Transportation Bill Sets Aside $45 Million For MagLev Train

tbischel tips us to news that the MagLev train project which would run from Las Vegas to Disneyland has received approval for $45 million in funding. The project has been in the planning stages for quite some time, and it was delayed further by a drafting error in a 2005 highway bill. "Derided by critics as pie in the sky, the train would use magnetic levitation technology to carry passengers from Disneyland to Las Vegas in well under two hours, traveling at speeds of up to 300 mph. It would be the first MagLev system in the U.S. The money is the largest cash infusion in the project's nearly 20-year history. It will pay for environmental studies for the first leg of the project."

Trains, US?

[skeldoy (831110)]

Trains in the US & A? Can this really be true?
Surely this must involve burning of insane amounts of petroleum somehow! Maybe the magnets are powered by petroleum?

Re:Trains, US?

[by Anonymous Coward]

Trains in the US & A? Can this really be true? Surely this must involve burning of insane amounts of petroleum somehow! Maybe the magnets are powered by petroleum?

He's a heretic. BURN HIM!

Re:Trains, US?

[mrbluze (1034940)]

He's a heretic. BURN HIM!

.. with petroleum! Ahh.. that feels better.

From Vegas to Mouse-land?

[denzacar (181829)]

It is not a train.

Its a ride.

Re:Trains, US?

[tompaulco (629533)]

Trains in the US & A? Can this really be true?
We have trains in the United States. I know. I just priced taking the train instead of the airplane for a possible upcoming vacation. It turns out that the train is more than twice as expensive as the plane and takes two days instead of 5 hours.
The point was moot anyway as it turns out I am not in the class of people that can afford to go on vacation.

Re:Trains, US?

[larkost (79011)]

I recently took the train from Philadelphia to San Francisco, and the trip was really nice. It took 3 1/2 days, but was in the same price range as flight tickets (it really depends on when you buy them). The ride was pleasent, and people aboard the train were very willing to talk (unlike on a flight). And the views were absolutely gorgeous.

If you have the time, I would recomend the trip.

Oh.. and if you are willing to sit in a chair the whole way you can get the trip for something like $100. I am not going to recommend that, but it is possible.

Re:Trains, US?

[Urza9814 (883915)]

Hmm. I take the train all the time. I suppose it may not be great for cross-country travelling, but you can go the entire way across PA in 5 hours for about $70. Business class, snack car...free drinks, power outlets, and you can actually use your cell phone. lol. Not to mention it's a _lot_ nicer. The business class on a plane are ancient seats, sometimes with holes where the padding is falling out, crammed together. It's horrible. In the space that a plane seats 30+ people, the train puts 15.

Re:Trains, US?

[CastrTroy (595695)]

I was going to say the same thing. Trains can be good for shorter trips. You can get from downtown(ish) Ottawa, to downtown (real downtown) Toronto in 5 hours. The flight is only 45 minutes, but once you count check-in, security, boarding, taken-off, and travelling from the airport to downtown, you're looking at about the same amount of time anyway. Both are roughly the same price, but the train seats are a lot more comfortable, and the whole experience is much more pleasant.

Lots of trains in the USA

[tjstork (137384)]

Trains in the US & A? Can this really be true?

Actually, the bulk of continental freight shipped in the USA is by rail. Have a look at the rolling stock of the likes of Union Pacific, Norfolk Suffolk or CSX, and you'll see that there's been quite a bit going on.

For example, cars are just getting into gas electric hybrids, but the railroads have been running diesel electric hybrids now for decades. The locomotives are now into a new generation of hybrid technology.

The fuel efficiency of these rail lines is staggering. One or two locomotives pull trains that can be two miles long!

But you are preaching to the choir here. I love trains.

Re:Lots of trains in the USA

[jimicus (737525)]

For example, cars are just getting into gas electric hybrids, but the railroads have been running diesel electric hybrids now for decades. The locomotives are now into a new generation of hybrid technology.

They're not hybrids in the same sense of the word. A diesel electric train is basically a dirty great diesel electricity generator which powers an electric motor. There's no drive between diesel engine and wheels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel-electric_locomotive#Diesel-electric [wikipedia.org]

Re:Lots of trains in the USA

[Firethorn (177587)]

I wouldn't call it 'dirty'. For a diesel they're quite clean, considering their power and size.

There's no drive between diesel engine and wheels.

I also wouldn't consider a mechanical link between the engine and the wheels a disabling factor for calling it a 'hybrid'. That's how GM is proposing the volt be set up, actually.

What would disable it is that, unlike car hybrids, current generation diesel electrics don't have any significant levels of alternative storage - they can't store energy from stopping to get started again.

