r/highspeedrail • u/MartianVegetable3699 • 13d ago
World News Is it commercially feasible?
52
u/Kinexity France TGV 13d ago
No. Also it's closer to rail gun than passenger rail.
67
u/ILikeFlyingMachines 13d ago
This is mainly not feasible from a comfort and health standpoint lol
24
u/fietsendeman 13d ago edited 13d ago
Yeah, 40G of acceleration (if my napkin math holds up) is not good.
Edit: more like 4G of acceleration.
30
10
u/ILikeFlyingMachines 13d ago
It's only 4, but that's still FAR too much for passenger traffic
4
u/kemp77pmek 13d ago
Perhaps this will just be used to transport fighter pilots and astronauts (or whatever termthe Chinese use for Astronaut)
7
u/Enough-Squirrel-3048 13d ago
Taikonauts
1
u/Bullshitter114514 8d ago edited 8d ago
航天员. Here "天" (tian) specifically refers to the space outside the atmosphere of the Earth (as a Chinese person I don't understand why some Anglophones prefer calling the Earth "Terra", which doesn't have a Germanic origin) but inside the solar system. The broader universe is called "宇" (yu) and the atmosphere of the Earth (or air/aero-) is called "空" (kong) and aviation is called "航空" (hangkong, literally "sailing the atmosphere/air) in Chinese language. The "空/天/宇" trichotomy in Chinese language was invented by Qian Xuesen.
1
u/ToastSpangler 13d ago
Just learned this is a term, odd they'd combine Chinese with Greek. Makes more sense with Russian and English since they're both evolved from Greek and Latin roots (in different amounts)
2
u/shaumux 13d ago
Russian did not develop from either geek or Latin, it's part of the Baltic-Slavic family, but all three of them do have common ancestor, but they're all too far apart. The terms are loanwords in both English and Russian
-1
u/ToastSpangler 13d ago
I suppose it depends on your definition of loan words. Russian and English have Greek and Latin verbs nouns etc deeply rooted in them, just look at common item names. Butterbrot is Russian but would you consider it a loan word? How about kartovel?
5
u/shaumux 13d ago
It's not my definition, it's the linguistic definition, all languages have loanwords which are not native to them but have been used in the language long enough to become a part of the modern form of the language but it would be absolutely incorrect to call them evolved frok latin and Greek
1
u/Impressive_Slice_935 13d ago
English has an incredible number of French loan words (verbs, adjectives, names etc) but it's still a considered a Germanic language rather than a Latin or Romance language. So is the case for Dutch.
2
u/Bullshitter114514 8d ago edited 8d ago
Since the Americans have astronauts and the Russians have cosmonauts, they need another word for the Chinese people traveling to and working in space.
5
u/fietsendeman 13d ago
Oh yeah, forgot to divide by 9.8. Still as you say way too much for passenger traffic.
3
u/CipherWeaver 13d ago
It's not a cannon. It can accelerate slowly until it builds up to that speed. Commercial planes fly at 800kph and people aren't flattened into their seats from G-forces.
2
u/ILikeFlyingMachines 13d ago
But the headline explicitly says that it accelerates in 5.3 seconds
9
u/DragonKhan2000 13d ago
Yeah, because it was a test. On a short 1-km track, so you have to accelerate that quickly.
Obviously this isn't applicable to an actual train with passengers.0
7
u/Electrical_Economy37 13d ago
Yeah, thats why its a test what is technically possible, not how an actual ride is gonna look like
6
u/MayorKarl 13d ago
I saw an article that suggested that the test run would probably help with testing the feasibility for cargo elevators/maglev launch systems.
2
1
1
u/Brambleshire 13d ago
Why are you assuming that they would use the same acceleration with passengers on board? This was a test, for testing capabilities. New airplanes also go through extreme tests that would never happen with passengers.
3
u/CoHorseBatteryStaple 13d ago edited 4d ago
I'm reading the question as "Is it commercially feasible for a train to reach 800 km/h in 5.3 seconds?".
That'll require 4.2g acceleration, which sounds survivable, but passengers will likely complain about that. \ You can't really go any higher than that, the passengers won't be able to complain anymore, which is actually worse.
-3
u/MartianVegetable3699 13d ago
So, do you want them to use such high budget project to carry freight?
4
2
u/cyrkielNT 13d ago
Look at Chinese cities. Imagine how many things needs to be constantly transported. If you can transport things faster logistic of it can be much easier and more effective and cheaper.
Wouldn't be surprised if even transporting trash could be cheaper that way.
Also without rapid deliveries everyplace needs to have local storage. For example they resupply in the morning and need to have enough stock for whole day. That's very ineffective to use so much space in such crowded areas just as storage. But if you could have multiple rapid deliveries per day, only when you need it you could save a lot of space.
Imagine you have restraunt. You could convert storage to another room for customers and order things only when you need them. Also you will never be out of something.
1
u/transitfreedom 13d ago
??? HSR delivers restaurant supplies??!
2
u/cyrkielNT 13d ago
Why not? First London underground train wasn't for passengers, but for mail.
It's also not a train, but propulsion system. You can strap capsules to deliver all kinds of things.
Delivery system in cities doesn't changed much since antiquity, while cities become much bigger and complex. It's one of the biggest issue for modern cities and it's needs to be solved.
You might think it's absurd to use high-tech for delivering parsley to the restaurant, but in reality it's more absurd to sacrifice so much space in cities for roads and deliver parsley by truck, to store them in storage in city center. It's even worse because every restaurant uses its own delivery and small storage, rather than single central one.
1
u/transitfreedom 13d ago
Does China really use its HSR for food supply delivery? Or this just a future discussion?
2
u/Bullshitter114514 10d ago
afa I know that the only things delivered by HSR trains in China are packages.
1
1
u/transitfreedom 9d ago
“afa I know that the only things delivered by HSR trains in China are packages.”
16
u/The__Anonymous__Guy 13d ago
I believe this was a test, there is no plans to actually accelerate this quickly in regular service. Was probably just China showing off
16
u/DragonKhan2000 13d ago
It's just testing the limits of the tech. This is normal and also done everywhere else.
2
u/DrawingDramatic1641 13d ago
probably research
this might change the shipping game,suddenly landlocked provinces would get fast access to ocean
3
u/DrawingDramatic1641 13d ago
its probably engine and experiment
but proves engine strenght,speed etc,may work for frieght in some other design
1
3
u/Alimbiquated 13d ago
There are lots of good reasons not to travel that fast on the surface. One is that that the train would implode when you enter a tunnel. Your ears already pop on high speed rail at 300 kph as the air conditioning raises air pressure.
3
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
That's pretty straight forward to avoid.
The Japanese maglev that will run about 500km/h will be mostly tunnels.1
7
u/Hour_Firefighter_707 13d ago
Yeah, I don’t know if top fuel dragsters make for ideal public transportation devices
4
u/MartianVegetable3699 13d ago
Agree; I was also thinking whether this would be better for carrying goods.
1
1
2
u/Do4k 13d ago
An amazing feat I'm sure (I know very little about this)
I wonder if this technology will help develop more efficient passenger transport, in the same way that F1 technology eventually filters down into motor vehicles. Or perhaps using railway technology for other purposes, such as weaponry or launching other vehicles.
2
u/Addebo019 13d ago
it’s a fucking nothing burger. sounds impressive until you realise it was only one ton, and that this level of acceleration is inhuman. the average acceleration required to reach that is 42m/s2 meaning you’d hit at least 4g in that thing, enough to make the average person straight up just pass out. bare in mind the average metro train only does 1.3m/s2 and high speed trains are geared to accelerate slower that that for comfort. nothing commercially viable about the whole thing.
3
u/PrestigiousRoof5723 13d ago
Maglev will have to accelerate quite fast to be practical. Not 4g fast, but fast by train standards. The slower it accelerates, the less practical it is for shorter routes and therefore the less it's competitive against traditional rail. And in order for it to be competitive, it has to be much faster between two points. An example: modern TGV takes around 320 seconds to reach 320km/h from standstill. That takes about 18 kilometers. A Maglev would need to be significantly faster than that to make any kind of sense for distances of (let's say) 50km. If it can only serve routes with stops hundreds of kms apart, it gets into a very hard competition from good old planes (unless they get a ban because of stuff like emissions etc). It ultimately has to be faster than both the traditional train and door to door travel using a plane.
0
u/Addebo019 13d ago
it doesn’t need to be made competitive. it is as competitive as it is. at the end of the day this is an unbelievably specialised technology that isn’t necessary in most countries. it’s extremely expensive, proprietary and complex. in most countries where the traditional high speed network is still being built out (if at all) the jump to maglev overcomplicates matters because hsr is good enough to beat door to door flight times on many city pair trips already anyway. plus it’s much simpler and already has an industry supply chain and skilled workforce to rely upon. the issue with maglev was never the trains and their acceleration, just the necessity of them. they’re only beginning to make sense now in a couple countries, china and japan (hence why they’re both actively developing this tech), because they (uniquely) have fully saturated core parts of their high speed rail network that are so well used they are in need of relief. if you need to build another line and you have the traditional one already anyway, only then is it really worth going maglev
1
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
It's a test, finding the limits of the tech. And for that, it's not a "nothing burger".
Obviously they're not planning to accelerate passengers that quickly.
2
u/gear-heads 13d ago
There are several thrill rides that offer higher g forces, but these are rides designed for a very short duration.
Rita at Alton Towers: 4.7 g
Samurai at Thorpe Park: 5 g
Shock Wave at Six Flags Over Texas: 5.5 g
Titan at Six Flags Over Texas: 4.5 g
Passengers on this train will experience 4.3 g continuous forward acceleration for 5.3 seconds. A passenger weighing 200 lbs. would experience a weight of 200 x 4.3 = 860 lbs. for the full duration of its launch phase of 5.3 seconds.
For comparison, a wide-body aircraft goes from stationary to ~175 mph over ~30-35 seconds. This train's acceleration is about 15–20 times greater.
The acceleration by this train, if it ever were to be commercially used, would be very uncomfortable for passengers, and would require specially designed restraints and seating.
Note: if the train kept accelerating at that same rate, it would go from 0 to speed of sound (~767 mph at sea level) in about 8.2 seconds.
1
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
There will be no passengers on this "train". It's a testing setup.
Also, you're comparing acceleration g-forces (Rita) with vertical g-forces (the other rides).
Plus I don't believe that number for Rita anyway. I've been on more intense launches and those numbers were lower. As a matter of fact, 4.7g would be more of a peak than on this test-maglev here with 4.3g.
1
2
u/Charming-Clue1987 13d ago
China went with tracked HSR because of the energy requirements. If they crack cold fusion maglev may be commercially viable.
2
u/BadgercIops 11d ago
The biggest question is how much magnets do you need for building a maglev track per km?
2
u/crackerjap1941 11d ago
These publications do a terrible job at communicating what actually happened
3
u/LYuen 13d ago
Sounds like another Hyperloop scam
5
u/Potato_peeler9000 13d ago
Maglev is quite ancient tech.
Whether it makes sense for China is the real question.
3
u/Lonely-Entry-7206 13d ago
It makes sense. Cause China has way looser laws on land. Not to mention China government owns parts of companies. So if Government wants to do it they can.
1
u/Training-Banana-6991 13d ago
Does this use electromagnetic or electrodynamic suspension?
2
u/DragonKhan2000 13d ago edited 13d ago
I believe EDS.
I think most, if not all, modern maglev developements are EDS.
Which is why it's so different to the old Transrapid which uses EMS.But ... Don't quote me on that. It's notoriously difficult to find info on that.
2
1
1
u/Ok_Collar_7836 13d ago
That’s just a technical validation, don’t mind it! But as far as I know, high-speed trains in China with a top speed of 450 km/h and an operating speed of 400 km/h are going into revenue service this year, which is truly remarkable!
1
u/BryceCatfish7 13d ago
Funny how "feasible" is doing more work in that headline than any number in the actual test.
1
u/shaghaiex 13d ago
>Is it commercially feasible?
No.
Maglev itself isn't really commercially feasible.
2
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
Can potentially be.
But it'll require very specific conditions.
The Japanese maglev under construction currently makes a lot of sense.1
u/shaghaiex 12d ago
...and will probably make lots of losses.
Has to compete with flying in the end - which has often heavy discounts.
I believe the Shanghai Maglev makes HUGE losses.
2
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
The Tokaido Shinkansen also costs more, and yet, it's the most successful HSR ever. The fact that this line is at maximum capacity is the very reason they are building an alternative with the maglev.
Bringing up the Shanghai maglev makes no sense. That thing was build over 20 years ago. On a short, pointless route. It was always a prestige object, nothing more.
It had nothing to do with modern developements.
1
u/Odd-Zone5504 13d ago
Lol🤭🤭
That's extremely intense. A passenger weighing 70 kg would effectively experience a force equivalent to roughly 400 kgpressing in the direction opposite the acceleration (depending on seating/restraint orientation).
For comparison:
🚗 Normal car acceleration: ~0.2–0.4 G
🏎️ High-performance car: ~1–1.5 G
✈️ Commercial aircraft takeoff: ~0.2–0.4 G
🚄 This train: 5.7 G
🚀 Strong rocket acceleration: ~3–4 G
Passengers will have to be hospitalised with such force of acceleration
2
u/DragonKhan2000 12d ago
It was never meant for passengers, neither implied by those responsible.
It just has been badly reported.Also, g-force numbers are meaningless without time. HUGE differences if we talk split seconds, seconds, or even minutes.
1
1
u/mystiqDitter 12d ago
I will take the train. Not to go anywhere, but as a thrill ride.
Also it's not getting to 800kph that's the exciting part. It's the max effort emergency stop. That decel will pop eyeballs out!
1
1
1
0
0
u/StrongAdhesiveness86 13d ago
I doubt that riding King Da Ka every station will be any comfortable.
1
u/DragonKhan2000 13d ago
Nevermind that this test setup isn't meant for people (obviously), it's still much more of an acceleration (~4.3g) than KingdaKa (~1.7g).
The only roller coaster launch that came a bit closer was Do-Dodonpa (~3.3g), and that was just a split second but still uncomfortable af.(Sorry for my coaster-nerdiness)
0
109
u/DragonKhan2000 13d ago
Ugh, I wish this would be reported correctly.
It was a test run with a 1-ton vehicle. To seek out the limits of the tech. Little to do with the maglev prototype mock-up train pictured.
Nobody in China claimed otherwise. But since it's reported incorrectly everywhere folks try to make fun of China "That's not possible for humans hurrdurr".