Maglev train idea for Northeast resurfaces

[happyslug]

14. I did use the word "untested" but I meant "Untested" in the real world.

Compared to steel rail, a system that has been used (i.e. "Tested in the real world&quot since the 1890s when Steel Rail replaced older Iron Rails, maganetic elevation is untested. In two of the three existing use of MAGLEV, one broke down to to a lack of spare parts in 1995, The Germans closed theirs down for what appears to be the same same in 2012 and even the Chinese are questioning the variability of their MAGLEV, calling it a white elephant. These attempts when compared to the massive use of Steel Rail shows how untested in the real world MAGLEV is.

Thus the real probem with MAGLEV is it is inferior to Steel Rail at distances below 500 miles and speeds of less then 200 mph, and inferior to air travel at distances over 500 miles and speeds exceeding 200 mph. The Technology was first patented in 1905, it was possible to build a MAGLEV by 1939. This is very old technology. The problem with MAGLEV is it is a solution looking for a problem to solve, not solution to a known problem.

Furthermore the longest track in Japan is 26.6 miles not 300:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCMaglev

Now, the Japanese Government has agreed to build a 438-499 km (270-310 miles) MAGLEV between Tokyo and Nagoya but the final route has not yet been selected. I think this is where you are getting your 300 plus miles of MAGLEV in Japan from, i.e. what is proposed to be built not what is in actual operation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen

The route was picked for the older Tokaido route, which goes 170 mph and is maxed out as to passengers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokaido_Shinkansen

Here is a map of both route, the present high speed train (top speed 170 mph) is in heavy yellow. The proposed MAGLEV line is the light yellow line. Notice it cuts through the mountains permitting a shorter trip. Between the shorter route, reduction in in between stops (to be left on the older train route which is to be kept) and that it is to be MAGLEV, will reduce the time of the trip. Will the reduction in time be worth it is another question.



In many ways these two routes shows the problem the US would have with a MAGLEV program, the US will first have to get people to use rail then upgrade to a MAGLEV (which is what Japan is doing) not built something that may never be used given the restrictions on using a super high speed high volume traffic train.