Using Monopods for city travel utilizing linear induction motors

[StephenHaw]

Having used the Shanghai maglev a couple of times in the past and it is impressive to be hurtling along at 380 km/h but as far as I am aware it takes a considerable amount of energy to propel the train forward and not long after it reaches that speed it starts to slow down again.
64% of running the Shanghai maglev is just on energy, and while it's really fast and smooth its main problem is that it only goes between the airport and Longyang station so it doesn't generally get enough passengers to cover the cost of running it.

In an urban area with a good network the idea could work however it would operate in conjunction with other already established transport system rather than replace them.
Considering cities like New York has between 4 and 6 million people using the metro system every day with trains arriving and leaving every few minutes at peak times, the unanswerable question is how many would switch given the choice? and I think for people traveling alone, providing the network gets them to where they want to go they will use it providing the cost is low enough.

Only caveat, the cost of building the infrastructure including disruption to the city during construction and potential lawsuits for losses incurred to businesses (on the construction route and surrounding area) would be such a bureaucratic nightmare any anticipated spend will be quadrupled in actual cost.

 

[Prathyush]

Shanghai maglev

It's more useful to see Shanghai Maglev is as a test track with a real world use case.

I am aware it takes a considerable amount of energy to propel the train forward and not long after it reaches that speed it starts to slow down again.

It will take time for me source all this information, but if I recall the research I did correctly maglev is more energy efficient and lower maintenance than high speed rail at comparable speeds.

the cost of building the infrastructure including disruption to the city during construction

One aspect of this outlined project is to design a system that can fit like standardized lego blocks, that are mass manufactured and assembled in approximately 10 m/10 ton chunks. You only need to build pillars, which should have a small footprint. The entire project makes very little sense without standardized assembly line manufacturing. Easy construction is a key aspect. That's a reason why rail is successful.

But obviously standardization of anything is hard, especially maglev where there are 100's of design parameters. But worth the effort. It need not be monopods, but well developed and well researched standard design parameters for tracks and vehicles. You can fix on the pitch length, pole configuration and solenoid configuration on track, and you can build vechicles of any multiple of pole pitch easily.

the unanswerable question is how many would switch given the choice?

It doesn't make sense to compete with existing lines, only complement them or upgrade them. Designing for realistic cities is quite a different problem. But also it should be noted that many cities don't have a public transport system, and are at a nascent stages of building them.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Shanghai Maglev is as a test track with a real world use case.

It's not a test case for personal transport. It's a test case for a mass transport system. Pods would be tethered to rails and the number of interconnections would be limited - unless they could jump from rail to rail. This is where the proposal fails to achieve a replacement for the present system of motor cars.
You keep ignoring this.

 

[Prathyush]

interconnections would be limited

I see no reason why they would be limited. That's the entire point of point to point transport. You can experiment with different network layouts on a paper, test various topologies of high speed lanes and interconnecting lanes and try it out for yourself.

unless they could jump from rail to rail

I discussed the 2 different switching mechanisms. In fact high throughput switching mechanisms are key to making the idea work.

This is where the proposal fails to achieve a replacement for the present system of motor cars.

This is not intended to replace all aspects of motor cars/Road transport. But a very large portion of use cases. It's a mixture of personalized and private transport.

I feel discussion has saturated, I am repeating the same ideas again.

I'll make a post about maglev physics at some point in the future. Too busy with work right now. There are some very interesting ideas(especially stabilization and propulsion) that I am trying to grasp.

 

[sophiecentaur]

You can experiment with different network layouts on a paper, test various topologies of high speed lanes and interconnecting lanes and try it out for yourself.

That's your job as the proponent of the system. If you are prepared to have a great distance to your nearest pick up point then it's fine but an interconnection. will take up more room than the naked track. How could it possibly achieve what an untethered taxi does all the time with potential interconnections every few metres? That's the opposition to your scheme.

 

[Prathyush]

How could it possibly achieve what an untethered taxi does all the time with potential interconnections every few metres?

That was never the plan. Stations will be under a KM, and possibly as close as under 200 m.

I explained some aspects of it in post 75 for a linear city. I may add more details when I find the time. I did work out rough schematics. But the essential idea is you have large radius, fast and high throughput tracks with slower tracks from stations connecting to them and away from them.