Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Converting traditional trains to mag lev

  • 11-06-2015 3:22pm
    #1
    carlowplayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 519 ✭✭✭


    How faster and more energy efficient are maglevs over traditional trains that require train tracks and would it be practical and expensive would it be to convert them to maglev


Comments

  • #2
    munchkin_utd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,921 ✭✭✭munchkin_utd


    I think you need to do a bit of research as there seems to be a lack of comprehension of the 2 systems

    Regular rail and mag lev are completely incompatible which is the main drawback of mag lev.
    A completely new and expensive parallel track to existing services suspended above ground is needed which is one of the reasons the planned lines in Germany never got built.


  • #3
    carlowplayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 519 ✭✭✭carlowplayer


    munchkin_utd wrote: »
    I think you need to do a bit of research as there seems to be a lack of comprehension of the 2 systems

    Regular rail and mag lev are completely incompatible which is the main drawback of mag lev.
    A completely new and expensive parallel track to existing services suspended above ground is needed which is one of the reasons the planned lines in Germany never got built.
    I guess "converting" would be the wrong phrase I guess "replacing" would be a better term
    But would it economically feasible to build maglev tracks in a different area/ network and then decommissioning older traditional tracks be economically feasible


  • #4
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,805 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    carlowplayer wrote: »
    I guess "converting" would be the wrong phrase I guess "replacing" would be a better term
    But would it economically feasible to build maglev tracks in a different area/ network and then decommissioning older traditional tracks be economically feasible

    Are you sure "MagLev" is cheaper than traditional trains ???


  • #5
    BoatMad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭BoatMad


    I've yet to see 400 tons maglev freight trains !!!


  • #6
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,130 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Ask new media darling Catherine Murphy how practical it is, as she once claimed the Maynooth line could go maglev to avoid raising / replacing bridges for catenary (when she was a councillor).


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Rawr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,259 ✭✭✭Rawr


    L1011 wrote: »
    Ask new media darling Catherine Murphy how practical it is, as she once claimed the Maynooth line could go maglev to avoid raising / replacing bridges for catenary (when she was a councillor).

    I wonder if she mistook 'maglev' to mean 'Third-rail power'? :D

    Oslo_017.jpg

    In some systems the powered 3rd rails are raised slightly to the side of the track (like here with the Oslo metro) and a 3rd-rail pickup shoe from the train slides underneath the rail to get power. I supposed if you didn't know better you might mistake this to be some form of maglev :D


Advertisement