[HN Gopher] Transport System Bogl: a new magnetic rail system
___________________________________________________________________
Transport System Bogl: a new magnetic rail system
Author : Tomte
Score : 37 points
Date : 2022-07-09 09:40 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (transportsystemboegl.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (transportsystemboegl.com)
| dzonga wrote:
| seems it's another maglev train solution. maglev trains seemed
| cool watching videos close to 2 decades ago. seems they're coming
| to fruition finally something to get excited about
| bluGill wrote:
| Not something to get excited about because maglev doesn't solve
| any of the real problems trains have in the real world.
| ucosty wrote:
| Another day, another gadgetbahn. It's hard to tell from their
| website exactly what problems they're trying to solve. They seem
| to have taken all of the worst aspects of monorail style
| operations, the relative complexity of maglev, and the vendor
| lock-in of a gadgetbahn and have just run with it.
|
| Off the top of my head:
|
| From their rolling (gliding?) stock concepts it looks like
| they're targeting the automated metro system market, think London
| DLR or Vancouver Skytrain. With these system top speed isn't
| really the issue as you'll be constrained by acceleration and
| stop spacing. Better gains can be had in this space by building
| better signalling systems, allowing the trains to run at higher
| frequencies.
|
| All of their marketing materials show the trains going in perfect
| straight lines. A lot of other monorail systems are constrained
| by this, because building switches for monorails is hard. Throw
| maglev into the mix and I can't imagine the problem gets any
| easier.
|
| They focus a bit on ease of construction with the elevated rail
| segments being made of pre-cast concrete sections. I'm faily
| certain any modern elevated train guideway is also made of pre-
| made sections on a production line. They're trying to sell normal
| as some kind of innovation.
|
| All the usual gadgetbahn things seem to apply as well. TSB goes
| bust? Good luck getting new rolling stock. Want to integrate this
| service with existing stations and track? Nope, it's all bespoke.
| Want to get rolling stock from a different supplier that can meet
| your local needs better? Good luck with that one. Nobody else
| buys this system, so it remains expensive forever? Sucks to be
| you.
| 0_____0 wrote:
| _gesticulates wildly in the direction of Paris Line 14_
|
| In the US, we're so far behind that we can just plain copy just
| about any modern train system. It's not the tech that's the
| issue, it's the land use, policy, and planning.
| bluGill wrote:
| Maglev has some advantages for high speed operation: less
| rolling resistance at speed (but worse in slow sections - while
| not rolling resistance, at low speed they are not as
| efficient), and less track maintenance. Problem is until you
| get to high speed those advantages are not worth it, and when
| you do air resistance is very expensive and so you need a lot
| more riders or a high ticket price.
|
| In the end maglev isn't worth it. It is only marginally faster
| than regular rail, and a lot slower than flying. You can bring
| a few cities just outside of regular rail range into train
| range, but if you just let those people fly you overall have a
| cheaper system.
|
| Sticking to standard rail means that you can share track with
| other service. While this isn't easy (you need a lot of people
| in the office ensuring the schedule works) the options make it
| well worth it. Even if you only share rail overnight when you
| are running less service, 24 hour service is something all
| cities should have on all lines.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Does anyone know how the new slower maglev in Changsha is
| working out (between the HSR station and airport)? I'm not
| sure why they went with maglev there, hopefully it just
| wasn't just a prestige project and there was a real benefit
| to it.
|
| The maglev Japan is building between Tokyo and Nagoya (and
| eventually Osaka) should be productive, but that is more of a
| traditional high speed one and will have enough traffic to
| support it.
| usrusr wrote:
| My sarcastic take: the problem they are trying to solve is that
| they are earning a lot of money from contracts so large that so
| few competitors remain that it becomes somewhat "taking candy
| from a baby" and that makes them desperately look for something
| to be proud of.
|
| On the less sarcastic side: unlike the major partners in the
| former Transrapid project (Siemens and whatever the current
| incarnation of Thyssen was called at the time), they aren't a
| public company but some kind of family estate foundation. That
| type of organization has far more liberty to follow vanity
| projects than anything pubic could ever dream of.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| Nice, but it looks ugly AF, it feels very "industrial"
|
| I can't imagine this in the middle of EU architecture
|
| Or in the middle of Asian temples, or in the middle of a
| beautiful landscape
|
| They really need better designers
|
| Also the front doesn't look like aerodynamic
| Someone wrote:
| Trains are relatively long in proportion to their width. That
| makes the sides of the trains become relatively more important
| for aerodynamics than the fronts.
|
| Possibly, making the front more aerodynamic has so many
| disadvantages that it's not worth it. For example, a train with
| a long nose means less space for passengers in a given length
| of train. It also may be a bad choice aerodynamically if you
| want to have the ability to combine multiple railroad cars into
| a single train.
| azalemeth wrote:
| The website doesn't actually say how it works. I can imagine it
| fitting with some (admittedly german) aesthetics.
| schroeding wrote:
| I think it looks quite fitting between boxy European[1] or
| Asian[2] rail cars. :D
|
| [1]
| https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1019_4-Gleisdreieck-...
| [2]
| https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Model_1000_of_Odakyu...
| Shadonototra wrote:
| they are very ugly
|
| an example of what's beautiful and modern design (imo) is the
| Tram in Bordeaux, France
|
| https://www.alstom.com/fr/press-releases-
| news/2020/2/alstom-...
|
| https://i.redd.it/fbl047w3qdpy.jpg
|
| https://static.actu.fr/uploads/2020/07/tramway-
| bordeaux-854x...
| schroeding wrote:
| I agree, but that's the boxy Euro-Asian reality, for years
| to come. So it can't get much worse. :D
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| If it's ugly AF and it takes 10K cars off the roads, then it's
| not that ugly. Much like "if it's stupid but it works, then
| it's not stupid".
|
| "EU architecture" already juxtaposes ornate pre-1900 buildings
| with brutalist concrete blocks and glass spires, so no change
| there.
| danw1979 wrote:
| I mean, it looks a lot like the DLR in London which is a bit of
| a raised concrete eyesore too. But it's not what you'd choose
| to plonk down in Vienna or Bruges, I agree.
| tgv wrote:
| Did you ever see the Brugge train station? Anything looks
| better.
| cgeier wrote:
| This is very similar to existing maglev trains (such as
| transrapid) but has the advantage that a lot of the technology is
| now in the trains, not in the track. That makes construction of
| such tracks a lot cheaper (but separate and new tracks are needed
| anyway).
|
| Also, this new system is designed for cruising speeds of up to
| 150 km/h (instead of 500 km/h).
|
| But in addition to passenger transport, they seem to be able to
| carry freight as well. Last year there was a demo track for
| container transport in Hamburg's harbour [1], not sure, if it's
| still there.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tee6BjDY0N8
| rob74 wrote:
| The question in my mind is just: if not for higher speeds, why
| should you build a maglev line instead of a conventional (high
| speed / regular) train line? IMHO the other purported
| advantages are not really convincing - it may be a little bit
| quieter, but the "flexible track routing" sounds very
| unconvincing: at ground level you would have to fence off the
| track, so in an urban setting it would probably end up on
| stilts most of the time. And if you consider that, phrases like
| "Visually appealing track route for urban use without overhead
| lines" sound a bit ridiculous - is a concrete guideway on
| concrete stilts really more visually appealing than tram (or
| train) rails with overhead line? (In case anyone is wondering:
| Germany has the luxury problem of having all other cables -
| power, telecom, etc. - 99% underground, so they can debate the
| aesthetic impact of overhead lines of trams. Not an issue in
| most other countries.)
| vosper wrote:
| I looked at the site, I can't tell what's new about it. Kinda
| looks like less-grimy BART to me, and that's hardly modern. Does
| anyone know more about what's innovative here?
| bluGill wrote:
| marketing, like most gadgetbahns. There is a reason transit
| enthusiasts in general look down on this. Anyone who knows
| something about how to run trains knows this at best done
| nothing to solve the real problems facing transit, and most
| likely if they get even one sale it makes things worse for
| everyone.
| abrudz wrote:
| Why do they have a re-painted Transrapid 07 on their grounds?[1]
|
| Trnasrapid seems like a much more mature and capable design than
| their own. E.g. While Transrapid uses a T-shaped track, Bogl uses
| a U-shaped track. That's not going to work well with snow or
| falling leaves, not to mention people on platforms discarding
| items into the tracks...
|
| [1]
| https://www.google.com/maps/place/Transport+System+B%C3%B6gl...
| usr1106 wrote:
| They bought it for 1 Euro from Deutsche Bahn.
|
| Deutsche Bahn have given up the idea that it's something you
| could advertise for a brighter future with so they must have
| been happy to get rid of it without getting bad press for
| destroying industrial heritage.
|
| Max Bogl participated in the construction of the Shanghai line.
| So I guess they thought it would be nice exhibit of being a
| global player.
| Transrapid wrote:
| gbanfalvi wrote:
| How is this better than a regular train/subway/tram?
| uniqueuid wrote:
| Magnetically levitated, meaning up to 500 km/h (~300 mph),
| silent, and it's driverless.
|
| Downsides are that you need to build completely new tracks with
| limited curvature (and new stations).
| Octoth0rpe wrote:
| > meaning up to 500 km/h (~300 mph)
|
| from the website: Cruising speed of up to 150 km/h
|
| I'm guessing that the value proposition of this particular
| system is that it's cut certain performance corners to
| achieve a far lower cost while still providing more than
| adequate speed for the intracity use case.
| bluGill wrote:
| Sure, but wheels work just fine at those speeds. the
| advantages of maglev over steel wheels need much faster
| speeds before they are realized. At least for all current
| maglev systems, this is still vaporware, ask me after it
| has been in use for 20 years and we have real world data on
| how it works out. Don't be the person who pays for getting
| that real world data though.
| iggldiggl wrote:
| Cynically speaking - it's based on a track made from pre-cast
| concrete elements, which Max Bogl (a construction company and
| concrete manufacturer at heart) will happily build for you.
|
| It's also marketed as a fully turn-key system where everything
| starting from the design and finishing with the vehicles and
| operations control will be provided by Bogl, which conversely
| also means that it's a fully proprietary system and you're
| dependent on Bogl for continuing support or any future
| expansions, too.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Aren't most elevated guideways built from sections pre-cast
| and moved into place? How is that a specific advantage of
| this thing?
| rincewind wrote:
| It's really hard to figure out how the system differs from
| PeopleMover. Is this new tech, or just a new vendor for basically
| the same design they have at Disney? Wait, is this a MagLev
| peoplemover?
| uniqueuid wrote:
| This seems to be a magnetic levitation solution. You know,
| floating on air cushions, (almost) no friction, but needs
| specific new tracks.
|
| A prototype was developed in Germany some 50 years ago [1] but
| never caught on.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid
| thematrixturtle wrote:
| Shanghai built a demonstration line out to the airport that's
| still operational and the world's fastest rail line to boot:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_maglev_train
|
| But it looks like Japan will be the first with a proper
| intercity line in 2027-ish:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen
| PinguTS wrote:
| Shanghai IS the Transrapid. Siemens first build it and than
| sold the whole technology to China, because the Transrapid is
| basically dead end.
|
| I think, they extended the original track later on. But no
| new one will be ever build.
| cgeier wrote:
| While similar technology, a lot more of that technology went
| into the train instead of the track which makes this new
| solution much cheaper to produce.
| moepstar wrote:
| https://www.google.com/maps/place/Transport+System+B%C3%B6gl...
|
| This is their test track, on the right-hand side of the road
| (edit: click on the picture, there's also a 360deg panorama of
| the track)
| PinguTS wrote:
| We should not forget the backstory of this company.
|
| Max Bogel is the largest family-owned construction company in
| Germany. They build mainly infrastructure like roads, but where
| also involved in the Gigafactory in Grunheide in Germany.
|
| So, for them its a new business unit to build more infrastructure
| as a whole contractor. They can delivery everything, not like it
| is today in infrastructure projects where you have many different
| contractors providing different parts.
|
| So, they want to sell more concrete.
| usr1106 wrote:
| Interesting, lived in Germany for 30 years (although decades
| ago), but had never heard about them.
