daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 4th, 2006, 11:37 AM   #41
pflo777
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,456
Likes (Received): 89

the problem is, that the maglev in germany, transrapid, www.transrapid.de has been developed, with taxpayers money. Altogehter more than 1 billion (!!) euro.
Therefore, siemens and thyssen-krupp cannot just say, we sell the patents for a dime to the chinese.(what i think will sooner or later happen anyway), without getting serous trouble with the german government.
Another key issue is, that germany still plans to build a maglev line like the one in shanghai, that connects the munich airport with munich main railway station.
So malgev is not dead, more like an undead technological zombie.

In the last 3 years, germany spent some 200 mio € to develop a new, more modern and cheaper guidway than the one in shanghai, and developed a more modern vehicle, the so called Transrapid-09. (In Shanghai the Transrapid 08, that was developed for the hamburg-Berlin maglev line, is in service)

ahhh, damn it, if german politicians wouldnt be so stupid.........
pflo777 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 4th, 2006, 11:59 AM   #42
cladiv
----
 
cladiv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: 上海
Posts: 363
Likes (Received): 0

Maglev is not dead but as many technologies in their infancy they are very expensive.Germans have spent much money and time in developing maglev technology and they can't afford to just sell it and then have somebody else which has developed a more economic version based on their research, that would be like an own goal
cladiv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 02:57 PM   #43
didu
Lord of the Ring
 
didu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 887
Likes (Received): 4

The Chinese should just sit down and do their own research, even if it's going to take them 10 years. The experiences and research methdologies they can learn from developing their own Maglev would be priceless.
__________________
My photo blog
didu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 05:39 PM   #44
Nodder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 34
Likes (Received): 1

It is quite understandable Germany doesn't sell core technologies to the Chinese. Selling them would just mean having a one-time profit, but no profit at all in the future.
It is a shame Germany hasn't build any Maglav connections themselves. But a thing about new technologies is, they are always very expensive at first. When time comes they become cheaper and cheaper though. So far it might not have been the time for the Transrapid. On is to know the Transrapid was developed as the ICE 5. So fa rthe ICE has only reached the 3rd generation. That shows the Transrapid was always seen as a long term investment.
I think it's the right decision not to sell too many technologies to the Chinese. It might mean a loss of profit and representation in short term, but it's better on the longer run.
Nodder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 05:51 PM   #45
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,962
Likes (Received): 18239

The Germans are trying to build a maglev line from Munich airport to the city. I visited their exhibition last year and here are a few photos :











More information : http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=214714
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 06:12 PM   #46
miamicanes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Miami
Posts: 904
Likes (Received): 181

Quote:
I'm sorry, the World Trade Center tragedy illed how many? Teh reason wwhy Airliners are such a big threat is that they can easilly be turned into a flying missle. It would take a lot more than just hyjacking a train to crash it into a skyscraper.
9/11 was an abberation. The fact is, an attack like it will never be able to take place again.

The only reason the terrorists were able to take control of the planes, with little more than box cutters and bomb threats, is because everyone knew that (pre-9/11), the best way to survive a hijacking was to fully cooperate with the hijackers (unless you're Israeli, of course). The expectation was that you'd end up taking an unplanned detour to Libya, but ultimately make it fine. I guarantee that passengers (in America, at least) will never cooperate with a terrorist again, because their attitude will be, "we're as good as dead anyway, so we have nothing to lose fighting back." And if the terrorists are somehow killing flight attendants and passengers, the pilots are going to figure they're next anyway, keep the door locked, and land at the nearest airport *regardless* of what the terrorists on the other side of the door do or threaten to do, because once again, the pilots will figure they're as good as dead anyway if they open the door, so they have nothing to lose by landing.

Anyway, getting back to trains... go Google a few train wrecks. A really bad train wreck is much, much deadlier than even the worst single air disaster.
miamicanes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 07:15 PM   #47
oKo
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 195
Likes (Received): 0

^ One other thing to consider. Maglev's are electrically powered. How much longer will air travel be viable given the fact that petroleum will eventually run out in twenty years?

In the long term, Maglev should become cheap and definitely viable to replace the airplane at least for continental travels.
oKo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 07:43 PM   #48
gaoanyu
Registered User
 
gaoanyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 696
Likes (Received): 7

These maglev trains are cool things.
I tried on one of them in Shanghai last month, and it's damn fast (needless to say)
Anyway, I think the Chinese should, on one hand, try to buy as much technologies as possible from Germany; but meanwhile, never stop it's own research efforts.
If we come up with a comparable maglev design, we may well compete with the Germans to sell these to other countries, not to mention that we can builf the tracks and trains much more cheaper than the Germans
gaoanyu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 08:01 PM   #49
GASpedal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Munich
Posts: 113
Likes (Received): 0

Development in Germany never stops. When China's got a comparable maglev design, there will already be a better product generation in Germany. At least that's the plan and the only chance for almost every technology branch outside of China...

The problem is that China hardly recognises the value of patents. I'm sure they wouldn't pay a decent price, even if Germany would like to sell the technology.
GASpedal no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 08:19 PM   #50
ch1le
always on
 
ch1le's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: tallinn/Tartu
Posts: 4,651
Likes (Received): 214

/\eh, if oil runs out the shit will hit the fan anyway.... what are plastics made of... oil... The world still derives 2/3 of its electrical power from burning fossile fuels
ch1le no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 08:22 PM   #51
Monkey
BANNED
 
Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Londinium
Posts: 14,103
Likes (Received): 38

Good for Germany. Chinese engineers broke into the Maglev depot to steal secrets from Transrapid. That kind of attitude to intellectual property simply isn't good enough.
Monkey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2006, 11:59 PM   #52
miamicanes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Miami
Posts: 904
Likes (Received): 181

Quote:
How much longer will air travel be viable given the fact that petroleum will eventually run out in twenty years?
Sigh. Not even the most paranoid doomsayers are claiming oil is going to run out... just that it'll become increasingly expensive to extract.

Someone on another site came up with a great analogy: the world reached its peak production of hardwood about 120 years ago, which in large part caused a worldwide shift from wood to coal for winter heating. Urban dwellers had been shifting to coal for decades before then, because coal was more energy-dense and cheaper to transport & distribute, but ~120 years ago pretty much marked the end of the era when even farmhouses could rely on cutting down trees for their winter's heating needs. That's not to say burning wood vanished entirely... even today, there are still a tiny group of people with "wood to burn"... but for the other 99.999% of us, the only time actual wood ends up getting burned is when the $12.99 shrinkwrapped fireplace log we bought at Wal-Mart gets thrown into the fireplace on Christmas Day for its once-a-year roaring fire.

By the same token, we still use lots of wood for making furniture and building houses... but now, the only place you'll find new old-growth hardwood is in ultra-expensive mansions, or expensive furniture. Everything else uses shit softwood like pine (ie, 99% of American residential construction), or gets made from particleboard with a fraction of a millimeter of expensive real hardwood glued on to make it resemble real wood. You can spend $12+ a square foot for a real hardwood floor... but most people settle for fake wood laminate, or maybe engineered wood floors (1/8" of real wood, glued to particleboard).

Petroleum isn't going to "run out". It'll just gradually become more expensive than alternatives, at which point they'll become worthwhile to use instead. Nuclear power is already cheaper than oil, and natural gas was already more expensive before recent oil price hikes made it competitive again (though in the case of natural gas, we're not "running out" per se... we've just grossly outstripped the US's current pipeline distribution, extraction, and refining capabilities, and will continue to do so until the new infrastructure that's been under construction for the past 5 years or so starts to come online in another 3-10 years).

And, of course, there's still the very good possibility that as-yet undiscovered oil deposits exist elsewhere, and the countries that will win the oil jackpot and strike it rich next are still anybody's guess. Really wanna scare some greens? Just remind them that China is a very, VERY big country... and almost certainly has vast quantities of oil somewhere. And they will eventually find it. And then there's sub-saharan Africa... the Amazon... Antarctica... India... northern Alaska...
miamicanes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 12:02 AM   #53
Yardmaster
Registered Melbourne
 
Yardmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,152
Likes (Received): 198

I don't really know much about MagLev, but this is an interesting thread.

I'd like to address a number of issues which have been raised here: I actually thought of starting a "MagLev" Technology Thread myself, but anyway:

  • Someone up there suggested MagLev was only good for Airport lines, someone else suggested Boston to Washington DC.

    What are the set-up costs, and what are the running costs? Could it actually be cheapernto MagLev someone from Boston to Washington rather than fly them? And how does limited fossil fuels and global warming impact upon this?
  • It was also suggested (above) that building MagLev lines had to be essentially "terrorist -proofed".

    Maybe. In the last fortnight I've seen a few interstate railway lines out of action for up to a week, because of accidents. But when we get to the stage where we're thinking that we can't build infrastructure because it might be attacked by terrorists, (look above!) Good God, what have we come to ?

    We can't build infrastructure because it might be blown up by terorists?

    Let's just go back a bit. Remember JFK? Well, he was assasinated while riding through Dallas in an open car. Remember the Arch Duke Ferdinand in Sareyo? No, well I was'nt alive then either (nor was my father).
  • I know this should be about MagLevs, but from above ... have you ever seen your leader?
    I have , a couple of times. Referring to Queen Elizebeth II, he said, : "I did but see her passing by, but I will love her till I die " In one instance, I could have grabbed hold of his ankle ... Sir Robert Menzies, Prime Minister of Australia, Lord of the Cinque Ports and Vice-Chancellor of my University.

In my time, the prospect of ever seeing your national leader at arm's length has totally disappeared. Think about this. It's pertinent to why we shouldn't take a risk ....


Is it now too dangerous to construct a MagLev (look above!) or even a subway or ... whatever. What separates now from the time when JFK was shot doen in a car in Dallas, Texas, and when, more than five years on beyond that, the the PM of Australia could confidently walk through his worst opponents during the Vietnam War?


Now we can't construct a MagLev system because it might be a terrorist target? What's happened?
Yardmaster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 12:24 AM   #54
gaoanyu
Registered User
 
gaoanyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 696
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by GASpedal
Development in Germany never stops. When China's got a comparable maglev design, there will already be a better product generation in Germany. At least that's the plan and the only chance for almost every technology branch outside of China...

The problem is that China hardly recognises the value of patents. I'm sure they wouldn't pay a decent price, even if Germany would like to sell the technology.
I think you are talking about some different here. Patents in China are recognised at the same level, if not higher, than in Germany, of course I mean the Chinese government.
I presume you were talking about the pirate things, like electronics and DVDs etc.. These are totally different to transferring maglev technology to China.
First, the transfer would be government controlled or at least partially;
Second, normal people won't pirate maglev trains.
gaoanyu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 12:25 AM   #55
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,962
Likes (Received): 18239

The Germans are likely to concede eventually because China is the most promising customer for maglev technology at the moment. If they want to break into this huge market and use this intercity line prove the technology, then they may be able to score more deals elsewhere.

Technology transfer is always an iffy topic especially between countries.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 01:05 AM   #56
wazabi
Registered User
 
wazabi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Berlin
Posts: 81
Likes (Received): 9

good decision, no good deal to play the trump card too early.
and you can't deny that chinese are copycats, just compare

opel frontera
with
jianling landwind

a certain similarity isn't there?

Last edited by wazabi; June 5th, 2006 at 01:12 AM.
wazabi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 02:40 AM   #57
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,962
Likes (Received): 18239

Cars look quite similar around the world, whether they are Japanese, American, or European. The basic structure is the same, and the aerodynamic requirements are quite consistent throughout the world.

It's like the difference between Coke and Pepsi.

What the West cannot do is to emulate the Chinese cost and pricing models.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 06:40 AM   #58
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

I must say I find this an odd development since the Chinese have their own tech, albeit younger than Germany's. Something is amiss. It casts heavy doubts on the Chinese technology - they know they are missing something, and they don't have the confidence to figure it out for themselves.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 06:53 AM   #59
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by odegaard
yeah and the USA also has the potential to run a balanced budget. sorry buddy but you seem like a hopeless romantic. I doubt that even my grandkids will see a vacuum maglev.
The Wright Brothers were hopeless romantics at one point too. I'm not only a romantic, but I'm stubborn too . I admit, I dream of the orbital railway. Right now it is a financial impossibility, but so was flying like we do today 100 years ago. The future is not yet written, and the way things are going, railways are far more practical than airways will ever be (the main reason being the "through-station", not possible for aircraft, all airports are a "terminus station").

Miamicanes, I was listening to your argument until you spun off onto such an unbelievably absurd tangent I am writing you off as a crackpot instead of the other way around.

Only an idiot would build a single-track line in this day and age anyway.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 06:59 AM   #60
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yardmaster
What are the set-up costs, and what are the running costs? Could it actually be cheapernto MagLev someone from Boston to Washington rather than fly them? And how does limited fossil fuels and global warming impact upon this?
Capital costs are prohibitive. If this wasn't the case, it would be far cheaper to take a maglev train. Main reason being no landing fees among other airport associated costs.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium