SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 20 of 386 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I don't understand why the UK estabilishment doesn't catch the opportunity of a MAGLEV infrastructure from London to Glascow.

Traditional HSR is the past, isn't it?

In addition, UK are an island having only one connection with the continent in the south part (EUROTUNNEL), so where's the problem?

HS2

http://www.hs2.org.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2

UK ULTRASPEED

http://www.500kmh.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Ultraspeed
http://magnetbahnforum.de/index.php?uk_ultraspeed

Carpe diem!
 

·
INACTIVE
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
Yeah, yeah, we know. If you'd bothered to actually read the threads, you'd know this very subject has been discussed at tiresome length before. Maglev is untested and unproven in this kind of scenario.

This obviously cannot be repeated enough: we are not building new HSR for the sake of speed! HS2's primary purpose is to add capacity to our national rail infrastructure. We're only using HSR at all because it doesn't actually cost noticeably more than building a new railway using older technologies. By sending all the inter-city trains down HS2, you free up great swathes of capacity for all-stations services, semi-fasts and rail freight on the classic lines.

Yes, there's always a first time, but the UK has been badly bitten by too many 'firsts': we're paying the price for it today in the form of a tiny railway loading gauge, and tiny, toytown tube trains in our metro systems. (And very little electrification compared to our mainland cousins too.)

Let someone else make the mistakes. MagLev is better suited to China, Russia, the US and India anyway: they have the sheer landmass to justify developing an internal network first, before extending it over their borders.

The UK would get very little benefit from MagLev as it's incredibly expensive to build, yet wouldn't reduce journey times by enough over traditional HSR to give value for money. We also wouldn't be able to build the network in phases because MagLev trains wouldn't be able to share the existing rail network with traditional trains. Thus the entire network would need to be built in one go, including any branches.

A related problem is that the UK has precious little expertise available in MagLev. We'd be importing everything, from the infrastructure technologies right up to the trains themselves. With nobody making compatible MagLev trains, that means tying ourselves to a single supplier for the whole network and its rolling stock. We'd be stuck with their choice of loading gauge and guideway design too, so if France decided to go with a rival firm, we'd never be able to link our two networks and run through services.

Finally, we're still waiting for someone to create a workable room-temperature semiconductor. This was always the key to unlocking MagLev's potential. Without it, MagLev is just a really, really expensive railway, the fastest trains of which are barely a few mph. faster than those of the fastest HSR.
 

·
King of Bernicia
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
Glasgow isn't important enough.
If Glasgow was a big London equivalent in the north then fair enough, linking the two would make sense. As it is though you've a bunch of other good sized cities in between, when you're stopping at a few out of Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Nottingham in between then its nto worth it especially given the cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,247 Posts
Finally, we're still waiting for someone to create a workable room-temperature semiconductor. This was always the key to unlocking MagLev's potential. Without it, MagLev is just a really, really expensive railway, the fastest trains of which are barely a few mph. faster than those of the fastest HSR.
You don't require "room temperature" literally since liquid Nitrogen only costs about 60cents US per liter.
Metal super conductors sustaining it's super conductivity at -196 degrees C has already been developed by Japan so Maglev are coming to reality at an economic scale at speeds up to 600km/h.
And no you do not need super conductive coils on the guide way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
No mate it's the 5th!

and 4th in England.

District Population Type Ceremonial county
1 Birmingham 1,016,800 Metropolitan borough, City (1889) West Midlands
2 Leeds 770,800 Metropolitan borough, City (1893) West Yorkshire
3 Sheffield 534,500 Metropolitan borough, City (1893) South Yorkshire
4 Cornwall 532,200 Unitary authority Cornwall
5 County Durham 508,500 Unitary authority County Durham
6 Bradford 501,700 Metropolitan borough, City (1897) West Yorkshire.

http://www.ukcities.co.uk/populations/

The whole idea of the scheme is to stop off at all the UK's biggest cities and as Sheffield is the 5th biggest then it should be stopping there!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
That is the metro area(and in my opinion is a way for cities to artificially boost their population where in real life they are no where near the actual city!) !The actual city of sheffield is the 4th biggest in England!

Largest Cities in the UK
This is a list of the largest cities in the United Kingdom. Note that the population statistic for London refers to Greater London which according to the "official definition" is not considered a city.
City Population

London 7.2 Million
Birmingham 992000
Leeds 720000
Glasgow 560000
Sheffield 512000
Bradford 467000
Edinburgh 450000
Liverpool 440000
Manchester 420000
Bristol 380000
Wakefield 316000
Cardiff 310000
Coventry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
No mate it's the 5th!

and 4th in England.

District Population Type Ceremonial county
1 Birmingham 1,016,800 Metropolitan borough, City (1889) West Midlands
2 Leeds 770,800 Metropolitan borough, City (1893) West Yorkshire
3 Sheffield 534,500 Metropolitan borough, City (1893) South Yorkshire
4 Cornwall 532,200 Unitary authority Cornwall
5 County Durham 508,500 Unitary authority County Durham
6 Bradford 501,700 Metropolitan borough, City (1897) West Yorkshire.

http://www.ukcities.co.uk/populations/

The whole idea of the scheme is to stop off at all the UK's biggest cities and as Sheffield is the 5th biggest then it should be stopping there!
Interesting to see neither London nor Manchester make the top 6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,903 Posts
Cos that list is only Single Districts and some cities are made up of more than one district whereas others like Birmingham have huge single districts.
 

·
King of Bernicia
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
That is the metro area(and in my opinion is a way for cities to artificially boost their population where in real life they are no where near the actual city!) !The actual city of sheffield is the 4th biggest in England!
Nah, conurbations are far far more natural
To look at the figures for the size of Newcastle for instance the city itself is counted quite small, that they'd exclude the connected towns and Gateshead...hmm...OK....but they even exclude some suburbs which are 100% counted as part of the city.
What's odd too is that on these city population charts London always does so well despite the real City of London being tiny in terms of population, a thousand people or so IIRC.
Urban area sizes are the best way of determining which cities are biggest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
Nah, conurbations are far far more natural
To look at the figures for the size of Newcastle for instance the city itself is counted quite small, that they'd exclude the connected towns and Gateshead...hmm...OK....but they even exclude some suburbs which are 100% counted as part of the city.
What's odd too is that on these city population charts London always does so well despite the real City of London being tiny in terms of population, a thousand people or so IIRC.
Urban area sizes are the best way of determining which cities are biggest.
I disagree, somewhere like London is very different, seen it is the only real big city in the south and the geography of London makes it easy to access. Somewhere like Sheffield is very geographically isolated as it is surround by hills so it makes it very hard for somewhere like Sheffield to merge with another big population base!Sheffield is also unique amongst UK cities as It is the largest city in the U.K. that does not form the basis of a conurbation. There is no doubting that somewhere like Sheffield is much bigger then a place such as Newcastle and is almost on a par with Leeds and Manchester in terms of the actual population of the city and histrionically being one of the most important and powerful cities of the north.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
A few points to add.

Firstly, we're not getting Maglev we're getting conventional HS Rail, get over it!

Second, there will be a station on HS2 at Sheffield.

Third, I personally couldn't give a f*ck whether Sheffield is the 5th or 9th biggest city in the UK. Nothing against Sheffield, its a nice place but the whole argument over population/administrative boundaries/conurbation size etc can be very dull. I must confess I've never lost any sleep worrying whether Manchester's population is around 450000 or 2 million depending on how its measured.
 

·
King of Bernicia
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
I disagree, somewhere like London is very different, seen it is the only real big city in the south and the geography of London makes it easy to access. Somewhere like Sheffield is very geographically isolated as it is surround by hills so it makes it very hard for somewhere like Sheffield to merge with another big population base!Sheffield is also unique amongst UK cities as It is the largest city in the U.K. that does not form the basis of a conurbation. There is no doubting that somewhere like Sheffield is much bigger then a place such as Newcastle and is almost on a par with Leeds and Manchester in terms of the actual population of the city and histrionically being one of the most important and powerful cities of the north.
Thats a problem with Sheffield growing any more though, that its surrounded by hills. Its a flaw with the city, not the system.
And no, Newcastle (or Tyneside rather) is 5th or 6th biggest in the country. Bigger than Sheffield for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
Thats a problem with Sheffield growing any more though, that its surrounded by hills. Its a flaw with the city, not the system.
And no, Newcastle (or Tyneside rather) is 5th or 6th biggest in the country. Bigger than Sheffield for sure.
The metro area might be bigger but not the actual city(it's the city I count not the surrounding towns, thats cheating!)!in terms of importance Sheffield is also bigger and has more power. Lets not also forget that the Sheffield urban area does not include Barnsley and Chesterfield which are clearly part of the Sheffield urban area and if they were included the Sheffield Urban area would also be bigger!It would actually be more appropriate to compare the Newcastle metro area to The Sheffield City region which has a population of 1.8 million.

The 4 biggest cities in the north in terms of importance and power would go, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield.
 

·
King of Bernicia
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
Its not cheating to count the urban area, its the way things are done. It doesn't matter to industries and businesses whether those 200 houses over there next to these other 200 are counted as being in the same city or are technically another town, they still are. This is the most logical way to do things. 'Which city is biggest', just counting the city, is pointless and serves no purpose.
Its the size of the urban area which makes London, Amsterdam, the Rheine-Ruhr, Tokyo, etc.... so important. Not the little technical official size of the city-proper.

The proper size of Sheffield does count Rotherham, Barnsley and Chesterfield though are some distance away. If they're Sheffield then Liverpool is Manchester.

The most important cities in the north in order are Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, Liverpool.
Sheffield is...maybe 5th.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
The proper size of Sheffield does count Rotherham,Barnsley and Chesterfield though are some distance away. If they're Sheffield then Liverpool is Manchester.

/QUOTE]
Barnsley and Chesterfield are very much part of the Sheffield urban area they are only 12 and 15 miles away and both have a Sheffield postcode! You can`t be serious about Newcasle having more national importance then Sheffield.:lol::lol:
 
1 - 20 of 386 Posts
Top