China grounds German technology(expensive wasteful maglev trains, German inventors quit too)

Business Day(via Google News) ^ | 7/5/03 | AFP

[Diddle E. Squat]

FRANKFURT - China is not going to build a train line between Beijing and Shanghai for the Transrapid magnetic levitation train, developed by a consortium of German industrial groups ThyssenKrupp and Siemens, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported on Friday. A management board member of Siemens’ transportation systems unit, Hans-Dieter Bott, told the German daily: "We have clear signals that the decision will be taken in favour of the traditional train technology".

The paper said that Chinese authorities were leaning instead towards the high-speed, Japanese-developed Shinkansen train for the 1,300km line.

Only last week the central German state of North Rhine-Westphalia scrapped its project to build a Transrapid line.

Siemens executive Gerhard Wahl said that decision had had an influence on the Chinese. "China is afraid being the only ones with this new technology," he was quoted as saying.

German engineering and technology conglomerate Siemens and German steelmaker ThyssenKrupp together developed the Transrapid magnetic levitation train, which can travel at more then 400km per hour.

A Transrapid train line already links Shanghai to its airport and Wahl said he was optimistic the line might be extended by about 200km

Chinese authorities are planning to build about 8,000km of high-speed rail networks around Shanghai and Beijing. ---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/06/27/international1136EDT0595.DTL

German state scraps high-speed levitating train project

(06-27) 08:36 PDT FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) --

German officials on Friday scrapped a $3.8 billion plan to build a high-speed magnetic-levitation train link across the industrial Ruhr region, citing concerns over financing for the ambitious project.

The Transrapid train, developed by a joint-venture owned by steel maker ThyssenKrupp AG and engineering giant Siemens AG, made its commercial debut Dec. 31 in Shanghai, China.

But cost concerns have long dogged two proposed projects in Germany, including the proposed 49-mile link between the western cities of Duesseldorf and Dortmund.

"Given the fact that the national government is only prepared to assume very limited financial risks of its own, and this state isn't prepared to assume any, we have come to the conclusion that we must draw the line between what we would like to do and what is feasible," Peer Steinbrueck, the governor of North Rhine-Westphalia state, told reporters. He also cited concerns over the link's profitability.

A similar project -- a 23-mile link between downtown Munich and the southern city's airport -- is still being pursued.

The two projects in Germany, dubbed Metrorapid, were slated to receive considerable federal funding -- $1.99 billion for North Rhine-Westphalia and $628 million for Munich -- but both have grumbled it wasn't enough.

Bavarian officials were quick Friday to urge the government to increase the federal funds promised to the Munich project now that the bigger plan has been scrapped.

Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who has championed the technology, said he accepted the state's decision.

Friday's announcement came as Steinbrueck's Social Democrats held talks with their junior coalition partner, the Greens party, over a feud that has threatened to tear apart the state government. The Greens have been far less enthusiastic than Steinbrueck about the high-speed link, adding fuel to personality clashes and differences over other transport issues.

Last June, federal auditors also cast doubt on the maglev train plans, saying they don't make economic sense and can't be built in time for the 2006 soccer World Cup as German officials intended.

In a report, the auditors said an original feasibility study didn't sufficiently allow for the cost of converting the trains, initially intended for long-distance runs, for use on shorter stretches. The study also overestimated usage and the revenues the trains would generate.

A proposed Berlin-Hamburg route for the Transrapid, which rides a cushion of magnetism along an elevated monorail at 250 mph, was scuttled in 2000.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Yet Arlene Specter continues to push for Federal tax dollars to fund this expensive, wasteful, failed technology, seeking $900 million in Federal dollars to build a $1.5 billion dollar high-speed maglev train to go 30 or so miles from Greensburg, PA to downtown to the Pittsburgh airport. Yeah, a huge demand for that, especially since those will be the only stops, correct? Maglev's only real benefit would be over long distances where its potential high speeds could make a difference, and even then it just isn't cost effective. Even light-rail on that corridor would be better, because it could at least serve all the neighborhoods and employment centers in between. Bottom line, its just another pork project.

Even the Germans, who invented the technology and have been pushing hard to sell it are throwing in the towel. China had been their only major customer for a big network that they claimed would "showcase" maglev's true benefits. Even China wised up.

What a boondoggle, maybe Arlen thinks it is actually Scottish technology?

[Diddle E. Squat]

Bad news for ya, there...

