• Science

    Trans-Atlantic MagLev

    By Posted on 3.4.2008 20 Comments

    What: Submerged OCEANIC tunnel and supersonic train WHERE: New York London Cost: $88 billion $175 billion Crux: Neutrally buoyant vacuum tunnel submerged 150 to 300 feet beneath the Atlantic's surface and anchored to the seafloor, through which zips a magnetically levitated train at up to 4,000 mph.The idea is as wondrous as it is audacious: Get on a train at New York City's Penn Station and hit Paris, London or Brussels just an hour later. "From an engineering point of view there are no serious stumbling blocks," says Ernst Frankel, retired professor of ocean engineering at MIT.

    1.25.2009 at 09:44pm - Comment by azulprofundo

    Lauld's cost analysis is awesome. Instead of arguing about whether it would work or not, he actually sat down and did the math. Kudos! I wanted to add, though, the vehicle headway should actually be the stopping distance of the trailing vehicle minus the stopping distance of the lead vehicle, plus the reaction distance. Even in the worst case scenario, when the wall caves in and the lead vehicle runs into a tube full of water, its stopping distance will probably be close to that of the trailing vehicles, especially if they are equipped with emergency brakes. Furthermore, if all vehicles are allowed to run end-to-end, with appropriate safety couplings, the necessary headway can be reduced to zero, since all stopping distances will be equal and reaction time will be zero.

  • Science

    Trans-Atlantic MagLev

    By Posted on 3.4.2008 20 Comments

    What: Submerged OCEANIC tunnel and supersonic train WHERE: New York London Cost: $88 billion $175 billion Crux: Neutrally buoyant vacuum tunnel submerged 150 to 300 feet beneath the Atlantic's surface and anchored to the seafloor, through which zips a magnetically levitated train at up to 4,000 mph.The idea is as wondrous as it is audacious: Get on a train at New York City's Penn Station and hit Paris, London or Brussels just an hour later. "From an engineering point of view there are no serious stumbling blocks," says Ernst Frankel, retired professor of ocean engineering at MIT.

    11.14.2008 at 02:26pm - Comment by azulprofundo

    First of all, this train WILL happen if the free market is allowed to operate. I don't know about you, but I would be the first to put in buy a few shares in the company that builds this, and I don't think I'm alone. As for saving our economy....sorry to disappoint you, but transportation already makes up a rather small percentage of the price of most products, and nothing can "save" a government regulated economy, least of all a train. It will however, drastically reduce the price of, and increase the speed of, transportation. All the objections people have posted in comments could have been easily solved had they given the thought to it. How will it be funded? (Sell shares in a public company.) How will it withstand ocean currents? (Anchor the tunnel to the ocean floor/) How will it be protected from terrorism? (1. Keep the government out of train operations, to avoid making the train a terrorist target. 2. Employ various security systems, which may include ir proximity detectors, cameras, ocean current monitors, electric field detectors, touch sensors, robotic patrols, security contractors, and huge bounties on the discovery of vandalism and capture of vandals.) Won't other forms of transportation lose out? (Yes they will, just like the manufacturers of steam engines did. As long as the government stays out, these industries will be powerless to stop it.) I do have one objection though: Traditionally, trains were built with large, interconnected cars (as opposed to many separate cars), because this reduced air resistance, reduced engine costs, and reduced the risk of collision and derailment. The downside is that the entire train must stop at each station. However, this MagLev tran has no air resistance, no onboard engines (it operates by alternating magnetic fields, like the motor in a disc drive), and no chance of derailment. As long as collisions are avoided by the computer control system (which isn't hard), operational costs can be dramatically reduced if two tracks are built, and cars are allowed to run individually, with off-ramps at appropriate locations. Think about it: the majority of energy waste in any transportation system is braking; by allowing through traffic to proceed without stopping, braking is dramatically reduced, resulting in massive energy and cost savings.



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg