The following commentary was written for the newsletter of the Carolinas Association for Passenger Trains (CAPT) in 1998. If you are interested in reprintinting this item please contact me.
Maglev's problems lurk beneath the surface
© Ernest H. Robl 1998
Maglev, or magnetic levitation transportation, is a solution in search of a problem. The concept, on superficial examination, appears to offer much promise for high speed ground transportation.
But, few of the glowing and enticing descriptions of maglev take a realistic look at maglev's technical and political problems.
Why should railroad advocates care about maglev? Make no mistake: Every dollar spent on maglev projects is a dollar that is taken away from improving conventional rail. Money that goes into maglev, even for research and development, takes away funds that could be applied to immediate spending on infrastructure improvements for conventional rail.
Railroad advocates need to be able to present a rational argument why conventional high speed rail provides a better alternative for this money.
Consider the following points:
- Money spent now on maglev would go to developing the technology. There is no off-the-shelf commercial maglev equipment available yet.
- Money spent now on improving or building conventional rail corridors would have immediate impact, as it would be spent on off-the-shelf items.
The biggest problems with maglev, however, are not technical but political.
- To run at the optimum speeds used in comparisons with conventional high speed rail, maglev right of way needs to be fairly level and as straight as possible.
- To build such a right of way into the heart of a fully-developed modern city would require massive demolition of existing structures, which is not economically feasible.
- If you build maglev terminals on the outskirts of large cities, then you have large additional expenses in tying these into existing public transportation networks. And, by taking other transportation to these terminals, much of the speed advantage of maglev is lost. Transfer from mode to mode is inevitably time-consuming and involves wait times.
- Most maglev vehicle proposals envision a vehicle cabin somewhat similar to the cabin of a passenger jetliner, with people packed in at least at the same density. There would be few en-route amenities and none of the proposals I have seen have any provisions for people traveling with multiple bulky items, otherwise known as checked baggage.
Conventional high speed rail, on the other hand, can operate out of existing center-city terminals, without a change of mode at the transition to the high speed right of way. Trains can operate at slower speeds over existing tracks to reach these terminals but operate at high speeds on upgraded or newly-built high-speed rights of way.
Equally important, high speed rail equipment can be detoured—even if at lower speeds—in the event of a major failure on the high speed corridor. (This was the case after the recent tragic accident on one of Germany's high-speed routes—the first such accident for that country's system.)
A major failure on a maglev line would shut down that line. Maglev proponents will claim that their system is so simple and failure-proof that such incidents will not happen. However, natural disasters are not predictable and humans have yet to develop any totally failure-proof technology.
While the basics of maglev—making the vehicle hover and moving it horizontally—have been shown in demonstration projects, ancillary technologies needed to operate a full system are far from mature. For example, switches for this type of technology are cumbersome and usually usable only at slow speeds.
On the other hand, high speed rail lines now have switches and cross-overs that can be taken at speeds upwards of 100 miles per hour, making route selection and traffic management relatively simple.
Most of the advocates of maglev have no point of comparison. Their only experience with rail travel may be conventional Amtrak trains or commuter rail in larger urban areas. The comparison for maglev should, instead be with the successful high speed systems of Europe and Japan, which are able to share the right of way with standard trains in urban areas..
CAPT member Ernest H. Robl is a North Carolina-based full-time freelance writer and photographer whose specialties include transportation and travel subjects.
[Business] [Pictures] [Newsletters]
[Ernest H. Robl Home Page]