|
| Just wanted to say if the Transrapid consortium with the
| biggest German industry players and decades of public
| investment backing could not make it, I would not try again.
| This is not the SW business where any can start with some
| resources rented in the cloud. Of course sometimes it's just
| too early to be right, but wouldn't count on it.
|
| On the anecdotal side my first presentation in school around
| 1972 was about the German Maglev train project. It did not go
| as predicted, they sold one minor line to Shanghai decades
| later.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Edmund Stoiber's infamous 10 minute speech killed the
| Transrapid in Munich. One of the OG German memes.
| schroeding wrote:
| For the uninitiated:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7TboWvVERU
|
| Context:
|
| The old munich airport in Riem was closed in the 90s. The
| new airport was very far away. Gadgetbahn Transrapid,
| running through tunnels and above the remains of the old
| olympia train line from '72, should save the day. MP
| Stoiber tries to explain the advantages.
|
| Translation:
|
| If you start from the main station in Munich with 10
| minutes, without having to check in at the airport yet,
| then you basically start at the airport, at the main
| station in Munich you start your flight. 10 minutes. Take a
| look at the major airports. If you go to Heathrow in London
| or anywhere else, Charles de Gaulle in France or in Rome,
| if you look at the distances, if you look at Frankfurt, you
| will find that 10 minutes is all you need to find your gate
| in Frankfurt. If you start from the main station, you get
| into the main station[1], you take the Transrapid to Franz
| Josef Strauss[2] Airport in 10 minutes, then you
| practically start here, at the main station in Munich. Of
| course, this means that the main station basically grows
| closer to Bavaria, to the Bavarian cities, because that is
| obvious, because many lines from Bavaria converge at the
| main station.
|
| [1] "get into" like you would get into a bus, like if the
| station actually transports you to your destination [2]
| Bavarian MP and German Minister in the 60s/70s/80s, Munich
| Airport is named after him
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Good lord, you actually managed to listen to and
| translate it without falling apart laughing? _tips hat_
| usr1106 wrote:
| Munich has been considered one of the leading engineering
| centers in Germany for a long time. (Maybe Berlin has
| passed it now when you focus more on software startups.)
| How the heck have they had the worst politicians In
| Germany (well, probably only second worst in post fact
| age) for decades?
| bluGill wrote:
| I wish they would sell standard systems. If it is just concrete
| we need more competition bringing costs down.
|
| Standard not only means you won't get an orphan system, but it
| also means you as a city can order from anyone. If the company
| you normally order from is busy with other orders you can buy
| from someone else when you have need.
|
| Standard means as a manufacture you can afford to invest in
| more jigs. Jigs are very expensive to make, but they decrease
| the cost of each whatever built with them. As such the more
| customers of the same thing the more jigs are worth investing
| in. Every change the jigs cannot handle is additional cost.
| (some jigs are adjustable, so within limits you could do things
| like non-standard wheel gauges - you still shouldn't but you
| could)
| iggldiggl wrote:
| Looking at that page, it's also marketed as a fully turn-key
| solution with really everything (design, track construction,
| vehicles, signalling) provided by Bogl, so they presumably also
| hope to get some sort of lock-in effect where buyers of their
| system continue being dependent on them for any ongoing
| maintenance or future expansions, too.
|
| For how this can go wrong, look at the story of the Translohr
| (some sort of guided bus touted as a cheaper alternative to a
| conventional steel wheel tram), where the cities who bought
| that system subsequently had difficulties in persuading Alstom
| (who had bought up the tram part of the Translohr technology
| and eventually decided to sort of discontinue that system) to
| continue providing maintenance support or possibly even
| additional vehicles for the exisiting Translohr installations.
| wffurr wrote:
| Quiet, fast elevated trains and commuter rail would be amazing,
| but at this point in the US I'd settle for existing _at all_ or
| in the few cities that have rail systems, equipment that 's not
| >50 years old and can actually stay on the tracks, be on time,
| and have reasonable levels of service.
|
| But even that extremely low bar isn't achievable. Meanwhile,
| local, state, and federal government can find $200 billion
| dollars a year to spend on roads so we can all be stuck in
| traffic on good quality pavement...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-11 23:02 UTC)