China Building 1,000 KPH Super Train

It has been awhile since I’ve talked about high speed trains here because, well, there hasn’t been a lot to talk about. America’s high speed rail system is slowly doling out money to Florida, the MidWest, and California, but it will be years before we see anything substantial. China, however, is moving ahead full speed with its plans for a high speed rail network, pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into such a network.

The latest plan from the People’s Republic calls for a high speed train that will combine the maglev system used in Japan and France with vacuum tubes. In theory, this train will be able to go 1,000 kph, or about 620 mph. That is twice as fast as most high speed trains travel today. How?

Vacuum tubes. When I hear vacuum tube, I think of those archaic computers with hundreds of little light bulbs beeping and booping in some underground bunker. The vacuum tubes planned for this Chinese super-train are more complicated. Maglev systems use magnetics to propel trains along at speeds in excess of 300 mph smoothly and quietly. What keeps them from going faster (the current world record is 361 mph, set in 2003) is air friction. China has a clever solution to this problem; remove the air. Hence, vacuum tubes.

These vacuum tubes would add almost $3 million to the cost of every kilometer of track (on top of the already astonishing cost of maglev trains), but would allow this super-train to travel upwards of 600 mph. Is the world record worth it? China seems to think so…and I agree. I am not a fan of flying. I like to stay on the ground. A super-fast maglev train sounds right up my alley. My only concern is the whole lack-of-oxygen. What happens if the train fails or loses power? Will suffocation ensue? If all goes according to plan, the train could be ready to levitate in about a decade.

Would you ride a 600 mph super train in a vacuum?

Source: Engadget via China Daily | Image: Wikipedia

Chris DeMorro is a car enthusiast, blogger, and all-around crazy man who is as passionate about hybrids as he is about Hemis. You can follow his constant misadventures at Three Months In A Mustang.

MAKE SOLAR WORK FOR YOU!

Next, use your Solar Report to get the best quote!

Tags: China, high, high speed rail, maglev, Rail, Speed, train, Trains, tube, tubes, vacuum

About the Author

Christopher DeMorro A writer and gearhead who loves all things automotive, from hybrids to HEMIs, Chris can be found wrenching or writing- or esle, he's running, because he's one of those crazy people who gets enjoyment from running insane distances.

Ben

That’s crazy fast. 747s cruise at 913km/h (at least according to wikipedia).

I have to wonder about carbon footprint compared to flying though. It can’t be too much better.

And keeping the tubes at a vacuum (and how much of one)? Thats just logistically crazy, you have to pressurize the train car, maintain a seal for the tubes. And then have the train come to a stop when enter something like an airlock approaching and leaving every stop?

Trains are a great idea, but speed should be secondary. High speed trains are primarily for business travel. Focus on increasing the riders ability to work on the train, then it doesn’t matter if you’re going “only” 300 mph.
Ben

That’s crazy fast. 747s cruise at 913km/h (at least according to wikipedia).

I have to wonder about carbon footprint compared to flying though. It can’t be too much better.

And keeping the tubes at a vacuum (and how much of one)? Thats just logistically crazy, you have to pressurize the train car, maintain a seal for the tubes. And then have the train come to a stop when enter something like an airlock approaching and leaving every stop?

Trains are a great idea, but speed should be secondary. High speed trains are primarily for business travel. Focus on increasing the riders ability to work on the train, then it doesn’t matter if you’re going “only” 300 mph.
kilometer :)

What is “KPH”? Do you mean “kmh” or “km/h” which is kilometers-per-hour?
kilometer :)

What is “KPH”? Do you mean “kmh” or “km/h” which is kilometers-per-hour?
http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/ J. Brad Hicks

Doesn’t seem any crazier than flying. If something goes wrong at 6,000 feet, you die just as dead. And I’m not enough of an engineer to do the math, but depressurizing the tunnel(s) may not be any more ridiculous, energy-wise, to lifting 300 passengers, their luggage, and the fuel to power the whole mess up to 6,000 feet for the lower pressure.

