# Las Vegas Maglev is not dead



## DowneasterPassenger (Feb 2, 2010)

Train To Bring Thousands Of Jobs To Las Vegans


----------



## MikefromCrete (Feb 2, 2010)

Interesting, since China's not even building Maglev in its own country. I think this will become another maglev dream that will crash and die.


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 2, 2010)

MikefromCrete said:


> Interesting, since China's not even building Maglev in its own country. I think this will become another maglev dream that will crash and die.


Aloha

You may be right, but it may also be a way of getting some of the money back we keep sending to China.


----------



## DowneasterPassenger (Feb 2, 2010)

I'm pondering what would happen if somehow they got Maglev, DesertXpress, and the Desert Wind all going !


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Feb 2, 2010)

MikefromCrete said:


> Interesting, since China's not even building Maglev in its own country. I think this will become another maglev dream that will crash and die.


China's 30km maglev train.


----------



## George Harris (Feb 2, 2010)

PetalumaLoco said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting, since China's not even building Maglev in its own country. I think this will become another maglev dream that will crash and die.
> ...


The Shanghai Airport maglev. It runs from the edge of the city to the airport and operates only a limited number of hours per day, so if your flight is late afternoon or evening, you will find it closed.

Consider this thing as being a size test bed and nothing more. I have heard that it was intended to be a trial installation to judge the practicality of running Maglev between Shanghai and Beijing. The result of the test? No. Build a standard high speed railway instead.

It is the German technology maglev and was built with German oversight.


----------



## DET63 (Feb 2, 2010)

Is a monorail confined to one track, or is there a way to switch trains from one track to another if and when necessary? It seems that one of the advantages of conventional rail is that switching trains from one track to another is a fairly simple and foolproof process.


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 2, 2010)

DET63 said:


> Is a monorail confined to one track, or is there a way to switch trains from one track to another if and when necessary? It seems that one of the advantages of conventional rail is that switching trains from one track to another is a fairly simple and foolproof process.


Aloha

Switching a monoral is no more complex than any other train. The difference is a beam is moved back and forth for the route desired, rather than "bending" the rails


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Feb 3, 2010)

I couldn't find a real world monorail switch, but I did find a modeled one (in software).




Found a photo


----------



## GG-1 (Feb 3, 2010)

PetalumaLoco said:


> I couldn't find a real world monorail switch, but I did find a modeled one (in software).


So much for not bending the beam. previously the switches I have seen, had a beam pair that rolled between the routes

If you want more on monorail go Here.


----------



## George Harris (Feb 3, 2010)

DET63 said:


> Is a monorail confined to one track, or is there a way to switch trains from one track to another if and when necessary? It seems that one of the advantages of conventional rail is that switching trains from one track to another is a fairly simple and foolproof process.


Where did monorail come from? We had been talking abuot Maglev. These are two very different animals.


----------



## transit54 (Feb 3, 2010)

George Harris said:


> DET63 said:
> 
> 
> > Is a monorail confined to one track, or is there a way to switch trains from one track to another if and when necessary? It seems that one of the advantages of conventional rail is that switching trains from one track to another is a fairly simple and foolproof process.
> ...


Well a maglev is effectively a form of monorail, isn't it?


----------



## George Harris (Feb 3, 2010)

transit54 said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > DET63 said:
> ...


No, not at all.

Monorails run on wheels, actually multiple wheels, as there are wheels on top to support and propel the vehicle and wheels on both sides to keep it upright and on top of the beam. Bicycle principles do not work for this stuff. Most of the systems out there, Disney and Seattle have rubber tires.

Maglev is magnetic levitation. That is the train is held slightly above the guideway and propelled along it by magnetic forces. Due to the electrical force required to levitate the vehicle, these things use *a lot* more energy than a vehicle on rails. There are two basic systems out there: The German version where the vehicle wraps around the guideway for lateral guidance and the Japanese version where the vvehicle sits in a flat bottomed U shaped trough for lateral guidance.

Neither Maglev nor Monorail meet the requirement for a means of safe evacuation as required in NFPA 130 in either letter or spirit. Because the Shanghai Airport maglev is in an urbanized area, the one occasion that evacuation was necessary they were able to reach it with fire department ladders, so the passengers could climb down the ladders.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Feb 3, 2010)

George Harris said:


> ...
> Maglev is magnetic levitation. That is the train is held slightly above the guideway and propelled along it by magnetic forces. Due to the electrical force required to levitate the vehicle, these things use *a lot* more energy than a vehicle on rails.
> 
> ...


Not according to Wikipedia.

"The power needed for levitation is usually not a particularly large percentage of the overall consumption; most of the power used is needed to overcome air drag, as with any other high speed train."

Another Wikipedia entry here.

And here, see page 3.

The faster the train, the more advantage maglev has over steel wheels. Also, steel wheeled HSR is running into problems going faster with overhead power.


----------



## George Harris (Feb 3, 2010)

PetalumaLoco said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...


All nice promotional lliterature, and yes I do mean the Wikipedia articles as well, and that is being somewhat polite. Some of it is more like puff pieces.

According to some published discussion, the main reason that Shanghai Beijing is going to be a regular high speed railroad rather than maglev is their experience with the Shanghai Airport maglev.

For either one, maglev or high speed railroad, at high speeds, say over 150 mph, the major proportion of both energy consumption and noise production is aerodynamic, which would be the same either way. Given that trains have operated successfully under overhead power at over 300 mph, saying that higher speeds under wire is a problem is unsupported by reality. As yet, we do not have any meaningful length of maglev necessary to give real-world answers to the concerns. The costs of rail and high speed rail are sufficiently well known that there is little question on that side of the equation, but for the Maglev, we have little but studies and analyses by the promoters.


----------

