China Unveils 'Fastest Ground Vehicle In the World' (usatoday.com) 146
China has unveiled its new maglev train that's being touted as the fastest ground vehicle in the world with a maximum speed of 372 mph (600 kph). USA Today reports: The train uses electro-magnetic force, making it "float" so there is no contact between the rail and the body, Reuters reported. The debut of the super fast train could cut down time for people traveling from Beijing to Shanghai to only 2.5 hours. That's a distance of 754 miles and currently a 4.5-hour train ride on one of China's bullet trains. China's newest train is expected to be ready for commercial use within the next decade.
Fake news (Score:5, Informative)
The fastest is 763.035 mph, which is double this train.
Re: Fake news (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't even need a rocket, there are turbine and ICE-powered landspeed cars that can go well over 600kph. Surprisingly the EV landspeed record is slightly below that.
Re: (Score:2)
I think they mean for fastest for general use, not a kind of rocket car.
Just because it's my Sunday driver doesn't mean it's not 'general' use.
Re: (Score:2)
Good job because Thrust SSC was a *JET* car, no rockets involved. Now Thrust Bloodhound does indeed have a rocket engine but it is targeting 1000mph, though last I heard they had run out of funding again.
Re: Fake news (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know about China, but when in Japan whatever you search for all you'll get are results about tentacle hentai p0rn.
Re:Fake news (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
So you're saying I can buy this vehicle and use it to travel somewhere? Or does this 763mph vehicle take passengers?
There's a difference between being in the Guinness book of records for a once off, and having the record of something general available for every day use. My local university has sent a record 255 Tb/s over a fibre optic cable, that doesn't mean my ISP doesn't provide the "fastest" connection even though it's only 1/255th of that speed.
Re:Fake news (Score:4, Insightful)
Doesn't say anything about being commercially available to everybody.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Yeah I guess they only built a train once and don't intend to actually use passengers on it.
Sigh. I guess you're from the Internet generation, with an attention span only as long as a headline, and an unquellable rage to vent about every little piece of irrelevant shit online. I get it. Using brain = hard.
Re: (Score:3)
Which is the fastest train in 2021?
Japan's high-speed train is at the top of the list: The L0 Series Maglev reaches 375 miles per hour. It was followed by France's TGV POS, which has a speed limit of just over 357 miles per hour.
That's a whole 5 miles an hour faster, which is quite significant.
Face it, wumao, China lies
Re: (Score:2)
I can’t imagine why a US centric website with mostly US readers would use imperial units.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not so U.S.-centric when not even 50% of the articles are about the U.S.A.
And "mostly U.S. readers" keeps getting mentioned but AFAIK we've never had official statistics on those numbers.
In any case, all articles should be using numbers from the country of origin, and converted numbers in parenthesis after that.
For this article, it should be "Z km/h (Y mph)", for articles about things from the U.S.A. it should be "Y mph (Z km/h)".
And if the W3C had planned it in the early days of HTML, we could have ha
Re: (Score:2)
I can’t imagine why a US centric website with mostly US readers would use imperial units.
Because:
1} It's primarily a science and technology web site, and even in the US science and tech is primarily done in metric.
2} It's a great gateway drug to encourage US readers to learn the units the rest of the known universe uses.
3} Anecdotal evidence suggests use of the metric system improves the imagination.
Re: (Score:3)
I can’t imagine why a US centric website with mostly US readers would use imperial units.
Because: 1} It's primarily a science and technology web site, and even in the US science and tech is primarily done in metric. 2} It's a great gateway drug to encourage US readers to learn the units the rest of the known universe uses. 3} Anecdotal evidence suggests use of the metric system improves the imagination.
Starting with a note, I'm not busting your personal chops - this just seemed like an appropriate spot to chime in.
Judging from how frantic and triggered metric supporters get if someone dares to use a non-metric unit - to the point where they hijack the comments, there's a ton of anecdotal evidence that there's some high level insecurity going on.
Now let's trigger y'all some more.
My shop in my garage is metric, and I turn out both metric and imperial. I've even turned out things like adapters, that ar
Re: (Score:2)
One last bit of trigger fuel - the bedrock measurement of the metric system - the meter (or should I say metre) is defined as this:
The length of the metre is equal to the distance that light travels in 1/299.792.458 of a second. I even put in the dots so it wouldn't cause more angst. but a fraction? Seems so..Imperial.
Nice try. :)
The Speed of light in vacuum is defined as 299 792 458 m/s (exactly), so it is pretty hard to NOT to have to deal with fractions, if you deduce the definition of meter from that.
Try? I merely point out that the measurement system that many people go crazy about as being somehow superior is at it's base, no less less arbitrary. That's the take home. I think it might be expressed in nanoseconds with some number of decimal points. That way it could be related to the metric system at least a little - Maybe it's time to switch over to the metric based time system? Get rid of that weird 60, 12, and 24, 7 days, 4 weeks of varying length and 12 months crap? One of the more amusing aspect
Re: Fake news (Score:2)
Or to go even deeper about how arbitrary a meter is, look at its original definition.
One ten millionth of the distance from the north pole to the equator along the line of longitude passing through Paris. How arbitrary can you get? Why Paris instead of Greenwich? The current definition based upon the speed of light merely highlights how arbitrary it really is. In any case, I'm familiar with both systems. And if I don't have a standard measuring tool available, I find using the imperial system far easier to
Re: (Score:2)
Try? I merely point out that the measurement system that many people go crazy about as being somehow superior is at it's base, no less less arbitrary. That's the take home.
Well, yard is currently defined to be equal to exactly 0.9144 meters and foot as 0,3048 meters, so I guess that makes Metric the superior system, by definition.
No, no , and no, My point that I apparently must point out in deep detail is that any and all measurement systems are 100 percent arbirtrary. Show me a non arbitrary measurement system. Any and all measurement systems are based on something that is completely 100 percent based on a something that is decided by people who are deciding on something that is 100 percent based on something that is agreed upon, not a constant and completely real 100 percent universal constant. ALthough you could argue the meter
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't be so bad if you actually used Imperial, which you don't.
Imperial gallon, originally defined as 10 lbs of water with 160 fl oz.
You changed your inch back in the 50's to the international inch of 2.54 cm and I'm pretty sure the lb was redefined at some point to exactly equal 454 grams.
Your gallon is the most broken and doesn't even have the correct number of fluid ounces.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, because the two units aren't easily converted depending on the intended readership, you twit. So yes, they do reach "miles per hour" just the same as they reach "furlongs per fortnite" or "knots" or any other rate of distance over time as long as you have basic math skills.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I guess they only built a train once and don't intend to actually use passengers on it.
If it's anything like the Shanghai maglev, then yeah, pretty much.
Technically it does carry passengers but it's not really fulfilling any function other than dickwaving for the CCP.
Re: (Score:2)
Even your point about using it to travel somewhere with passangers is redundant because the summary and article make clear this is a maximum speed; which means just like the maximum speed of high speed trains the world over it isn't the speed it will reach in normal operation AND there is already a Japanese train that has actually done 375mph so a proposed Chinese train that might be able to do 372mph
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fake news (Score:4, Informative)
They mean the fastest regular passenger service. However the Japanese maglev shinkansen also operates regularly (on a test track) at 600 kph and is scheduled to go into service around the same time.
The Japanese system is expected to get faster too, they are just being cautious. The current wheeled shinkansen trains can actually operate above the speed the regularly use but are restricted to reduce noise. The new maglev is designed in part to mitigate noise issues.
Re: (Score:2)
They mean the fastest regular passenger service. However the Japanese maglev shinkansen also operates regularly (on a test track) at 600 kph and is scheduled to go into service around the same time.
The Japanese system is expected to get faster too, they are just being cautious. The current wheeled shinkansen trains can actually operate above the speed the regularly use but are restricted to reduce noise. The new maglev is designed in part to mitigate noise issues.
Plus, let's be honest, which of them would you trust more?
Re: (Score:2)
"Fake news"
Yup, Reuters didn't mention it, so I'm guessing it's American brewed click bait: China unveils 'fastest ground vehicle in the world'.
At least USA Today used quotes around it, though I'm sure they knew how an average American would read it and I wouldn't be surprised if a better translation was something like 'fastest passenger or ground transport'.
Impressive (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Impressive (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Props given: they were really good at stealing the tech and know-how back then. And Germans were really naive.
Re: (Score:3)
Is there really much evidence for this? The train in Shanghai was build by Siemens-Thyssenkrupp and that it is operated with a huge loss in China is not much of an achievement. Germany basically gave up on the technology when it was clear that is is too expensive compared to traditional high-speed trains. The basic technology of MagLev trains is fairly old, and while is is plausible that they looked carefully at the German design is entirely within the Chinese engineering capabilities to build their own.
Re:Impressive (Score:5, Informative)
The Shanghai maglev used electromagnetic suspension (EMS) which turned out to be not do great for long distances at very high speeds, or things like significant elevation changes. Basically the train wraps around the track with C shaped arms that contain electromagnets. It's unstable and requires constant feedback and adjustment to keep the train from getting too far off axis and hitting the track. The main advantage is that the train is always levitated in normal operation.
The future looks like it will be electrodynamic suspension (EDS) which is what this new Chinese train uses and what the Japanese Chuo Shinkansen uses. The track is U shaped with magnets in the walls. The big advantage of this is that the whole system is self-centring and doesn't need any feedback system at all, the magnetic forces keep everything aligned. As you can imagine that's quite important in a country where earthquakes are a regular occurrence.
The disadvantage of the EDS system is that levitation only works at speed, so the Chuo Shinkansen has a landing gear (rubber wheels like an aircraft but a lot smaller) that are used below 150km/h. It was judged that the trade off was worth it, especially since the current wheeled shinkansen are regularly inspected and maintained on a fairly tight schedule anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you ok? You seem to be having a hysterical meltdown from a single comment which you yourself admit to being on point as a foundational thesis for your post.
Go outside. Howl at the Moon for a while. It'll pass.
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, it's only "stealing" when non-Americans do it. If the Chinese want to build an airplane they have to reinvent the airfoil from scratch or they'll be stealing our IP doncha know.
Re: (Score:2)
So why didn't the Germans develop this train?
Because you couldn't run a network of maglev trains on wind power.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
jia you
Re: (Score:2)
And that makes it less impressive that the Chinese are spending money on upgrading infrastructure while America crumbles why exactly?
If you and I compare dick sizes, you're not helping your case by pointing to some dude has a superschlong in South Africa. The attempt to divert attention would itself be quite telling.
Re: (Score:2)
If you and I compare dick sizes, you're not helping your case by pointing to some dude has a superschlong in South Africa.
The superschlong guy lives in Denmark and his name is John Dillerman.
Re: (Score:2)
The Shanghai maglev was intended partly as a demonstration and evaluation platform to help China decide if it was going to go with maglev for it's national high speed rail project. In the end it went with conventional wheeled high speed rail, mostly because maglev was still quite new and unproven for high capacity long runs, and Chinese firms were able to supply large amounts of wheeled rolling stock and track but maglev would have required heavy reliance on German or Japanese technology.
It's a shame becaus
Exactly, and we fsckd up (Score:4, Insightful)
Exacly, it was developed in Germany and we never built a public track to use it but discussed it (NIMBY and dying industry building cars running on fossil fuels) for a few decades until we sold it out to Shanghai.
The Chinese deserve any credit for actually building, using and improving it.
We can build solid and sometimes innovative things, but we often can‘t make use of them because.
Re: (Score:2)
We can build solid and sometimes innovative things, but we often can‘t make use of them because.
With as many German in-laws as I have, I have seen this problem close up. Greens keep lecturing hoi polloi on how the world needs more trains, but in Stuttgart they are actually preventing a new railroad station from being built. In the UK, they are trying to prevent the north-south bullet train from being built.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was in Shanghai but did not have a chance to ride it. I heard that they built housing around the line but it went unused because deep vibrations from the track made people ill. Is this true or apocryphal, do you know by any chance? Maglev sounds sweet (Japan also has a test one) but I am not clear on what it is like for people nearby the 500-600kph vehicle.
Re: (Score:2)
How many are in use there?
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't take a train in the US if went 1000mph.
Why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because the constant acceleration and breaking to give priority for freight movement would make it massively uncomfortable. The problem with the USA is not so much train speed. If the trains were actually able to travel their rated speed for the entire journey that alone would be a big step forward.
Re: Impressive (Score:4, Informative)
Probably because the constant acceleration and breaking to give priority for freight movement would make it massively uncomfortable.
I will argue that is not actually relevant when talking about true high-speed trains. The tracks that exist in the USA are completely incapable of carrying high-speed trains, we would have to build an entirely new network of completely new tracks to have maglev trains. Maglev tracks are more closely related to the Disney World monorail than they are to what we call trains in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Maglev tracks are more closely related to the Disney World monorail than they are to what we call trains in the USA.
Maglev tracks in the US are more closely related to the Simpsons monorail than they are to Disney's. They will never exist.
Re: Impressive (Score:2)
The fact our tracks are in horrible shape, just google Amtrak accident, and train travel is rated just slightly above bus travel in terms of desirability.
Not to mention the fact train fares in the US are extortionately high, usually half the price and a third the time to fly the same route.
Re: (Score:2)
usually half the price and a third the time to fly the same route.
Did you mean three times the time? I took the train from Mass to Maryland once, it took longer than it would have taken to drive the same route.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not exactly saying much, an average third world country is killing the US infrastructure-wise.
Seriously, I've seen hemp insulation while in California. And local powerlines over ground, something that's virtually gone in Europe by now, except maybe in some areas in Moldova.
Infrastructure in the US is a fucking disgrace for an industrialized nation that wants to be #1 in the world in many aspects.
Re: (Score:2)
People are doing hemp insulation on purpose, not by accident or because they can't afford anything else. It's not the cheapest option. People are doing it because they're eco-hippies.
Unburied power lines are pretty sad though.
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen the building, and I know the people living there. It's not an eco thing. It's more due to the wiring being ancient.
Re: (Score:2)
> The Chinese are killing us infrastructure wise
Actually, our infrastructure is killing us. Condos in Florida are the tip of the iceberg. It forces hundreds of millions of us to drive, which raises sea levels and causes forest fires. No sidewalks or bike lanes in many places contribute to diabetes and heart conditions. Roadways collapse. Etc. Etc.
Re: (Score:2)
It is much easier to blast a path across your country for a new train line when you own all the land and can simply kick the people out and bulldoze anything in your way.
Most countries, including the US, have eminent domain laws that allow the government to take over private property to make way for infrastructure projects, so that's not a valid excuse for why the US can no longer build infrastructure.
In China, on the other hand, you regularly have projects held up by property owners who refuse to move in a phenomenon known as "nail houses", with roads and highways either being blocked or forced to be re-routed around such "nail houses". [amusingplanet.com]
"Next Decade" (Score:4, Funny)
Maglev has been expected to enter commercial usage in the next decade since the 70's. I'll not hold my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
Maglev has been expected to enter commercial usage in the next decade since the 70's.
And it's gonna be powered by nuclear fusion!
Re: (Score:2)
And it's gonna be powered by nuclear fusion!
Which the Greens will allow to happen!
Re:"Next Decade" (Score:5, Informative)
Maglev has been expected to enter commercial usage in the next decade since the 70's. I'll not hold my breath.
Maglev has been in commercial usage in Shanghai for almost two decades now... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It's barely hanging on. Commercially, it has not been a success and conventional rail has managed to displace it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's been 10 years out for about 40 years now. Just like cold fusion.
Re: (Score:3)
Maglev has been expected to enter commercial usage in the next decade since the 70's. I'll not hold my breath.
It exists in plenty of other countries, just not in the USA. The reason is simple, money. Nobody is willing or able to raise the funds to make it happen here, and there are too many forces at play that are preventing it from happening as well. With lots of open space we could do it here if there was appetite for it but there are always plenty of detractors preventing it. Why ride a comfortable train at 300mph when you can fly at 350mph? Everyone loves the TSA on top of it, so we need to make sure we g
Ground speed? (Score:4, Interesting)
Surely in order to quality as a "ground vehicle" it has to actually be in contact with the ground?
Since this train will be hovering just above the ground, it's more like a low altitude aircraft or a hovercraft than a ground vehicle.
Re:Ground speed? (Score:4, Informative)
The track is an integral part of the linear motor system that the train can't operate without, so it is considered a ground vehicle.
It's basically a traditional circular motor but unrolled into a flat track. The track part contains alternating N/S permanent magnets and the train has a set of alternating electromagnets that are driven similar to how a normal motor is, out of phase. Instead of creating rotational force (torque) it creates linear force. There is also a separate magnetic force used for levitation.
Hovercrafts are also ground vehicles because they need the ground to work. For land speed records there are separate categories for wheeled vehicles and levitating vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
So wait... it's basically a train-shaped railgun?
Re: (Score:3)
Railguns are different, they have the electromagnet in the barrel of the gun to accelerate an inert projectile. Maglev trains have the electromagnet in the train and in the rails.
In the Japanese system the track has conventional electromagnets and the train has superconducting magnets that operate at 4 degrees Kelvin (-269 C). There are actually a few different ways you can arrange the magnets to provide levitation, guidance (keeping the train centred on the track) and propulsion and they all have various s
Re: (Score:3)
A railgun has two parallel, conductive rails, shorted by a conductive projectile. Enormous amounts of current creates magnetic fields that repel the projectile from the end of the rails where the current is supplied.
Re: (Score:2)
Impressive (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering that they will now reduce the travel time to only 2.5 hours, that is end to end way faster than the plane. I think that the plane will then only be taken for connecting flights.
Re:Impressive (Score:5, Interesting)
This is just the start too. The Japanese maglev is due to enter operation around the same time and at an initial speed of 600km/h, but expected to reach at least 800km/h on the current rolling stock and beyond with new designs.
Part of the challenge is not just building a faster train or running it a bit quicker, it's the signalling and safety. The current wheeled trains already take a few km to stop from full speed in an emergency. Visible signalling is pointless in a maglev, it zooms past too fast for the driver to see, so they are implementing fully electronic signalling which obviously has to be extremely reliable and fail-safe.
Re: (Score:2)
Signalling is an issue for high-speed rail as well. TGV et al have used in-cabin signalling from the start.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, even most low speed rail in developed countries has in-cabin signalling now. With maglev there is barely any point having a window, and since much of the track in Japan will be tunnel anyway there won't be a lot to see. In fact windows may be a hindrance to the driver, due to being blinded when exiting tunnels at speeds in excess of 166m/s or due to a variation of road hypnosis from the track and tunnel lighting.
The current shinkansen already have very long noses so stopping in the right place at stati
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. They are going through a lot of mountains. Most of the track is tunnel.
Re: (Score:2)
I've taken the train in China too.
if you don't have a national ID, you also have a long wait to get into the main concourse. They seem to prioritize citizens when allowing access.
the whole experience reminded me a lot of going to the airport in the US, and took a similar amount of time to get through.
the luggage thing is nice that you have fast access to it on the train, but you also need to keep an eye on it, as it's just placed in a common area near the door.
In the end, I'd still rather fly even if they c
Re: (Score:2)
In Europe you just go through a metal detector next to the platform. China's bane is the amount of bureaucracy it takes to do anything. The one time bureaucracy moves fast there is getting it applied to a new technology. But at least in China you can build things.
Re: Impressive (Score:2)
Off-topic: kph? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm curious about the way the summary was written. