Anaheim-Vegas maglev train project gets $45 million infusion
By Joshua Fruhlinger 
posted Jun 8th 2008 1:37AM
posted Jun 8th 2008 1:37AM
[Via Slashdot]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
fear and loathing goes 21st century
We can't stop here, this is bat country!
2 Hours? At 300mph, it should take well under 1 hr!
thanks for the reply, Brian
ben: good thing because it wasn't an option at 300mph
I would like to see this connect to every city in the US.
NICE
Indeed, but where I work at Heathrow Airport this would cover about 6 months of on-costs for some largish project and that is it!
Big projects = extortionate!
Not that I complain; i'm more than worth my weight in gold!
New public transportation, and trains nonetheless, in the US!? It's about damn time.
this way parents can leave their children at disney land, while finding enough time to send in vegas!!
genius!!
public transport from one "entertainment" location to another.. will this actually help anyone to commute to work?
Russ, strippers/wannabe starlets?
but seriously, anything to get high tech mass transit on the radar over here
Yeah the government funding public transportation from Disney to Vegas is about par for the course. Meaning that it's laughable.
Three words: Snow White Strippers
What happens if there is a power outage? will the maglev crash? There is probobly some kind of backup generator or battery, but still, ive always wondered what a maglev could do to a lost cow in the desert at full speed
I believe the train has wheels below for just such a situation, besides when it is in a station (I suppose you could keep floating at a station but why bother).
The more you know!
I believe there are standard magnets to keep the train from touching the tracks, and it only needs power to move.
This particular project is based on the technology developed by a German company Transrapid. The Chinese have a line running in Shanghai (and have been caught red-handed trying to stealing the technology for their "own" maglev technology). This particular type of maglev can follow existing right-of-ways along highways or railroads on raised pylons a few meters high or at ground level. Cows and other fauna along the route need not fear. Also, if there's power loss, a Transrapid meglev isn't careening anywhere as it partially wraps around the guideway and it flies just a few millimeters above the guideway, so if anything it'll just scrap along the track until it stops. The one collision that has happened occurred because of a communication failure: A maintainance vehicle was still on the test track in Germany when the test train came barreling through.
@Ben
At first I thought like you did, then checked wikipedia. There aren't currently any trains that are held up by permanent magnets, although research is being done on it. All current trains are held up by electromagnets, so if they lose power, they will not levitate for long. It seems most trains have enough onboard battery to bring the train down to a low speed, from which point it either rolls on wheels or just scraps along the track until it comes to a halt.
3-5 billion dollars... thats like one or two B2 bombers.. thats pennies for the US government... i think one of those B2 bombers just crashed too.... there was ure maglev train ticket right there
The cost of a B2 is $1.2 billion, so that's roughly 4 bombers.
National security > fast train to Vegas.
And why should the rest of the country pay for Los Angelenos to get to Las Vegas faster? Let the people riding the goddamned thing pay for it. Better yet, let the businesses that will be served by it, to wit, the multi-billion dollar gaming industry (and Disney) pay for it. There's a word for this, and it starts with "boon" and ends with "doggle."
@ Artie
Step forward in clean, efficient transportation > Bombers that would be killing innocent civilians or taking up space on a base somewhere.
I think B2s are being phased out for UAVs and cruise missles anyways.
warmongers hate mass transit. who knew?
You are obviously unfamiliar with the concept of "deterrence" (hint: its what dominant weapon systems do while they are "taking up space on a base somewhere").
while our "dominant weapons systems" rot away on bases, the rest of the world moves beyond us economically, diplomatically, and technologically.
ah well, fearmongering "ftw"
Nah; as always, its the uninformed, poorly educated, easily swayed keyboard demagogue "ftw".
Several problems in this thread: As pointed out, B2's are on their way out in favor of UAVs and other far cheaper and far safer methods of delivering ordinance. As for the limited scope of the project, California wants it as a proof-of-concept run because the LA-LV connection is one of the busiest routes in the nation. The are plans for a more expansive system connecting all of Southern and Central California to help deal with that state's future mass transit needs. Similar proposals exist for Baltimore-DC, Pittsburg and its eastern suburbs, as well as Atlanta. This isn't an amusement park ride, it's a real attempt at dealing with transportation needs in this country.
Artie, I suppose your superior "education" about antiquated bombing technology being >> every other possible national or human endeavor somehow indicates I am "easily swayed" (i.e. think for myself)? Huh? you make no sense at all. Too much AM radio is warping your "mind". Who's the demagogue now? Check out the numbers on those other metrics I mentioned then get back to me with your empty war-cheerleading. You must have cried when the cold war ended.
by the war Artie, I have bachelor and master of science degrees from major research universities. don't talk about what you don't know.
moisture > b-2 bombers. ;p
i for one, cannot wait for the maglev, if it ever comes. the drive just plain sucks, especially trying to get out there on a friday night after work. it takes about 2 - 3 hours just trying to get out of LA before hitting the (not so) open road to vegas!
"The 2005 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined and is over eight times larger than the official military budget of China."
Fuckin' bring it on... world.
@ phanbouy
Wow: bachelors AND a masters. Oh, and by the war. . . I'm a high school graduate as of last June but hey, at least I can freaking spell. At least make sure things are spelled right when you're bragging on yourself.
Anyhow, I think that private companies like Amtrak need to be spending money on this, not the feds. I work to go to school, and the thought that I am working hours of my life to pay the federal government so they can pay not only for a war that I don't support but also for projects that do this Floridian no good makes me sick. Like I said, why don't Amtrak and Union Pacific, who actually would have a stake in this if it worked, put in some dollars to research a clean, cheap alternative to oil?
@ An_asshole
Let's not forget that only a handful of states contribute more to the union than they take in through taxes. California one of those states that do actually contribute.
Not to say that's fair either, but what is?
kt, don't go to college, even if any is deluded enough to let you in somewhere. the degree is spelled MASTER OF SCIENCE, dipshit. have fun serving me french fries.
p.s. it's not bragging when someone first calls you "uneducated", tool.
kt@ You realize that Amtrak is funded by the National Government right? Also infrastructure projects cost money and their's no way that they will be sustainable without government money. Airlines received $15 billion from congress after 9/11, Train companies need $100 billion just to improve tracks by 2030 which is when they will reach peak capacity. If we don't spend money on infrastructure projects, we're are just hurt ourselves in the long run. The 3-5 billion this will cost over several years isn't even 1% that the national highway system cost. So think of this way, the government spends 3-5 billion on this or 40 billion on improving freeways, runways, terminals and other projects that will be required if this project isn't constructed. Maybe you should look into the economics of rail transport and notice that it's a lot more efficient than the freeway and wonder why you don't have a high speed rail network in Florida.
The government just spent close to $300 million just to build a two mile long bridge over six feet of water in my town. How in the hell is this project only going to cost $45 million?
The project costs $3-5 billion. The $45 million is only a small part set aside by Bush.
in short, bush doesn't want to support mass transportation... bombers can kill hundreds and thousands of people.. while trains only kill people if they crash...
bombers more fun > trains going chu chu..
but one can still dream of one day traveling on the ground just as fast as in the air..
The $45 million is meant to be used for the initial environmental impact studies, and such.
The environmental impact statement also covers parts of preliminary engineering. The money buys more than which cacti are going to be bulldozed.
At the top of the page, you shall find an article. Read it.
This could have some promise. I've been one of those lucky guys trying to get to Vegas from L.A. on a friday and had to sit in bumper to bumper traffic for almost 8 hours. If they can make the train ticket more affordable than simply flying Southwest Airlines at roughly $100 each way, then I'm game. I just don't understand why a high speed route like L.A. to San Francisco isn't also on the table.
"I just don't understand why a high speed route like L.A. to San Francisco isn't also on the table."
It is. Vote for the bond measure this November if you're a CA voter in favor.
http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/64198
The high-speed rail project is a $33 billion program to provide high-speed rail service between Anaheim, Los Angeles and San Francisco. An additional $7 billion will be required to extend service to San Diego and Sacramento. A bond measure will appear on the November ballot authorizing construction of the system.
"The immediate challenge for the Authority is to demonstrate to the voters how the $9.95 billion in bonds on the November ballot can generate the $33 billion necessary to fund the project´s first phase," Senator Lowenthal stated.
Holy crap this is awesome. I live in Irvine (right next to anaheim) and I'm going to vegas this weekend for my bday! (flying SWA--i think ~55 each way + taxes, if anyone gives a dump) This would be so tubularly radisweetly sick. I love vegas.
topography and cost. They're going to do a line in pittsburgh where it's far cheaper for land grants while proving an acceptable topographical challenge with all of the hills, valleys, rivers, etc.
Thanks for the info Johan. I had no idea.
As much as I'd like this to happen and use it, I will probably never use it, as I live over an hour away from Anaheim.
But if it happens, at least it'll reduce the number of cars coming from OC.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/maglev-train.htm
think if you put two magnets together and held them at exact opposites but never let them touch. maglev doesnt need power for levitation, but it does need it for forward, backward thrusts. also braking. there are backup brakes in cases of power failure, accidents.
if they were permanent magnets, the train wouldn't go anywhere.
What exactly do you think electromagnets are powered off of?
@Jedix123, you're doing it wrong, turn the magnets around.
Disney? Give money for something resonable? I think you've over estimated the communist mouse...
its not a communist mouse, its a fascist mouse...get it right
Guaranteed to cost a heck of a lot more than $5 billion!
Maglev seems like overkill (ie, waste of $). The French TGV regularly goes 200 mph, and has achieved a top speed of 357 mph. But why waste money on a proven technology, I guess?
Other than the sci-fi coolness factor and bit of extra speed, I don't see what advantage maglev has over TGV/shinkansen-style high-speed rail either.
Anyone care to explain? Is it much more energy-efficient or something?
The TGV in question that did 357mph was stripped out, tuned to perfection and was boosted in power in a way that no normal TGV train ever is - plus it hardly had any passengers on it (as opposed to a normal commute). In essence it was a speed benchmark, not normal speed at normal conditions, as opposed to this MagLev which can do those speeds with significantly less trouble.
I would agree with you on choosing TGV/ICE/Shinkansen trains over the maglev option. Not only they are significantly cheaper, to buy and operate, but it is proved technology for the last 40 years.
The only reason I think why the US government is against it is simply because the makers are either Alstom (French), Siemans (German) or the Japanese company that makes the Shinkansen. National pride to the current government is more important then practicality.
I believe the maglev is also built by some German company...
Why should anyone invest in a core 2 duo? My 486 is proven technology and it runs Windows 95 just fine...
The Tejon Pass alone with cost a good 20 billion. The only way to build up speed would be to build the track several hundred feet above the freeway. It won't be doing 300mph through LA county.
This is yet another bridge to nowhere. Vegas will be forced to dry up once fresh water sources begin to dry out. LA will follow soon after.
@BigD145
hmmm...I guess you've never heard of the LA aqueduct. We're good for a while.
@Greg: You get your water from all over the state and those sources are failing. LA keeps fighting with Arizona and Washington/Oregon over water sources. You can't take any more water from Mono Lake than you already do and your population continues to climb. You already wiped out Owens Lake. With the growth going on in Victorville, you'll be fighting with them over your Central and Northern Cali sources. Fresh water is not endless. Underground sources have a 50-100 year cycle. Snow and rainfall have been on the decline. SoCal is screwing itself over.
It isn't reasonable to compare train technology to CPU tech.
A CPU cost under $1000 generally, while a train system costs many billions of dollars. If you got the wrong CPU, you can just replace it easily. If you build the wrong train system, what will you do?
If a CPU crashes on you, nobody gets killed. We know what happens when trains have "issues".
A CPU doesn't require maintenance. A train system does. Maintenance on a system that's been around for a while & figured out over time is likely to be much cheaper than on a new, unproven system.
I'm not saying that one should never invest in new systems. Far from it; rather, when it comes to huge public projects, new technology needs to prove itself in the market over time before you dump huge sums of public money into it.
After all, on the day the latest CPU came out, did you rush out and buy it? Or did you wait until after you read performance reviews and the price dropped enough for you to consider it a bargain?
(Or, for a more relevant example, did you run out and buy a Rambus-memory-based motherboard when Intel first came out with it and Rambus memory was very expensive? Or did you hold on and find out that not only did it have bugs but also it wasn't any better than regular, cheaper DDR memory?)
bk7, with regard to the TGV and its top speed, you must remember that it was designed (decades ago) to cruise at 200 mph.
Obviously, if you wanted to have a similar train cruising at 300 mph, you wouldn't use the exact same design. You'd tweak it.
We can agree that there are various ways to make a train go fast. When it comes to spending huge amounts of public money, I think it makes sense to go with the best system on a cost/benefit basis, not just a benefit-only basis. So while maglev might be a great way to make a train go fast, it might not be the most dollar-efficient way to do so.
I'm not a train engineer, though, and I don't think this decision should be made by people who, like me, don't have all the facts.
It's about time a train got to that lil place called Vegas.
That town was on verge of dyin' !
As a resident of Vegas and hearing about this project for decades, my thought is we'll still be talking about doing this in the 22nd century and they'll be no stitch of progress.
The Amtrack line between Vegas and So Cal was killed years ago because nobody uses it, our little mass transit train along the strip & convention center can BARELY keep itself operating... I don't know about the folks from So Cal but here in Vegas people just like to drive their raised diesel trucks and HUGE SUVs around... I think once the sheen wears off the new paint this will be little more than an amusement ride. All that aside, I love the idea! ;)
@Justin
the reason why no one uses amtrak is because if fu@king blows.
1) extremely slow (last time i was looking to go to SF from LA amtrack was going to take about 9 hours...might as well drive)
2) extremely pricey (same thing, when i looked to book a ticket for SWA they wanted 110 roundtrip...for a 1 hr flight mind you...amtrak was 100 bucks. sorry, but i think i'd spend the extra 10 bucks to save a total of 12 hours commuting time
those two reasons alone are enough for most people to ditch trains. in just about an market, if you can find an airport that runs SWA compared to amtrack in a similar route, you'd be foolish to take the train (given that you have at least a week to book out to get the cheapest SWA fares)
Amtrak is quite reasonable even if it is slower than flying. I used to do the 7-8 hour drive from Monterey Bay to Capistrano and it got tiring. Over the past couple years it's gotten to the point where gassing up a 35mpg car costs as much as a train ticket. You can get a heck of a lot more work done on a train and avoid the LA traffic.
Justin: Amtrak is slow and blows because it doesn't get the government funding it needs in order to be successful. Over 764 million people road trains in 1946. Now only 27 million people do. Part of that is because we have become so dependent on cars and planes in the US. While in Europe they have been maintaining their rail infrastructure and rail travel is actually much more prevalent in those countries.
We will face a challenge in the future where our rail infrastructure reaches make capacity by 2030. We'll even have to fund probably over $100 billion dollars or more into it or we'll have a serious crisis because power plants won't get coal, we won't be able to ship grain, crops across the country and all that gasoline and oil we use won't get to us because it all comes via ports on rails. Representatives from Norfolk Southern and CSX have said that delays could be as high as 2 months as trains try to get across the country.
Also the Desert Wind service, Los Angeles to Las Vegas was discontinued by budget cuts by the Clinton administration. Mostly because the trackage between Las Vegas and Los Angeles is out of date and they didn't want to spend the money to improve it.
Is it stopping 30 min each in Victorville and Barstow? Because Vegas is only about 260 mi. away from Anaheim. Should take less than an hour.
The train likely tops out around 300mph. It does not average 300mph on the trip.
Also, if you take a look at the map, there are some rather bendy sections where the train is likely going to move a LOT slower. Not to mention the fact that trains usually move much slower in populated areas (e.g., the Anaheim end of this train).
Plus you can add a few minutes on each end for initial acceleration and deceleration.
Plus, the linked older article says the trip will be "well under two hours", not two whole hours.
I commute from Southern California to my job at VMware every week. I so wish they had a maglev from here to San Jose/Bay Area. It would be a better candidate for Federal money. Let Las Vegas foot the bill for a maglev, which no doubt most people will be riding for their benefit.
well, you know, from one DisneyLand to the next...
yea you could go to one place where everyone is a kid to the other where everyone is an adult.. or wants to be.
Of course, now that I look at a bigger map, it seems plausible they would link Vegas to the Bay Area. Then I'd be set.
I rode the Shanghai to Pudong maglev back in February, and it was pretty nice. Much more comfortable than flying in my opinion (and not impacted by delays or weather). Add in some free wireless (which it better have), and I'm in.
Of course, I'll have to stay at my current job for another 15 years before I will be able to take advantage of this... by then, hopefully all our oil will be exhausted and all software engineers are working from home like they should be now.