[Diddle E. Squat]

Lesser-known maglev gets Pennsylvania push

Here's the latest maglev-related scam to fleece the taxpayers. 80% Fed taxpayer funding to build a $188 million 2.5 mile line to run around a PA college. Totally incompatable technology with roads or rail, any system built would require an entire network of brand new infrastructure and ROW and/or air rights, unlike buses or trains. I guess they didn't learn from the boondoggle failure of the similar people movers at the university in West Virginia, always a popular subject on the 'Fleecing of America' type programs.

Bacon, bacon, I smell bacon...

[Diddle E. Squat]

Oh yeah, just by coincidence, Adtranz, one of(the only?) the companies pushing maglev(and who would get the govt funded construction contracts) just so happens to be located in Pittsburgh.

[lelio]

Part of me thinks it was scrapped as it wasn't a Chinese company making the train. Maybe they've already stolen the technology and are just waiting to try it out themselves.

[Willie Green]

LOL! Puts you square on the side of the enviro-luddite German Green Party! ROTFLMAO!!!
The Greens oppose Maglev because they're afraid it will siphon away money from conventional trains.

In a way, they have a point.
After WWII, Europe and Germany put a lot of effort into rebuilding their passenger rail system. And they've continually upgraded and improved their conventional rail service to where it's the envy of the rest of the world. (Well, almost. Japan essentially did the same thing after WWII, so their passenger rail service is excellent as well.)

The one downside to this is that their existing infrastructure is so good that it minimizes the benefits of implementing an innovative technology like Maglev because it is not backward compatible with conventional rail infrastructure.

The United States, OTOH, essentially abandoned passenger rail service after WWII and focused efforts of construction of the Interstate Highway System. The infrastructure for passenger rail service was left to decay to Third World Standards. That is why the United States, like China, is positioned to more greatly benefit from construction of new technology rather than resurrecting the old.

It is not at all surprising that China has opted to go with high-speed rail vs. Maglev on one of their routes. Although they are competing technologies, I support them both. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages dependent on the specific conditions of the terrain and climate they must travel through. High-speed rail has the construction cost advantage across relatively level terrain. But it can only travel up grades of maybe 1~2% compared to !0% for Maglev. This gives Maglev the advantage in hilly terrain by minimizing the need for extensive grading and/or tunneling.

High-speed rail also has a slight speed disadvantage, 190 mph max vs 300 mph for Maglev. Faster is obviously better, and either one will do if you're only poking along at only 45 mph on a run-down, dilapidated system. But if you already have the 190 mph, like Germany does, it's a little more difficult to scrap to change over to the 300 mph.

Thanks for the heads up!

I know you're a whacknut opposed to any type of mass transportation system whatsoever. But it gives me the opportunity to briefly explain to others the distinction between the available technologies. One may be more appropriate than the other, depending what region of our nation they may live in.

[Paleo Conservative]

Part of me thinks it was scrapped as it wasn't a Chinese company making the train. Maybe they've already stolen the technology and are just waiting to try it out themselves.

The paper said that Chinese authorities were leaning instead towards the high-speed, Japanese-developed Shinkansen train for the 1,300km line.

I don't think so. Considering the rivalry between Japan and China, I doubt they would consider using Japnese technology instead of German unless there were technical advantages to the Japanese technology.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Actually my livelihood is tied to expanding mass transit, WHERE APPROPRIATE AND JUSTIFIABLE. Mode and money matter.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The one downside to this is that their existing infrastructure is so good that it minimizes the benefits of implementing an innovative technology like Maglev because it is not backward compatible with conventional rail infrastructure."

And EXACTLY the same thing can be said of the U.S. with respect to its highway and airport systems. If you want mass transit, buy and run buses. Don't try to steal taxpayers money to establish a whole different (and hugely expensive) infrastructure as is necessary with any and all rail systems.

[Willie Green]

Actually my livelihood is tied to expanding mass transit,

ROTFLMAO! Boy are you ever ill-suited for that occupation!
Much like Larry Flynt pretending to be a minister, isn't it? LOL!

One would think you'd be excited by the development technology and alternatives.
The low-speed maglev that you denigrate is a case in point.
It shows significant promise for urban commuters.
But for some reason, your opposed to even constructing a demonstration project to PROVE it's capabilities.
Are you afraid that it actually WILL PROVE what the promoters claim? Hmmmm....???

Operating on an elevated guideway, low-speed maglev can be constructed with a very small footprint in congested urban areas. Needing room only for its support pillars, it travels ABOVE congested roadways where there isn't even enough room to add another lane. And like it's high-speed counterpart, low-speed maglev can easily travel on steep grades of up to 7%. This makes it capable of not only operating in hilly terrain, but the guideway could conceivabley be built to quick go up and over an existing urban structure that may be in its path. Plus at the lower speed, it should be able to negotiate tighter turns than the high speed maglev, allowing the system designers even more flexibility in threading it through congested urban areas with minimal conflict with existing structures.

LOL! If you can't see the potential advantages, then you're in the WRONG occupation!!!

[Willie Green]

Don't try to steal taxpayers money to establish a whole different (and hugely expensive) infrastructure as is necessary with any and all rail systems.

Nobody's advocating replacement of highways and air travel with rail. Quite the opposite. The sensible approach is to integrate the different modes of travel with each other to provide the traveling public with the flexible and convenient choice of switching from one to the other. As part of this approach towards integration, most of these plans propose building maglev/high-speed rail/mass-transit stops AT THE AIRPORTS where infrastructure for travelers already exists (car rental, hotels, restaurants, etc. etc.) At these hubs, travelers can easily switch from one mode of transportation to another as best suits their needs. There's parking for their personal cars, the Maglev or high-speed rail station, the airline terminal, rental cars, taxis, shuttle buses, maybe light rail for local commuters etc. etc. All integrated and interconnected. Hop off of one and onto another!!!

[Diddle E. Squat]

I have yet to see maglev of any speed with any significant advantage over ligh-rail, which while expensive, is generally more cost-effective, and can utilize already existing rail infrastructure in some instances. Much cheaper is commuter rail, which can co-utilize existing freight tracks already in place. And the most efficient and cost effective form of transit is bus and bus rapid transit, far cheaper than light-rail, and far more flexible, since it can use practically any roadway to produce nearly unlimited trip options, easily adopting to changes in the market. Some say that people won't ride buses but will ride trains, but that highlights another benefit of bus rapid transit: if properly designed it can later be upgraded to light-rail when and if sufficient public will appears for rail and its accompanying costs. In some cases commuter rail can also be later converted to light-rail, or instead may function as pre-existing (and thus extremely cheap) track entry into the heart of cities for future intercity rail if the market demands ever justify introduction of expanded existing passenger rail or upgrade to high-speed rail. Thus you have plenty of existing technologies and existing infrastructure that can be incrementally expanded and upgraded as demand and funds allow, as opposed to maglev, which is a totally new, unproven, expensive, and incompatable technology that would require massive upfront capital expenditures.

But the dreamers and utopians never like practical solutions.

[Tailback]

Nobody's advocating replacement of highways and air travel with rail.

No, the rail promoters just steal the money that should go to the highways instead like in Oregon.

[Willie Green]

But the dreamers and utopians never like practical solutions.

ROTFLMAO!!!
Man, you're killing me!!! LOL!!!
You're funnier than those fuddy-duddies at IBM with their infamous "The PC is just a toy, it'll never replace the mainframe", ROTFL,
Man, what a waste of a career, going to work every day for years and years, only to get your head stuck up your butt!
LOL! You luddites are a riot!

[meatloaf]

Actually the people mover (PRT) at WVU was the basis for similar systems at airports all over the world. Bombardier nee Adtranz nee Daimler Chrysler nee ABB nee Westinghouse, the original developer, still builds the systems.

[neb52]

Texas is also looking at putting some type of high speed rail system between the major metropolitian areas. I think they have been pushing the Maglev the most.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Nobody's advocating replacement of highways and air travel with rail."

The hell they're not. One of the fondest goals of the eco-nutcase movement is to eliminate the "internal combustion engine" (aka the automobile), and force EVERYONE into "mass transit".

Add to that the FACT that the funds used to finance the "mass transit" activities are invariably funded with money stolen from the highway gasoline tax trust funds, which rightfully should be used to build and repair highways. That is one MAJOR reason I don't have a problem with mass transit using buses, as it legitimately uses the same infrastructure "I" pay for with my gas taxes. I don't EVER plan to use rail transport of any sort, unless someone holds a gun to my head and forces me to, so I see no reason why my tax dollars should be stolen to finance rail.

[Iris7]

Yeah, Willie, my brother is a rail freak too. An irrational bunch. Impervious to reasonable arguments, enchanted by their fantasies.

[Willie Green]

The hell they're not. One of the fondest goals of the eco-nutcase movement is to eliminate the "internal combustion engine" (aka the automobile), and force EVERYONE into "mass transit".

So you gotta prove that you're even goofier than they are by becoming a raving lunatic at the opposite extreme?

Talk about idiocy.

[Willie Green]

History honors those who creatively advance technological innovation.
Not those dismal deadweight naysayers who think the earth is flat and that man will never fly.