[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/n/ - Transportation


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 4 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: nfig259-1.gif (56 KB, 454x478)
56 KB
56 KB GIF
Actually, how useful are they in term of reducing the cost? And how much capacity can they get? Is it possible to use their smaller size requirement and construct larger tunnel to make full on double deck subway?
>>
File: ST_SN5000_20061102_001.jpg (223 KB, 900x600)
223 KB
223 KB JPG
>>1200919
Not really useful, if I'm honest.
Costs are far, far higher than traditional metro systems. Even non-traditional 4th Rail rubber tyred metros like in Paris, Montréal or Sapporo get the benefits that a linear motor would, at least in terms of steeper inlines and tighter turns as well as faster accelleration and decelleration.
I think there could be an application of a linear motor in a metro like system, but I feel as if the costs would not only be extortionate for inital construction, but the complexity would be too much for any non-Japanese city.
Therein lies an interesting point. Only Japan has invested in suspension monorails, standard monorails and high speed maglev, despite the fact that standard conventional rail is cheaper and easier. China could do it too, but that depends on the Chinese being interested.

Honestly, I think light rail metro the DLR in London or the LRT-1 in Manilla would be easier to implement, even if you need the need to deal with steep inclines or turns, rubber tyred metros would be much cheaper to implement.
>>
>>1200919
Refer to that fat debt burden held by toei on that horrid oedo line.
>>
>>1200946
Oedo Line is because of the structure, depth, and river crossings. Doubt on how much cost savings conventional rail can bring on this alignment.
Other steel-on-steel / steel-wheeled linear motor metro are far more problematic.

>>1200926
> costs would not only be extortionate for inital construction
> complexity would be too much for any non-Japanese city
> Only Japan has invested in suspension monorails, standard monorails and high speed maglev, despite the fact that standard conventional rail is cheaper and easier
Tokyo has extensive through service interconnecting systems. The usual argument for conventional rail in this case isn't that applicable. Oedo Line is a niche that's expensive to be fulfilled in any case as more or less an independent system, and it claims to serve natural disaster relief purposes.
>>
>>1200926
BYD from China seems to be investing heavily on monorail though although they seems to be eyeing for associated rights while selling those systems




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.