What it looks like to me is that they’re trying to figure out how to keep aviation-speed travel if (when) we get to a world where electricity is a lot cheaper than aviation fuel; they can run power lines through a train tunnel, but you can’t power a 747 off of laptop batteries. If aviation fuel skyrockets (pun unintended) in price, the choice won’t be between a vacuum maglev train and an airliner, it’ll be between a vacuum maglev train (or something equally ultratech) and not getting there.

(Not, mind you, that we’re likely to run tunnels from China to Hawaii to the US. It leaves that problem unsolved.)
http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/ J. Brad Hicks

Doesn’t seem any crazier than flying. If something goes wrong at 6,000 feet, you die just as dead. And I’m not enough of an engineer to do the math, but depressurizing the tunnel(s) may not be any more ridiculous, energy-wise, to lifting 300 passengers, their luggage, and the fuel to power the whole mess up to 6,000 feet for the lower pressure.

What it looks like to me is that they’re trying to figure out how to keep aviation-speed travel if (when) we get to a world where electricity is a lot cheaper than aviation fuel; they can run power lines through a train tunnel, but you can’t power a 747 off of laptop batteries. If aviation fuel skyrockets (pun unintended) in price, the choice won’t be between a vacuum maglev train and an airliner, it’ll be between a vacuum maglev train (or something equally ultratech) and not getting there.

(Not, mind you, that we’re likely to run tunnels from China to Hawaii to the US. It leaves that problem unsolved.)
Cloxxki

Not a new idea at all.

1000kph is actually a modest goal, when using the words vacume and maglev in one sentence. Unmanned, I bet they could manages a large multiple.

However, I am guessing the Chinese are looking to go to an air pressure to be compared to the summit of the Himalyas. Perhaps even lower. Some pressure which we can survive in, albeit shortly, and with risk of Caisson’s disease.

The hard part (I’ve done drawing of such systems as a small boy) of such a sytem would obviously be the feeding system. Do we feed humans through air loack into pressurized trains, or do the trains themselves move through air locks when entering and leaving the station? Once establish, and that’s the nice thing about vacume or low pressure, it doesn’t need any energy to be maintained, while it does create an environment that promotes speed.

I bet the Chinese have already drwan up see-through tubes to allow decent view from the trains when travalling above ground.

While such a vacume train is certainly more envirmentally friendly than a fossil fueled airplane with only part of the low air density advantage, carbon footprint I need to add is irrelevant a parameter in itself.

I have recently proposed a transport network based on tracks that law at lower altitude than the stations. Rolling out of the station, a steep downhill would follow (obviously all in vacume tubes), reaching speeds in the 1000kph range, before leveling off, and cruising at that speed by lack of air or rolling resistance (true vacume, good maglev). At the end station, the track would point up, trains loses velocity, and reaches station at zero speed, having averaged 9000kph+. Oh, and without any power used for propulsion!! Realistically, you’d need some, to overcome actual air pressure (vacume won’t happen this lifetime for trains) and controlled braking.

The main engine of this train system is gravity. The trick is in the high speed low altitude cruising.

It could also be used for urban business transport. Skyscraper top floor boardrooms with stations for 4-man capsules. Steep downtrack, horizontal part at subway level. Go from one end of town to the other in about a minute.
Cloxxki

Not a new idea at all.

1000kph is actually a modest goal, when using the words vacume and maglev in one sentence. Unmanned, I bet they could manages a large multiple.

However, I am guessing the Chinese are looking to go to an air pressure to be compared to the summit of the Himalyas. Perhaps even lower. Some pressure which we can survive in, albeit shortly, and with risk of Caisson’s disease.

The hard part (I’ve done drawing of such systems as a small boy) of such a sytem would obviously be the feeding system. Do we feed humans through air loack into pressurized trains, or do the trains themselves move through air locks when entering and leaving the station? Once establish, and that’s the nice thing about vacume or low pressure, it doesn’t need any energy to be maintained, while it does create an environment that promotes speed.

I bet the Chinese have already drwan up see-through tubes to allow decent view from the trains when travalling above ground.

While such a vacume train is certainly more envirmentally friendly than a fossil fueled airplane with only part of the low air density advantage, carbon footprint I need to add is irrelevant a parameter in itself.

