China's 270mph flying train could run on London to Glasgow route if plan takes off

[london lad]

Andrew Clark, transport correspondent
Monday June 6, 2005
The Guardian

Described as "flying on the ground", Shanghai's 270mph magnetic floating railway has impressed British ministers. But plans to build a London to Scotland line would cost at least £16bn, according to feasibility studies sanctioned by Downing Street.
Known as the Maglev (magnetic levitation) train, China's flagship transport system takes eight minutes to hurtle along a 19-mile track through the paddy fields surrounding Shanghai airport - a journey which takes up to an hour by car.

The sleek white carriages, first of their kind in the world, are controlled by a magnetic charge which holds them 1cm above a metal track.

Tony Blair has held a Downing Street seminar to consider building a Maglev on a London-to-Glasgow route along the spine of Britain through Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh. His advisers say the project would pay huge environmental dividends as it would make domestic air travel virtually obsolete, with a trip from London to Newcastle taking just one hour 40 minutes.

The chancellor, Gordon Brown, rode Shanghai's Maglev in February. Backers of a British scheme want it to be a free-standing railway between the existing east and west coast mainlines to relieve chronic road and rail congestion forecast within10 years.

The German company behind Shanghai's Maglev, Transrapid International, has spent 18 months working on a "pre-feasibility" plan for Britain which has concluded a basic cost would be £20m a kilometre. The entire 500-mile proposed route would cost £16bn even before taking into account the purchase of land.

Jochen Kruse, Transrapid's project manager in Shanghai, said: "We've had discussions with No 10 - now we'll be going to the Department for Transport."

He said Britain's hilly terrain was ideal for the Maglev, which can be angled at a gradient of up to 10%, against the 4% for conventional rail. This means less investment in bridges and cuttings. Existing, but unused, tunnels through the Pennines have been identified for part of the route.

The Shanghai system has been open for 18 months and has carried more than 2 million people. But not everybody is impressed. Critics question the durability of the technology - one of the two tracks has been shut for long periods while engineers adjust troublesome cables carrying the electrical charge which sparks the train's magnetism.

Furthermore, the entire system is sinking into the Pudong, Shanghai's marshy outpost of land used as an economic boom zone. Special leeway has had to be built in to allow for sinkage of up to 5cm.

A prominent figure in Shanghai's business community said: "It cost an awful lot of money to put in and it's expensive to maintain. Most of the local Chinese people can't afford to ride on it."

At present, the Shanghai Maglev terminates on the outskirts of the city. It only operates between 9am and 5pm - even though many international flights arrive in the early morning. The journey is so short that it only hits its maximum speed for a few seconds before decelerating.

The Chinese government is considering an extension into the city and possibly further, to the neighbouring city of Hangzhou, in time for Shanghai's hosting of the World Expo in 2010.

The Maglev is attracting followers around the world: Germany wants one for an airport link in Munich. The US government is due to choose imminently between three Maglev schemes: a Baltimore to Washington railway, an airport link in Pittsburgh or a 31-mile track through the Nevada desert linking Las Vegas with casinos on the Californian border, which could be extended to Los Angeles.

Mr Kruse said a green light from Downing Street would enable Transrapid to come up with a detailed scheme in 18 months. But construction could take many years: "How long does it typically take to build such things in England? If you could import a thousand Chinese workers, it could be built in a year."

A Maglev network would improve on the dismal weather record of Britain's existing trains. The train's speed is sufficient to blow snow up to 20cm deep off the rails. Other peculiarly British hazards are unlikely to mount an obstacle. Mr Kruse said: "Leaves on the line? I really don't think that will be a problem."

Through air with the greatest of ease

Early on Saturday morning, a handful of elderly men were practising tai chi on a lawn outside Shanghai's Maglev station. Blithely ignoring the 270mph trains hurtling overhead, they were a rare reminder of traditional China.

The so-called floating railway is the crown jewel of Shanghai's economic boom. It cost £1.2bn and was built in 20 months.

Boarding a Maglev train for the 19-mile journey to Pudong airport, I settled into a yellow leather seat, watched over by attendants in airline-style uniforms.

Digital screens in every carriage allow passengers to keep tabs on how fast they are moving. Within seconds of departure, we were floating on a 1cm cushion of air at 100kmh and the carriages began to lean from side to side.

The "tilt" on Maglev trains is unnerving - they lean to an angle of 12 degrees, a third more than one of Virgin Trains' new Pendolinos. Travelling on a track on stilts above a road, passengers get a view of the sky through one window and the ground through the other.

After four minutes, we hit a peak speed of 431kmh (267mph) - more than twice as fast as a GNER inter-city 125. The speed flickered between 430-431kmh for about 30 seconds before gradually declining near the end of the seven-minute, 20-second journey.

Before arriving, I glimpsed inside the driver's cab where a bored-looking woman gazed at an electronic screen with her arms folded. The train's German designers said she was there on the insistence of the Chinese authorities; the technology drives itself, guided by electrically controlled magnetic fields.

A trickle of passengers, largely foreign, got off at the airport.

A Maglev ticket costs 50 yuan (£3.50). Most locals stick to the bus: it is only 15 yuan.

[potto]

well nearly all the negatives that they pointed out in the article are perculiar to the local setup of the Shanghai route

"the entire system is sinking into the Pudong"
"Most of the local Chinese people can't afford to ride on it"
"It only operates between 9am and 5pm"
"only hits its maximum speed for a few seconds before decelerating"

This is surely the future of mass transit? Once the world was riding on British trains and marvelling.... oh well catch up time!




we should have built one for the millenium party!

[tayser]

barely proven (commercially) technology...
blight on the landscape...
expensive...
and a key point: terminates outside the city (re: blight on the landscape point)

why bother?

a TGV solution can reuse the existing 'last mile' into London/Birmingham/Manchester/Glasgow-Edinburgh, it's a proven technology, cheaper than a Maglev and the vehicles can run on classic lines acting as branches from the main LGV, thus extending the network beyond just the N-S corridor, London-Birmingham-Manchester-Glasgow (or Edinburgh) @ 350kph - anyone want to estimate how long the trip end to end would take?

[Monkey]

Most of the local Chinese cannot afford to fly but those who can afford to fly can also afford the Maglev. I noticed it was much busier this year than last and the price has come down - about £2.70 if you have a plane ticket and £3.30 if not. That's cheaper than the Tube to Heathrow let alone the Heathrow Express. Maglev rules!!

[Bob]

Well this idea has stuck around for a whole 6 months now and even lasted out the election!

While I'd love to see maglev in this country to be truly useful it would have to join city centres as well as out of town parkway stations. Tunnels under London, Birmingham, Manchester.... would double the cost of the project. I can't see this would pass a cost / benefit analysis and we lack a wackpot dictator to build it regardless of cost.

However I firmly believe this makes a new conventional high speed North / South link more likely. This would have the added benefit of linking directly with CTRL.

[Monkey]

Japan is developing a new 360km/h bullet train to open service in 2008. The capacities and reliability of Japan's system are fantastic and well suited to this busy populous transport corridor. I say buy Japanese high speed rail or German Maglev.

[nick_taylor]

In I step

I've long imagined a maglev network for the UK which could go double decker above current railway lines, follow motorways and use current rail termini as major stations.

London - Glasgow: 345 miles (554 km)
Speed: 270mph (434kph) at top speed (I think ahead with the technology)
Time: 2hs (if un-direct + with long stops + route)


London - Glasgow: 345 miles (554km)
Speed: 217mph (350kph)
Time: 2hrs 45mins (if indirect + long stops + route)


Maglev over TGV:
- Cheaper to maintain (no friction or moving parts)
- Automatically run
- Faster (negates the requirement for a car or a plane for long distances)
- Easier construction methods due to the flexibility of the track (could run alongside motorways for example)
- Maglev is a proven technology actually developed originally in the UK (infact we could quite simply take this in-house simply because we do actually have the brains and know-how of how to get some a network underway, we just need to put them altogether)
etc....

TGV would also in most parts require a totally newly dedicated line, just like maglev - difference being that maglev is more flexible to the surrounding geography hence lower costs. Infact maglev is a technology getting faster and faster with a system currently being developed in Japan that allows trains to run at over 500kph. Late last year on the Yamanashi test line saw two trains passing at 1,026 kph (the Yamanashi test line is 42.8km long with around half of the route in 12 seperate tunnels).

The thing is, we are behind the likes of France, Germany and Japan in having a HSR network...why should we be settling with what they have? We have the people, the money and the requirement to build such a network now. I think its about time that the rest of the world would have to be playing catch up! Imagine in 15 years totally re-laying the track of the CTRL and the Channel Tunnel...it would force the French to be behind and have to upgrade just like we are having to do with the CTRL. I'm so fed up of playing second fiddle - now is the time we go back to our Victorian ways and build for the future and not for the past.

[tayser]

Originally Posted by nick-taylor

In I step
I've long imagined a maglev network for the UK which could go double decker above current railway lines, follow motorways and use current rail termini as major stations.

ECML/WCML and Motorways have much tighter curve radii than any HSR, whether it steel wheel on steel rail or Magnetic leviation, could handle - any new HSR option would involve substantial land purchasing costs, your argument is unrealistic.

Originally Posted by nick-taylor

- Maglev is a proven technology actually developed originally in the UK (infact we could quite simply take this in-house simply because we do actually have the brains and know-how of how to get some a network underway, we just need to put them altogether)
etc....

just because it's home-grown doesn't mean it's any good to you.

Originally Posted by nick-taylor

TGV would also in most parts require a totally newly dedicated line, just like maglev - difference being that maglev is more flexible to the surrounding geography hence lower costs.

what's shaz and baz from [insert English countryside village name here] going to say about an ugly concrete guideway blotting out their view? are you going to build 500km of noise-reducing barriers along the whole length of the line? the fact that the technology would be nearly exclusively elevated means that the cheapest possible aesthetic would be chosen over anything that would be 'pleasant' to look at, thus contributing to any NIMBY backlash.

Originally Posted by nick-taylor

Infact maglev is a technology getting faster and faster with a system currently being developed in Japan that allows trains to run at over 500kph. Late last year on the Yamanashi test line saw two trains passing at 1,026 kph (the Yamanashi test line is 42.8km long with around half of the route in 12 seperate tunnels).

so what - an average speed of 500kph would be far more useful in Australia where the end points are further distances apart - think about London-Birmingham-Machester, a Maglev wouldn't be cruising at its average for very long before it had to slow down to pass larger settlements and the cities that each service would invariably stop in (as building bypasses around the cities would be as useful as tits on a bull).

Originally Posted by nick-taylor

why should we be settling with what they have? We have the people, the money and the requirement to build such a network now.

there's a niche organisation who has limited commercial-grade experience with this technmology you're falling over for, but there's also a tonne of people across the channel who've extensive experience in a technology that is proven, has turned into a revenue-generator and is also improving with every new line constructed around the world.

Is 20 billion pounds (and then some) worth the risk all in the name of innovation?

[Monkey]

^ It's not so innovative though is it. Maglev has been around for decades now. It's a lot faster than HSR even though far less investment has been spent on it. Once Maglve becomes more commercial the performance lead will only increase further still. It's not noisier than HSR at all (no friction) and, because you tilt the tracks, and don't have to share routes with other traffic, you can corner just as tight at much higher speeds than railways.

[gothicform]

not entirely true tays, large chunks of the ecml south of grantham are completely straight, so straight they could run the 225s at 150mph+ if they had the signalling installed, problem 1 is the signalling isnt in car so they cant go over 125mph as they cant see the signal properly, problem 2 is going over 140mph means clearing the track for up to 3 miles in advance because of breaking distance. they used to go 140mph until the new safety rules in the mid 90s regarding in car signalling, i remember going on them when they were in white and black livery in the early 90s and arriving in kings cross 20 misn ahead of schedule - apparently drivers would actually race to try and beat each other's records. it was specifically built in the 80s to hit these high speeds but good old bureaucracy has killed this. it was not possible for them to go faster than 125mph between grantham and york because they never bothered to upgrade the power, if the trains did go that speed theyd cause brown outs in the surrounding housing. the line between much of grantham and york is also straight enough to handle it.
225s were originally designed to have tilt added at a later stage, they are upgradable to tilt as the intention was to have them tilt between york and edinburgh and go a smooth 140mph from york to london and faster if track and congestion allowed them to.
the ecml is a wasted opportunity, an almost high speed train line, that needs between 20 and 30 medium scale improvements along the length of it to get it up to that level. these improvements were never carried out because in 1988 thatcher merged intercity with british rail. intercity had previous made a clear profit every year and it was this money that had been paying for the likes of the ecml upgrade. british rail stopped the upgrade and used the money from the route to subsidise other routes leaving what has to be the oldest half finished rail project in the whole of europe - 17 years and counting now.
what the govt should really do is split the railways up into intercity (profitable), network southeast (profitable) and everything else which gets govt subsidies, the other two can then get new routes

[tayser]

think about what happens when you try and go around a bend/corner in a car too fast, you're forced to one side of the car. And an object moving @ 500kph displacing wind won't be loud? LOL.

pay attention to the speed and the radius of the curves on that video.

sorry, but I'm just a realist.

[Zim Flyer]

Why not just rebuild the Great Central Line. From what I have heard what remains is straight and what has been built over can be tunnelled or bridged.

By the way, quite like gothicforms idea about separating the South East and ECML and subsidizing the rest, I think there is alot of sense in that.

[nick_taylor]

Originally Posted by tayser

ECML/WCML and Motorways have much tighter curve radii than any HSR, whether it steel wheel on steel rail or Magnetic leviation, could handle - any new HSR option would involve substantial land purchasing costs, your argument is unrealistic.

Motoroways in general curve around quite a lot, but in general they follow a certain pattern and could be built right next door on the actual embankments/cuttings of some partions of motorways. This is the beauty of maglevs - greater ability to go up gradients and around bends than tilting trains. I do think land purchasing would be required, but

Originally Posted by tayser

just because it's home-grown doesn't mean it's any good to you.

No it doesn't, but several universities in the UK are working for NASA in developing a maglev launch system which uses the same idea of the maglev transport system. Other individuals work for other international companies and or universities in the UK. It is just that the resources and knowledge base the UK has, is not amalgamated into one specific central cohesive unit, unlike say JR's R&D Unit.

Originally Posted by tayser

what's shaz and baz from [insert English countryside village name here] going to say about an ugly concrete guideway blotting out their view? are you going to build 500km of noise-reducing barriers along the whole length of the line? the fact that the technology would be nearly exclusively elevated means that the cheapest possible aesthetic would be chosen over anything that would be 'pleasant' to look at, thus contributing to any NIMBY backlash.

Maglev tracks could easily be double decked over current railway lines in urban areas and the intrusion would make not much difference other than a double tiered network. In the countryside, maglev lines could run alongside current railway lines and motorway - thus a few concrete pillars with a 6 lane motorway network next to them won't make much difference. Infact such a system can travel at ground level also. One thing maglev has over HSR is the noise factor: its far FAR quieter than any normal HSR train service in current operation. Either watch it in operation or watch some of the Transrapid videos - you'll be pleasantly suprised!!!

Originally Posted by tayser

so what - an average speed of 500kph would be far more useful in Australia where the end points are further distances apart - think about London-Birmingham-Machester, a Maglev wouldn't be cruising at its average for very long before it had to slow down to pass larger settlements and the cities that each service would invariably stop in (as building bypasses around the cities would be as useful as tits on a bull).

Actually if you look through the Transport, Urban Planning and Infrastructure sub-forum here, you would note that we have had notable discussions on maglev already. Acceleration speeds have been increasing also as the speeds increase, you could have in areas 4 tracks, where an express service could achieve constant top speed stopping at London - Birmingham - Mancheser - Newcastle - Edinburg - Glasgow. While in some sections the track would be shared be local services, but which would then switch on to local tracks........which could have more stops. In the process of this I have just highlighted another benefit of maglev: its computer controlled and means there is no chance of a collision and that train management is easier. Slower trains could for instance be used on the local spurs. The network would see costs go up, but the catchment and movement would be rapidly overhauled.

Originally Posted by tayser

there's a niche organisation who has limited commercial-grade experience with this technmology you're falling over for, but there's also a tonne of people across the channel who've extensive experience in a technology that is proven, has turned into a revenue-generator and is also improving with every new line constructed around the world.

Is 20 billion pounds (and then some) worth the risk all in the name of innovation?

Maglev has been around for sometime and I somehow doubt the TGV will be the primary mode of travel in around 30 years for France. By then they will be looking at modern alternatives and once again we will be left behind as the Germans and French upgrade to the next level which is: maglev.

So yes it is a very large and dangerous gamble....but we can't just upgrade now and continue to lag behind our continental rivals who will undoubtedly begin mass-upgrade plans whenever we would get such a TGV network up and running. Why take a small step when we can take a jump and prepare the country for the 21st Century

Originally Posted by tayser

think about what happens when you try and go around a bend/corner in a car too fast, you're forced to one side of the car. And an object moving @ 500kph displacing wind won't be loud? LOL.

pay attention to the speed and the radius of the curves on that video.

sorry, but I'm just a realist.

Yes your right to be skeptical, but this country needs to look into the long term - to prepare for all the problems that this country will have to overcome such as congestion on the transport network and the ever growing population. I'm actually also interested in slower (but still fast) maglevs that could serve other areas of the UK, eg commuter lines into London.

[andysimo123]

Well instead of Blair spending £12 billion on the ID cards, he should spend it on this.

[JDRS]

This is definetely a good move if the technology is proven as it would put Britain firmly at the forefront of modern rail transport and bring us more into line with countries like France, Japan etc on Transport. Although I doubt it will go ahead.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by tayser

think about what happens when you try and go around a bend/corner in a car too fast, you're forced to one side of the car.

Like I told you before you just tilt that track. That's exactly what the Shanghai Maglev does at 430km/h (it could go 500km/h if the route was longer). You cannot tilt railway lines so much partly because of the weight balance (railway trains have a higher centre of gravity) and partly because the trains may have to use the tilted stretches of track at lower speeds where it would be uncomfortable. On a dedicated Maglev track the trains would never pass at anything other than their design speed so curves can be substantially compensated for by tilting. Indeed Maglev can turn tighter than HSR depsite running at substantially higher speeds.

Originally Posted by tayser

And an object moving @ 500kph displacing wind won't be loud?

Yes it makes a noise but then so does HSR moving at 300km/h or, in the near future, 350km/h. The Maglev has the advantage of making no frictional noise - the trains do not touch the tracks at all. For this reason it's probably quieter than a high speed train.

Originally Posted by tayser

LOL.

pay attention to the speed and the radius of the curves on that video.

I don't need to watch the video. I have experienced the Shanghai Maglev myself several times - in fact I was on the Shanghai Maglev just last Sunday.

Originally Posted by tayser

sorry, but I'm just a realist.

I'm a realist too. Maglev is a real option now. It has been around for decades, the technology is mature, the safety impeccable, and, most importantly, Maglev substantially outperforms high speed rail. Stop being skeptical for the sake of it and actually look at the arguments and the facts. Maglev is now ready for large scale service operation. China, despite scaling back spending on large scale infrastructure projects, has still stopped short of ruling out Maglev for the critical Beijing to Shanghai route. The UK is seriously looking at it too. These are government ministries with £bn budgets that are taking it seriously - not obscure pressure groups or geeky internet enthusiasts. If they can take it seriously then perhaps you should too. Technology does progress and the flanged wheel and rail is not enshrined for all eternity as the only high speed surface transportation that will ever be viable.

[Leeds No.1]

maybe we're behind Germany/France is developing HSR because we're saving up to develop a HSM (High Speed Maglev!) so our transport becomes the envy or the world again. If there was to be a maglev, I think the best route is the one identified, although possible extensions should be to Liverpool, Swansea, Southampton and through the midland cities.

[Prestonian]

some interesting info on here about the maglev
http://eriksrailnews.com/
http://www.expall.com/ultraspeed.html

[Jonesy55]

Originally Posted by Leeds No.1

If there was to be a maglev, I think the best route is the one identified, although possible extensions should be to Liverpool, Swansea, Southampton and through the midland cities.

I think it would probably be uncommercial to go to Southampton or Swansea with Maglev. How about two routes, one serving MK, Birmingham, then branching in two near Stoke to serve Manchester and Liverpool, the other could serve Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Maybe when costs are reduced after a few years a route serving Heathrow, Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea might be on the cards.

[lyonsdown]

The more I think about this the more it makes sense, the UK is pretty small compared to a lot of countries so it shouldn't be beyond us to build a reasonably good coverage between the major conurbations, anything that takes people out of aircraft for these short haul distances has got to be a good thing. And ultimately these will be a lot quicker than getting on a plane as they would hopefully go straight into the city centres raqther than stopping at an airport miles from where you actually want to be.