What are your thoughts on modifying conventional railway infrastructure, including traditional railroad switch technology, to allow conventional tracks to be used for maglev trains?I was considering whether improvements in electrification could enable this modified infrastructure to reduce the need for frequent electrical substations or repeaters, potentially allowing them to be spaced much farther apart than the catenary poles used on the fastest high-speed railways.Below are some suggested ideas for improving maglev track-switching technology, inspired by the widely-used standard gauge tracks:>Track switching for a magnetically levitated transportation system and method: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7757609B2/en>Magnetic Transport Systems (MTS) has developed a game-changing breakthrough in railroad technology: https://www.magnetictransportsystems.com/magLEVrail.shtmlThoughts?
>>2019129>Thoughts?Obvious bullshit. It'd be trivial to build a tabletop demonstrator if it actually worked.
>>2019129>What are your thoughts on modifying conventional railway infrastructure, including traditional railroad switch technology, to allow conventional tracks to be used for maglev trains?Literally why would you do this you wouldn't be able to run trains any faster. If you want a 0 emissions train just electrify for Christ sake. Don't take techbros seriously when it comes to railroads, they have no idea what they're doing and just make a shittier version of what already exists.
>>2019129Sounds like a lot of money and effort for small gain.
>>2019129I just don't believe regular train tracks can be modified to accept maglev trains without significant compromises to both systems. At best, you could install regular train tracks in an SCmaglev trough, since it's basically just a concrete road with magnets on each side wall.
>>2019129Maglev is a meme.
>>2019129sounds retarded. if maglev trains don't have their dedicated right of way they still are limited to all sorts of restrictions, especially from conventional trains using those tracks. people that would even consider that idea are also people that think using a freeway shoulder as a bike path is a good idea (no joke this actually exists in sydney)
>>2019255>>2019218>>2019180You are thinking from very close-minded perspective and are completely missing my point. My point is that it’s possible to maintain the same dimensional and size specifications, as well as the existing requirements, while repurposing the internal mechanisms of the rails used in intercity passenger and high-speed corridors. This would allow for the incorporation of maglev technology without needing to completely re-engineer the track system. For example, I envision something similar to the wider rails used for rubber-tired rolling stock in cities like Paris, Montreal, Toulouse, Marseille, and Mexico City, which could be adapted for maglev use.
>>2019395Then you have to slow the maglev down to whatever speeds your metro or conventional train runs at, or leave enormous headways to accommodate them. Maglev is a gadgetbahn anyway.
>>2019395>i envision something similar to metro trains that virtually never go faster than 80km/hIt's hard to miss a reasonable point if you don't provide one
>>2019399>>i envision something similar to metro trains that virtually never go faster than 80km/hI did not say that, and by the way the speed prohibitive aspects are more related to curvature, I don't know why you are conflating my point to the entire concept subsisting on the same coherent metro system infrastructure, I was specifying on the track-related aspect in terms of design.>It's hard to miss a reasonable point if you don't provide oneIf this is your conclusion on my earlier stated point then I am sorry to say that you fail to comprehend even basic grammar.
>>2019129So let's just look at the pros and cons of maglev vs conventional railMaglev Pros>Quick acceleration>High top speeds>Relatively stable, though this is usually tied to how the track is designedMaglev Cons>Energy intensive>Massive start up expenses>Uses a shit load of magnets>Low limits on vehicle load>Relatively little rolling stock and infrastructure to tie intoRail Pros>Greater weight capacity>Cheap to build and upgrade>Ties into networks that have existed for over a century by nowRail cons>Slower acceleration>Lower top speeds unless built like as a dedicated HSRSo, the benefits to maglev are really only applicable when on a HSR ROW. So you may be thinking "oh great we can do this joint-maglev/HSR track in place of other HSR standards". Except that's fucking retarded. Those two technologies literally fill the same niche, so you'd be doubling project expenses to do the same thing twice.>>2019400If you want to replace the metro trains with maglev, just rip the rails out and lay down maglev tracks instead. It's probably cheaper, more effective, and there's at least some outstanding data on maintenance, efficiency, and safety.
>>2019180>Don't take techbros seriously when it comes to railroads, they have no idea what they're doing and just make a shittier version of what already exists.That applies more widely. Don't take techbros seriously at all.
>>2019444>Don't take techbros seriously at all.Pretty much. Their job is to oversell things they bearly understand to people who don't understand will give them fuck tons of money with no expectation of making a profit in the next 10 years. Whole sections of the tech industry are fundamentally broken when it comes to the investment side of things.
