do with the degree of precision required in designing, building and maintaining a track intended for use at very high speeds. Because Maglev (and WIG) are non-contact techniques, they can get by with looser specs for their "tracks".
More information on WIG Aircraft (Score:2)
url error (Score:1)
Hybrid Maglev/WIG train ? (Score:2)
In my first year of highschool I made a similar system - it was essentially the same design as in the picture, except with a R/C car with triling line to pull it along. On that scale it was trivial to make a model that would go about 2" off the ground.
For a production model of this train you would expect it to ride about 1.5 - 2 feet above the tracks. Any closer and you have to spend too much time cleaning the track path to make it financially viable.
The best solution would be to combine MagLev technology with the WIG train, have Maglev at stations, thus minimising time to get the train up to a high enough speed to use WIG. This keeps the costs of MagLev to a minimum, and the energy inefficiency of long time ground contact to a minimum.
just my thoughts - one last thing, in a MagLev train, how do they shield everything from the fields? or i guess it wouldn't matter since its not oscillating....
thats all folks
Re:Smallish problem? (Score:1)
I'd think that these are what they want to replace the bullet trains with.
Re:Wing in Ground? (Score:2)
Hey, actually, if grooves ARE cut into the ground, and only the wings are in these "wing tracks", then they can construct the tracks with control over the shape to maximize the ground effect and at the same time, they don't have to worry about weather and air density having too much effect on the performance of the train.
What if these tracks were tubular? And then the wings can be tubular as well, constructed so that it's like taking an airplane wing and curling it up into a tube. That way, the air pressure going through the middle of the tubular wing would be greater than the pressure outside of it, causing the tubular wing to be riding on a cushion of air that keeps the wing towards the middle of the tubular track. Of course, the shape would have to account for requiring more lift near the bottom due to gravity. Oh, the biggest problem is how to keep the wing attached to the train while trying to keep the track's air pressure high and stable.
Re:Smallish problem? (Score:1)
Re:Too much infrastructure required (Score:1)
WX concerns? (Score:2)
Re:WX concerns? (Score:1)
noise (Score:2)
The comments about self powered tracks seem to suggest they might be looking into a hybrid maglev solution where some form of magnet propulsion could be used (or at least some form of track mounted propulsion) with ta wing providing lift to avoid friction.
____________________
Does it come in HO Gauge? (Score:1)
Re:Smallish problem? (Score:1)
And despite the fact that they are trying to reduce the speed at which the train lifts off the tracks, I doubt anyone would want to use them for normal commuter service. Especially in Tokyo, where you reach the next station 1-2 minutes, doesn't seem too efficient as a replacement for the normal electric trains.
Re:Too much infrastructure required (Score:1)
The bullet trains for the most part are built entirely on raised tracks, so you wouldn't need extra right of way, you would just need to rebuild the track system that is already in place. Of course that is easy to say, but a lot of work to do. Especially if a wider railway is needed, I can imagine all of the existing tunnels would have to be widened considerably; not a fun prospect if you know how many tunnels shinkansen pass through in some parts of the country.
But any non-conventional high speed rail will take lots of work to put in place...
Trains are more fun! (Score:1)
Think about what you have to do to take a plane somewhere. You have to go to an airport, (not as many as train stations), sit on a cramped plane (especially if it's a short distance you are trying to go to, the plane will be tiny). Once you arrive, you are not very close to where you really want to go (once again, because not as many airports).
For a high speed train, as far as boarding and getting off, it's almost like riding a normal train. There are lots more stations, so you often arrive much nearer to your final destination than you would in an airplane. In the end, with a high speed train I feel like I have just taken a trip across town, whereas if I take a plane, I actually feel as if I have really travelled a great distance!
Add in the fact that you can run several high speed trains from point A to point B every hour, you start to see that for certain distances/destinations, trains are much better.
Re:This train uses ground effects (Score:1)
Of course, I don't want them taking the Toukaidou shinkansen offline to do this; that would be a pain!
TCO - was Re:Dimensions? (Score:1)
Re:Dimensions? (Score:1)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
I could just see that, train over a road at rush hour, flying along just fine over the normal cars, somehow adjusting for the natural bumps and curves in them, then WHAM an SUV is in the way.... or a semi or etc..
I don't think using this technology is going to provide a way for freeform flying trains.. it needs to be close to a surface for the WIG effect to happen, and needs to have walls on either side so that it can steer. (be steered?)
You want it higher than cars? Just have to build the track higher..
Flying Trains (Score:1)
Why use a track? Let them roam,
Returning when tired.
There's nothing new in this world... (Score:1)