Monorail proposal to link Melbourne airports

[Rhys Xanthis]

i dont see how a geelong-frankston service would link any airports at all? what would it link avalon to? the surburban train line that frankston has? all the people will want to get back on the maglev to go back home if the first thing they see is frankston

[Michael Mak]

Originally Posted by Rhys Xanthis

i dont see how a geelong-frankston service would link any airports at all? what would it link avalon to? the surburban train line that frankston has? all the people will want to get back on the maglev to go back home if the first thing they see is frankston

Moorabbin Airport?

[D Chan]

Originally Posted by Bill S

So what are the exact costs?

costly to passengers (I don't think fares will be as cheap as those of normal trains), which raises a question, will there be enough passengers who would want to catch the 'monorail' at an additional cost (question marks as to how much) to save half an hour or 40 minutes of time.

costly to maintain and operate (depends how the operator runs it e.g. frequency and how much patronage I guess)

costly to construct (refer to Greg M's post)

[Ash W]

Originally Posted by Kelvin R

I thought it was the other way round, high construction cost but low operating costs.

The operating costs would be very high too. It takes quite a lot of electricty to get a maglev train to levitate. Also the track needs quite a high level of maintenance, especially 'turn outs' which are quite complex.

It seems to me anytime someone raises a transport issue Transrapid comes up with a maglev solution which seems to derail (no pun intended) any serious discussion about adddressing the real issues.

[Kim F]

I thought the Victorian Gov had said yes to a normal rail link to Tulla, about two months ago

[Michael Mak]

Originally Posted by Kim F

I thought the Victorian Gov had said yes to a normal rail link to Tulla, about two months ago

Even the rail link to MEL was built, how successful would it be? Brisbane has its own rail link to BNE but it doesn't meet early or late flights, the interval between the train service is 30 minutes. Travelers are after flexibility, more frequency is needed. And not to mention how much they are charging for it (about $24 return?)

Sydney's Airport Link suffers from similar problem. The high cost is turning lots of people away. Personally I don't think PPP works for Public Transport.

I think Melbourne's Skybus is excellent, high frequency and the price is reasonable for the service it offers. A rail link to Tulla could well become another white elephant.

Michael

[Lachlan H]

Originally Posted by Ash W

The operating costs would be very high too. It takes quite a lot of electricty to get a maglev train to levitate.

False. The maglev is VERY effecient, it only powers up the piece of track the trains currently on, and the next section of track the train is about to go onto, every other bit of track is switched off. Im not sure of the stats but someone might be able to explain how it compares to current trains in Australia. It also has very little noise as there is no friction between the train and tracks as it levitates, all you hear is the wind as it goes past.

Ive been on japanese bullet trains, french TGV and eurostar's and the shanghai maglev, and i felt most comfortable and safest on the Maglev, because it wraps around the track you feel more comfortable and safer, compared to on the eurostar when it tilted to go around a corner and you feel wonky on your feet in the dining car!

[Ash W]

Originally Posted by Lachlan H

False. The maglev is VERY effecient, it only powers up the piece of track the trains currently on, and the next section of track the train is about to go onto, every other bit of track is switched off. Im not sure of the stats but someone might be able to explain how it compares to current trains in Australia. It also has very little noise as there is no friction between the train and tracks as it levitates, all you hear is the wind as it goes past.

Yes I know how it works, but the magnetic field required to make the train levetate comes at a power consumtion cost, not to mention the massive cost of the track and the maintenance of said track.

Originally Posted by Lachlan H

Ive been on japanese bullet trains, french TGV and eurostar's and the shanghai maglev, and i felt most comfortable and safest on the Maglev, because it wraps around the track you feel more comfortable and safer, compared to on the eurostar when it tilted to go around a corner and you feel wonky on your feet in the dining car!

Actually those trains are designed to be wonky. In fact the British were one of the pioneers of fast train technology but their tilt train design was so good that there was no sense of movement which in turn made people sick when they road in it. I am not sure how the maglev gets around this but they aren't silly so I am sure it does somehow.

As for stablity on the track, a few TGV's have come off the track in their 20 years of operation but the articulated/common bogie design means it stays upright even if it derails at 300km/h+. If you want a good stat about safety 23 people have been killed in maglev accidents compared to 0 in "high speed" TGV accidents. There are about 400 TGV trains operating daily, and how many maglevs? Not many. (PS by high speed I mean on dedicated high speed tracks)

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the maglev as such, except I don't think it is the answer to any of the transport problems the world faces. Traditional technology such as steel on steel is very safe and still has a lot more to offer and at a far less cost than maglev. Maglevs, like traditional monorails have a place but not as part as fully integrated transport solution.

[Bill S]

Originally Posted by Ash W

Yes I know how it works, but the magnetic field required to make the train levetate comes at a power consumtion cost, not to mention the massive cost of the track and the maintenance of said track.

It seems not to be that thirsty on power ->

The normal energy consumption of the Transrapid is approximately 50–100 kW per section for levitation and travel, and vehicle control. The drag coefficient of the Transrapid is about 0.26. The air resistance of the vehicle, which has a frontal cross section of 16 m², requires a power consumption, at 400 km/h (111 m/s) cruising speed, given by the following formula:



Power consumption compares favorably with other high-speed rail systems. With an efficiency of 0.85, the power required is about 4.2 MW. Energy consumption for levitation and guidance purposes equates to approximately 1.7 kW/t. As the propulsion system is also capable of functioning in reverse, energy is transferred back into the electricity network during braking. An exception to this is when an emergency stop is performed using the emergency landing skids beneath the vehicle, although this method of bringing the vehicle to a stop is intended only as a last resort should it be impossible or undesirable to keep the vehicle levitating on back-up power to a natural halt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transra...y_requirements



And it seems that the track can be built for not a huge amount of money as well ->

China aims to limit the cost of future construction extending the maglev line to approximately 200 million yuan (US$24.6 million) per kilometre.[13] These costs compare competitively with airport construction (e.g., Hong Kong Airport cost US$20 billion to build in 1998) and eight-lane Interstate highway systems that cost around US$50 million per mile (US$31 million per kilometre) in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magneti...rain#Economics

[Rhys Xanthis]

Its one of those things that will just get cheaper and cheaper with time, it just depends if Melbourne can hold out without a rail link to make it cheap enough.

The railway in Shanghai rakes in enough money to pay for operating costs, but thats it, there is no way they're going to turn a profit from it.

So for this railway to be a MAGLEV, i think it's going to have to be a wholly Government operated train line, and not sold off to Connex (!!) or anyone else, otherwise the cost of a fare will just go through the roof.

The Governent has to be prepared to lose a large sum of money if it wants a maglev..