Instead, the reason they use the electronics is that it's replacing the transmission - which would actually be more costly, less efficient and break sooner than the electronic setup. Oh, they'll use the electric motors to help them stop, saving brake pads, but instead of going to a battery the energy goes to a resister net on the roof of the locomotive.

Personally, given that trains normally go for non-stop travel, I wonder if it might be better to leave the batteries in the station so the train doesn't have to haul them and electrify the rails, at least in switching yards and such, instead.

Re:Trains, US?

[c6gunner (950153)]

Allowing real high speed trains in the US is a threat to our dependence on foreign oil, and the foreign lobbyists simply won't ALLOW it. At some point there will be no wide open spaces left for these trains, and then the public (nimbys) will be against trains on their own, without opposition from Big Oil.

It's amazing how much paranoia has become ingrained in certain subsections of modern western society.

You know, I too enjoyed watching X-Files in my youth ... but if I had realized that it would help establish an entire generation of raving lunatics, I'd have gotten some funding set aside at the pentagon to have the CIA assassinate Fox Moulder .....

Re:Trains, US?

[Original Replica (908688)]

It's amazing how much paranoia has become ingrained in certain subsections of modern western society.

In terms of the American political world, given how often what is called "paranoia" turns out to be close enough to fact twenty or thirty years later it's not really a surprise. In the 1980s global warming was considered paranoia,even though it had been theorized in 1896. [lenntech.com] Treehuggers were fringe political freaks thirty years ago, now we know that they were mostly right. Orwell's 1984 was thought a bit over the top during most of it's literary history. But thoughtcrime and doublethink are a modern reality. Predictions of government abuse of "anti-terrorism" laws were written off as treasonously unpatriotic just six years ago.
Given how much "Big Oil" countries have been investing in the US, it would be foolish to think that they didn't have considerable influence here in the US, both through lobbists and through business and real estae acquisitions. Also given is the oil import/export relationship is the prime source of income to most OPEC countries, it only makes sense that they would act to protect it. Maglev trains powered by stationary nuclear plants don't burn nearly as much imported oil as jumbo jets. Now exactly how successful they would be in their efforts to block the progression of an oil free infrastructure taking hold in the US is a potential topic for debate, but the fact that they will use what considerable influence they can to that end would seem obvious.

Re:Trains, US?

[SuperQ (431)]

How about this:

http://www.bts.gov/publications/freight_in_america/html/table_01.html [bts.gov]

The US moves (by weight):
Truck: 60%
Train: 10%
Boat: 8%
Pipeline: 18%
Mixed-mode: 1%
Other 2%

The interesting thing is the ton-miles table where Trains are much closer to Trucks.

I used to work at a mid-sized auto parts company. We had a fleet of about 20 trucks that would move things from Minnesota to about half of the country, mostly on the east side. I always thought it was fairly in-efficient that we had trucks that would go all the way to Texas instead of driving it into Minneapolis (55 miles), then shipping it via train to Dallas where a local truck would take it to a warehouse for store distribution.

Critics

[LaskoVortex (1153471)]

Derided by critics as pie in the sky

Where critics = oil companies and automobile manufacturers

Re:Critics

[azgard (461476)]

Really? I am from Europe, and just have to wonder...

What about building the first Maglev between Washington and New York? What about San Francisco and Los Angeles? What about making it actually useful?

Re: "making it actually useful"

[FurtiveGlancer (1274746)]

I think they are more concerned with making it actually profitable.

Re: "making it actually useful"

[conureman (748753)]

This is USA, home of AMTRAK. Profitable would be cause for concern. It absolutely must not provide a viable alternative to the current system. BART only runs because it is expensive and impractical. Think of the Oil Companies!

Re: "making it actually useful"

[by Anonymous Coward]

They would make a huge profit from a DC to NY train assuming it had stops in the big East Coast Cities. I grew up in Baltimore and it seems that almost everybody their worked in DC and had to drive all the way everyday. A lot of people would use it for business commutes and many college kids could use it to get home from school (UMD, GW etc) without car.

Re:Critics

[hyperz69 (1226464)]

I lived in Vegas 7 years. They NEED This. Even the expansion to 6 lanes between the cities was not enough. We are talking 400KM+ Of cars taillight to tailpipe on any given weekend! It's even a crazier route then VA to Washington DC.

Re:Critics

[yog (19073)]

Good point, but what do the train riders do once they get there? LA and Vegas are car cities with scant public transportation. It's not enough just to have the inter-city leg. You need to have feeder buses or trolleys at each end, or short term car rentals, or... I don't know.

Anyway, hopefully they'll get this thing off the ground and generate some me-too reactions from some of the other busy routes around the country. Boston-to-New York comes to mind, and Chicago-to-anywhere (St. Louis, Detroit, Des Moines).

Eventually there should be a national high speed rail alternative to air travel, and we will see less airport congestion and, perhaps, a more humble attitude on the part of the airlines when they have some real competition for a change.

But "should" does not translate into "will", unfortunately. The money and the political initiative just aren't there at this time.

Re:Critics

[Gregory Arenius (1105327)]

Disney land is in the LA Metro area which has a population of about 13,000,000 people while LV has a metro area of about 1,700,000 people. Most of the land between the two is desert while most of the land between DC and NYC is populated making a right of way much more difficult to obtain there. The way the summary states that it connects to Disneyland, while possibly true, is really designed to be deceptive. It would have been much more honest if it said connects to LA and LV. There exists a huge amount of both car and air traffic between the two cities. Even with the high price of gas and a recent expansion of the highway between the two cities the roads are still clogged. While I don't know if maglev is the right technology a solid case for high speed rail between LA and NV can certainly be made.

Cheers,
Greg

Infrastructure problems in the East prohibit

[spineboy (22918)]

There is already a "high speed" train that runs between New York and Washington D.C. - the Acela Express, for a commute time of 2 hours 48 min. It is limited to a paltry 75-150 MPH (120-240 KPH) due to track conditions. Mostly the speed is limited via the existing infrastructure, the bridges, tunnels, track closeness etc. Higher speeds would necessitate reinforcement of those structures, and the overhead electrical wires to withstand higher speeds. Much of the speed inhibition is in that the train needs to tilt to navigate the sharp rail curves. Pre-existing tracks are to close together to allow for high speed cornering that would require the trains to tilt, thus preventing train collisions between regular trains, and the leaning Acela Express. Of note, there are multiple at-grade crossings on this trains route - these are rarely found on other high speed train lines for obvious reasons.

Re:Infrastructure problems in the East prohibit

[Skater (41976)]

Of note, there are multiple at-grade crossings on this trains route - these are rarely found on other high speed train lines for obvious reasons.

No there aren't. During the Great Depression, the Pennsylvania Railroad spent a ton of money to improve the DC-NYC Northeast Corridor to eliminate all at-grade crossings. There are a few at-grade crossings north of New York (closer to Boston, actually), but that's not the section of the line you were talking about.

Re:Infrastructure problems in the East prohibit

[ChrisMaple (607946)]

Part of the reason that train speeds are severely limited is that they are built on the now-idiotic standard of a vehicle height exceeding 12 feet. Even though most of the mass is relatively low, the center of gravity could probably be cut by a factor of 3 if attention were paid to it. Trains should be 3 feet high and passengers loaded like peas in a pod. Then speeds would be limited by track roughness and other such factors, not tipping over because of centrifugal force.

Re:Infrastructure problems in the East prohibit

[legutierr (1199887)]

Whatever its problems may be, the Acela is the fastest and easiest way to get from NYC to Washington. A flight might be of shorter duration, but when you factor in the inconvenience and delay of ticketing and security, and the time and cost of getting to the airport, the overall trip is faster. Plus you don't have to mess with those stupid ziplock bags, and you don't have to turn off your cell phone. I never fly between NY and DC, it's only the Acela.

It would be great, though, if they improved the tracks to get the full speed out of the train.

Re:Critics

[amRadioHed (463061)]

That's the first thing I though. High-Speed Rail [ca.gov] to San Francisco is what we really need, the current rail situation is a joke. A four hour trip from San Diego to San Francisco for under $100? Yes please!

Re:Critics

[canuck57 (662392)]

Derided by critics as pie in the sky

Where critics = oil companies and automobile manufacturers

Did you read the article? Lets recap this:

There is no train on the route Amtrak's Desert Wind between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership.

Now what makes anyone think after the hoopla is over the drivers will take a maglev train?

$140 a barrel? $200 a barrel? $300 barrel?

Me, I drive because I like to drive. While today's $140 barrel hurts the budget, I will still drive. Not because I don't live any where near the train, I could take a bus or plane. But because at $100 it is still cheaper than golf for hours entertained. People like driving.

Derided by me too

[CdBee (742846)]

the French national railway (SNCF) has proven time and time again that electric trains can easily achieve 300mph (a TGV hit 357mph on test in 2007)

That's just 3mph slower than the fastest ever Maglev Monorail.. but it runs on standard gauge rail track that can be time-shared with commuter trains and railfreight traffic.. Heavy Rail in the USA is something that had its time then went away, but don't be surprised if it makes a return again.

300mph trains between city-centre stations can compete with 600mph aeroplanes flying from heavily-secured out-of-town airports.

they better check out North Haverbrook first...

[by Anonymous Coward]

Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
Like a genuine,
Bona fide,
Electrified,
Six-car
Monorail!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_vs._the_Monorail [wikipedia.org]

Huge construction project.. recession..

[onion2k (203094)]

A huge construction project that would take place in during a recession/depression.. is this going to be this generation's Hoover Dam?

Well, apart from the fact a dam is actually useful, and a train between two holiday resorts during a time when people have no money to spend on holidays is all kinds of pointless.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[apodyopsis (1048476)]

..a train between two holiday resorts during a time when people have no money to spend on holidays is all kinds of pointless.

Not at all, if it proves the technology. Ensures people are happy to use it - and paves the may for a cheap, fast, and effective mass transit to try and tempt people away from cars.

I bet the big automotive/oil firms are watching this like a hawk.

After all, who wants to drive between the cities when you can do it in a fraction of the time, cost, and in air conditioned comfort whilst reading papers, sipping tea, and chomping biscuits.

Many times in the UK I have wished we could reverse Beechings Axe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_Axe [wikipedia.org]

Even more with the massive fuel price increase we have had here in the UK. The long term solution is to change demographics (get people living closer to work) and to ensure a cheap and viable mass transit alternative.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[YeeHaW_Jelte (451855)]

Come on, this technology is well proven, there's been a testtrack running for over twenty years at Siemens in Germany, a stretch of track has been taken into production between Hamburg and someplace else (can't remember) and a line between Shanghai and Pudong airport has been running for some years now.

At the moment, it's still to expensive, and all countries/continents where passenger trains are common have extensive networks of traditional tracks ... and let's face it, the French technology in this case, the TGV, is almost as fast and runs on conventional tracks ( which, admittely, have to be purpose built for the TGV with shallower turns etc but still ).

The technology is nice, proven but at the moment there's not really a business case to be made for longer stretches of MagLev tracks.

Why Maglev? and why Vegas to Anaheim?

[spineboy (22918)]

It would seem that Los Angeles to Las Vegas would be more population centered, thus insuring better profitability.

As far as mag-lev - why? Building a proven TGV type of track, would allow other trains to use it as well, also aiding in cost-benefit. Plan on multiple side junctions to allow the TGV type train to pass the slower trains, thus permitting dual use for freight, etc. I can't imagine the mag-lev train to be that much more efficient, since fuel cost , at those speeds, is all about fighting wind resistance, and not rolling resistance.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[conureman (748753)]

The techniques being tested are for tax-dollar extraction. It is extremely complex and requires lots of study and careful planning. Transportation is just a side-effect.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[timeOday (582209)]

Don't think it will ever make enough money to be profitable. Obviously a pork barrel project!

"Ever" is a long time. Imagine DC without the Metro, what a nightmare. But where did it come from? When it was built, why wasn't it shot down by everybody thinking it's just too gosh darn hard and probably not worth it anyways? It seems we can't accomplish anything anymore, anything that would require new infrastructure is "impossible," so we sit here suffering and doing nothing about it.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[basiles (626992)]

Sorry, a $45 millions budget is not huge. In France, 300 km of a TGV lines cost exceed the 3 billion euros. (See that [wikipedia.org] in French; remember that 'milliard' in French = 1E9 = billion in English). And the LGV line is doing well. And I am not ashamed that it is funded by French taxpayers money. I wish -for American people- that the next USA administration will actually fund (with dozens of billions of US$, not dozens of millions) a better transport system in the US.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[Skater (41976)]

Won't happen. It'd be nice but it won't happen.

I read Trains magazine religiously each month. This month there was an article about a train (Amtrak) that Missouri pays for to run between St. Louis and Kansas City (IIRC). Ridership on the train was very good, but unfortunately the track it uses has a lot of freight trains as well, so the Amtrak trains are frequently late, and ridership is declining. Missouri did a study and found that it'd cost $45 million to improve the line, and they allocated $10 million to double track a few sections.

Meanwhile, as the article points out, if Missouri instead decided to build a 6-lane highway, the federal gov't would kick in 80% of the funding.

Sanity. It just won't happen.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[MtViewGuy (197597)]

It's not as big a boondoggle as you think. It could pave the way for essentially obseleting air travel between city centers for trips under 600 miles in distance due to the 300+ mph cruising speed of maglev trains.

For example, Chicago could become a MAJOR hub for maglev trains, with these lines going from Chicago in a spoke-like fashion:

1) To Milwaukee, WI-Madison, WI-Eau Claire, WI-Minneapolis/Saint Paul, MN
2) To Rockford, IL-Davenport, IA-Des Moines, IA-Council Bluffs, IA-Omaha, NE
3) To Champaign, IL-Saint Louis, MO-Columbia, MO-Kansas City, MO-Wichita, KS
4) To Indianapolis, IN-Cincinnati, OH-Louisville, KY
5) To South Bend, IN-Toledo, OH-Cleveland, OH-Erie, PA-Buffalo, NY
6) To Grand Rapids, MI-Lansing, MI-Detroit, MI

Given that maglev trains aren't limited by the width constraints of standard gauge rail, you can create trains that could seat 500 passengers per train or more travelling every 18 to 20 minutes on the same route. You would actually encourage people to not fly or drive between these two cities due to the very fast transit times.

Re:Huge construction project.. recession..

[canuck57 (662392)]

1) To Milwaukee, WI-Madison, WI-Eau Claire, WI-Minneapolis/Saint Paul, MN 2) To Rockford, IL-Davenport, IA-Des Moines, IA-Council Bluffs, IA-Omaha, NE 3) To Champaign, IL-Saint Louis, MO-Columbia, MO-Kansas City, MO-Wichita, KS 4) To Indianapolis, IN-Cincinnati, OH-Louisville, KY 5) To South Bend, IN-Toledo, OH-Cleveland, OH-Erie, PA-Buffalo, NY 6) To Grand Rapids, MI-Lansing, MI-Detroit, MI

And if appropriately managed, likely would cost less than the war in Iraq/Afghanistan. And employed Americans doing it. Better yet, something to show for the trillions.

The Wonders Of Engineering

[steeljaw (65872)]

Start your day shaking hands with Mickey and in under 2 hours you can be getting a blow from Minnie! Woot Woot! Engineering has cum a long way :p

Bizarre

[jdub_dub (874345)]

So a route which was cancelled because of low ridership... is getting the most expensive trainset in the country?

Maybe they should talk to the germans first

[ThatbookwritingWheel (553383)]

The transrapid project has had a similar length timeframe, and the only feasible implementation (munich to munich airport) was finally shot down a couple of weeks ago. Costs where double of what was originally projected. While maglev is a really cool technology, it is not as brilliant in real life due to the high costs and the competition from airtravel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid [wikipedia.org]

Previous train route cancelled due to low useage

[Starvingboy (964130)]

From the very short article

There is no train on the route--Amtrak's Desert Wind between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership.

This has to be a joke/troll. 45 Mil for the environmental study for a already failed train route? I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Re:Previous train route cancelled due to low useag

[jmv (93421)]

And how long did the previous train take. If it took 8 hours, then maybe it's the reason it didn't succeed. That being said, if you're going to build a maglev train, you might as well build it between two major cities, like New York to Washington.

Re:Previous train route cancelled due to low useag

[Mike1024 (184871)]

45 Mil for the environmental study for a already failed train route? I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

You ain't seen nothing yet. This is a 250 mile train track [usatoday.com] - That's 400km - while the Japanese Linimo [wikipedia.org] maglev cost $100 million per km (for 9km) while the Shanghai Maglev Train [wikipedia.org] cost $1.33 billion for 30.5 km - $43 million per km.

The French LGV Est [wikipedia.org] is 300 km and cost 4 billion euros - $6 billion. $21 million a mile.

Or if you look at the British London-to-channel-tunnel rail link, it cost £5.2 billion ($10 billion) for 108 km [wikipedia.org] - $100 million a mile.

Even if economies of scale get the price down to $10 million per km the cost will be $4 billion.

Re:Previous train route cancelled due to low useag

[NewbieProgrammerMan (558327)]

Even if economies of scale get the price down to $10 million per km the cost will be $4 billion.

Let me see if I can convert that to units I can understand...I guess Libraries of Congress per second, Olympic Swimming Pools, and rods per hogshead have the wrong dimensions... how about 0.02 Wars on Terror, 10 bridges to nowhere, or 20 unmanned space probes?

Interesting Route

[FurtiveGlancer (1274746)]

From a place where one makes memories with the kids, to a place where one wishes nothing remembered.

Bread and Circuses

[haakondahl (893488)]

Gosh--if only the technological prowess and unparalleled economic might of the United States could somehow transport us between fairy tale wonderlands and our hookers and gambling--a little faster.

What a world we might make then.

MagLev is pointless

[Toreo asesino (951231)]

The French made their TGV go much faster than 300Mph on normal tracks by basically giving it bigger wheels - 352Mph to be precise.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6521295.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Why pay so much for a technology giving you so little? MagLev isn't cheap. You could just copy the French...........ah what am I saying...