this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
234 points (94.0% liked)

Asklemmy

49691 readers
1063 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

They were invented decades ago.

They have fewer moving parts than wheelbois.

They require less maintenance.

There's obviously some bottleneck in expanding maglev technology, but what is it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 52 points 2 years ago (12 children)

The same reason supersonic passenger jets are rare.

The extra speed comes with a massive increase in costs.

Travel 30% faster than high speed rail for 10-20 times the cost.

[โ€“] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago (11 children)

Is the claim about "10-20 times the cost" true? The internet says Shanghai maglev cost $1.33 billion for 30.5 km, i.e. less than $44 million/km. Compare https://transitcosts.com/new-data/ or https://transitcosts.com/high-speed-rail-preliminary-data-analysis/

Secondly, if it is true, why would it be true? Why would it be more expensive to build something with fewer moving parts?

Supersonic passeenger jets require more energy. Maglev trains require less energy.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Maglev's top speed record is just 5% faster than conventional train speed record. Thus if Maglev is more than 5% more expensive, then it doesn't make any sense to build them.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Speed records aren't usually representative of regular use top speeds, are they?

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

Well, if we look at actual maglev deployments in the real world, then they are much slower than conventional trains. All of them top out at 160kph, while conventional trains going below 200kph don't even count as high speed. There's only one Maglev line in the world which actually goes fast. So if we want to talk about regular speed representation, maglevs are slow and useless.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)