• Asetru@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Maglev isn’t even more expensive. High speed rails that are built “to spec” for 400 km/h are expensive as fuck. Trains are usually shorter but frequency is higher, so per passenger it roughly evens out.

    The real deal breaker is the lack of compatibility. Can’t ever run a maglev train on legacy rail while your high speed train can use the existing system to bridge gaps in the high speed network.

    • jdr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Not more expensive? Hard to say because also nobody builds them! But I don’t think there’s any specification you could make today that could be met cheaper with maglev than with old school big iron.

    • Photonic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I don’t know why you would want compatibility. The Shinkansen is also always on their own track. Air planes aren’t compatible with train tracks either, so if you look at it more from a perspective of what they’re trying to replace I don’t think it’s that big of a deal.

      I think it’s also mainly the start up and build costs, I think the wear of the rails of high speed trains on wheels is very costly

      • twix@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        So you can have your high speed trains run to more remote stations, limiting the amount of changes for passengers. Took the train to Grenoble that way, which is quite comfortable with a direct connection from Paris.