To pay off the $3 billion it will need to generate close to a million bucks a day for about 8 years. And that's not even including energy and running costs!
A million bucks is 10,000 $100 tickets, so that means a ticket will probably be higher than an airplane's (which are sometimes $75 one way).
At $100 per ticket it seems that it would be easier if they just reduced the hassle at the airport so you can show up at the airport 20 mins before the flight and still make it on the plane.
Still i hope it gets built --- I love maglevs.
sure flying's $75... + $54 in fees
Aren't government-funded public transport companies usually unprofitable?
In this country (the UK), our rails are run by national rail and lots of little companies that own sections of track. However, the government massively subsidises the money that they earn, because trains are not profitable.
I can't imagine that they expect to make their money back on this.
8 years is a weird period for the amortization of a public infrastructure such as a train (30+ would be more like it). Anyway, I don't think it's the proper way to look at it.
AFAIK in this kind of public transportation tickets are supposed to pay for the operating costs. This new train would theoretically generate an increase in economic activity and therefore in taxes (don't we all love them?) that would eventually pay off the initial investment.
Big problem is when you start an infrastructure with a budget of 3 to 5 Million dollars (66% more!?). Wouldn't be surprised if it ended up costing around 10 million, since there are always a lot of pockets to fill.
I can't help but notice you didn't even include inflation (at least 8% over this timescale) and the fact the loan will be attached to some form of APR!
Why 8 years? That's a terrible payback for an infrastructure investment. Try 20-30 years.
However, I agree that the billion dollar casinos should be footing the bill for this project.
And are they just going to run one train? With the potential volume of traffic on this route, I could see adding 2 or more trains, running 24 hours on the weekends.
I don't know the projected ridership levels, but the California High Speed Rail Network will have 250,000 to 300,000 daily riders. 10,000 daily riders is really low. I would suspect that it will be around 50,000 at least. For instance, the Tokaido Shinkansen is the world busiest high-speed rail and carries 375,000 passengers a day.
300 MPH from the happiest place on earth to sin city.
I take it that by "sin city" you mean disney land.
Why link them? Because alot of adults get pissed off from paying $1500 to spend 7 days waiting in mile long lines and going on "it's a small world" ten freaking times - they need to go somewhere to get away from the all put-on "cutesy" crap.
Right! And appropriately, the mag-lev drops you off at Copperfield's show, right in the middle of---you guessed it---a levitation trick!
How about one between Engadget's headquarters and Cupertino?
I read elsewhere that these high-speed trains are so efficient that no one flies between those cities any longer. There's no need to show up an hour or two earlier for airport security checks.
I think the purpose is to build the first one in a place it is likely to get used and where people will pay becasue they want to go to the destination. Once we prove it can work, we can build more. Sounds nice to build somehting for commuters, but thse trains are elevated so building these in a highly populated area will reguire the sacrifice of many homes and businesses. Building this one with most of it in a unpopulated desert, going to a popular destination, makes sense.
I've been on the Shanghai MagLev several times, it's great. It was built as a proof of concept from the new airport to the Pudong area.
oh, for all of the B-2 and DoD related comments, this is not the right forum,so why would you comment? But as with any subject, your opinions are welcome. You don't have to have any actual facts to comment.
they must be able to go through tunnels or something, which would probably up the cost though, or they could do it like the docklands light railway in london
gee, a high speed train from Sodom to Gomorrah. Seems like money well spent.
IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT PUTTING A 300 MPH TRAIN THAT MERELY FLOATS ABOVE A TRACK IN A QUAKE FAULT ZONE A LITTLE DANGEROUS?
NO, WHY? WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
TEH EARFQUAKE COULD STICK TEH CAPS LOCK
It's not like that don't have high speed trains in Japan or anything...wait...
Maglev is very cool technology, but I want to know why they're not building a regular high speed train like the TGV in France or the Ave in Spain? Those trains are almost as fast(~200 mph), use proven technology, and are much cheaper per mile to build. This strikes me as a bunch of politicians just wanting to have the latest toy. Don't get me wrong I'm all in favor of more trains in this country and love riding them when I'm in Europe, but I don't think they've thought this through. Go read about how much trouble the Chinese have had with their roughly 20 mile maglev in Shanghai.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Maglev_Train