I have recently proposed a transport network based on tracks that law at lower altitude than the stations. Rolling out of the station, a steep downhill would follow (obviously all in vacume tubes), reaching speeds in the 1000kph range, before leveling off, and cruising at that speed by lack of air or rolling resistance (true vacume, good maglev). At the end station, the track would point up, trains loses velocity, and reaches station at zero speed, having averaged 9000kph+. Oh, and without any power used for propulsion!! Realistically, you’d need some, to overcome actual air pressure (vacume won’t happen this lifetime for trains) and controlled braking.

The main engine of this train system is gravity. The trick is in the high speed low altitude cruising.

It could also be used for urban business transport. Skyscraper top floor boardrooms with stations for 4-man capsules. Steep downtrack, horizontal part at subway level. Go from one end of town to the other in about a minute.
CKofAZ

I’m interested in way you would feel safer in traveling in a train that moves as fast an airplane does. In the event of an accident your chances of survial in either would be simular, Id rather travel by a proven technolgy.
CKofAZ

I’m interested in way you would feel safer in traveling in a train that moves as fast an airplane does. In the event of an accident your chances of survial in either would be simular, Id rather travel by a proven technolgy.
JeffB

Sure it sounds great, but the economics of it is barely touched upon. How does $3 million per kilometer translate into the increased price of the ticket for these vacuum tubes? As I understand it, that’s just the initial cost. I suppose maintenance and depreciation/replacement need to be factored in over its useful lifetime.

If it boosts the cost of a $100 to $500 I might well prefer the 300 mph train to the 600 mph one.
JeffB

Sure it sounds great, but the economics of it is barely touched upon. How does $3 million per kilometer translate into the increased price of the ticket for these vacuum tubes? As I understand it, that’s just the initial cost. I suppose maintenance and depreciation/replacement need to be factored in over its useful lifetime.

If it boosts the cost of a $100 to $500 I might well prefer the 300 mph train to the 600 mph one.
http://windcrank.com george sikes

This is possiable, go to et3.com, my friend has patents on this and has been to China and looked at what they have.

Start out transporting mail and packages, think of the savings there. When all the bugs are worked out , transport people too…….

By the way I suggested using solar on roof of the tubes, a two (2) ft wide row of solar panels the length of the tube would run it and then some, also could use wind too in states where wind is good and solar is low.

George
http://windcrank.com george sikes

This is possiable, go to et3.com, my friend has patents on this and has been to China and looked at what they have.

Start out transporting mail and packages, think of the savings there. When all the bugs are worked out , transport people too…….

By the way I suggested using solar on roof of the tubes, a two (2) ft wide row of solar panels the length of the tube would run it and then some, also could use wind too in states where wind is good and solar is low.

George
http://www.motornature.com/ green car driver

I doubt the feasibility of a vacuum tube several hundreds kilometers long. Vacuum tubes are great for small objects in space-efficient shops or backrooms, but they are unproven technology for trains that weigh more than 500 tons. Vibrations would be incredibly strong.
http://www.motornature.com/ green car driver

I doubt the feasibility of a vacuum tube several hundreds kilometers long. Vacuum tubes are great for small objects in space-efficient shops or backrooms, but they are unproven technology for trains that weigh more than 500 tons. Vibrations would be incredibly strong.
http://www.hhokitsdirect.com Bob

Very cool idea, but really expensive. It will be interesting to see how well the seals in a vacuum tube of that size hold up to the weather and climate changes over time. I can’t imagine how huge the vacuum pumps are going to have to be….

I like George’s comment above- line the tops with solar cells to help offset some of the energy needed to pump a vacuum…
http://www.hhokitsdirect.com Bob

Very cool idea, but really expensive. It will be interesting to see how well the seals in a vacuum tube of that size hold up to the weather and climate changes over time. I can’t imagine how huge the vacuum pumps are going to have to be….

I like George’s comment above- line the tops with solar cells to help offset some of the energy needed to pump a vacuum…
just bwatching

Speed costs money. How fast do we need to go?
just bwatching

Speed costs money. How fast do we need to go?
Justa Thought

How about just putting vacuum where it would be underground anyway? When going through mountains, etc. That way you don’t have to build the vacuum tubes above ground and long distances.

With no tubes, I would put the solar panels on the ground around the tracks. 99% of the time, the train is not covering them.

It would be so much more efficient with superconductors, even if they had to be cooled to dry-ice temps (instead of the liquid nitrogen).
Justa Thought

How about just putting vacuum where it would be underground anyway? When going through mountains, etc. That way you don’t have to build the vacuum tubes above ground and long distances.

With no tubes, I would put the solar panels on the ground around the tracks. 99% of the time, the train is not covering them.

It would be so much more efficient with superconductors, even if they had to be cooled to dry-ice temps (instead of the liquid nitrogen).
chris

Cool idea, but completely unpractical and in no way cost-effective. Especially with the the looming rarity of earth metals and China controlling over 90% of them. While the vibrations would be marginal at normal working parameters (if everything works properly all the time), if something goes wrong…..everything will. It’s never a good idea to put all of your eggs in one basket. The destruction of such a costly project by terrorism, mechanical break-down, or technologically unforeseen backfire would have catastrophic affects on a country-wide level. It would be the equivalent of all of our airplanes suddenly falling out of the sky. Why vacuum, why not just speed up the air in front of them instead? Turn it into an air-tunnel! Like shooting a spit-wad out of your straw at the teacher, or a pea out of your nose. Maybe a complete redesign of the train itself utilizing an inboard turbine to suck all the air out of the way. If we can make a jet (SR71 blackbird) travel at speeds close to mach 4 (~3000mph), why can’t we just design a maglev that runs on an electric turbine similar to that? NO worries about lift to drag, no worries about crashing, no worries about needing a vacuum tube. All you need is a very long run way and landing area. Only thing you’d have to worry about making it go that fast would be the shock waves.
Question though……don’t electro-magnetic fields (EMFs) cause cancer with prolonged exposure?
chris

Cool idea, but completely unpractical and in no way cost-effective. Especially with the the looming rarity of earth metals and China controlling over 90% of them. While the vibrations would be marginal at normal working parameters (if everything works properly all the time), if something goes wrong…..everything will. It’s never a good idea to put all of your eggs in one basket. The destruction of such a costly project by terrorism, mechanical break-down, or technologically unforeseen backfire would have catastrophic affects on a country-wide level. It would be the equivalent of all of our airplanes suddenly falling out of the sky. Why vacuum, why not just speed up the air in front of them instead? Turn it into an air-tunnel! Like shooting a spit-wad out of your straw at the teacher, or a pea out of your nose. Maybe a complete redesign of the train itself utilizing an inboard turbine to suck all the air out of the way. If we can make a jet (SR71 blackbird) travel at speeds close to mach 4 (~3000mph), why can’t we just design a maglev that runs on an electric turbine similar to that? NO worries about lift to drag, no worries about crashing, no worries about needing a vacuum tube. All you need is a very long run way and landing area. Only thing you’d have to worry about making it go that fast would be the shock waves.
Question though……don’t electro-magnetic fields (EMFs) cause cancer with prolonged exposure?
DC in SF

I wonder about the security of it against tampering. It’s a lot easier to tamper with a conveyance on the ground than one in the air. I think a cordless drill may be enough.
DC in SF

I wonder about the security of it against tampering. It’s a lot easier to tamper with a conveyance on the ground than one in the air. I think a cordless drill may be enough.
hughe

This project started in early 90’S in swizerland,

it was called the SWISSMETRO, but the governement failed to fund the estimated 13 billion track prototype between Geneva and Lausanne ( about 50 milles long ) and all the workt prototype whent to japan ( engine and rail systeme ) where they finaly built a track without the vaccum tube (to avangardiste).

Swiss dum gouvernement !! (-:
hughe

This project started in early 90’S in swizerland,

it was called the SWISSMETRO, but the governement failed to fund the estimated 13 billion track prototype between Geneva and Lausanne ( about 50 milles long ) and all the workt prototype whent to japan ( engine and rail systeme ) where they finaly built a track without the vaccum tube (to avangardiste).

Swiss dum gouvernement !! (-: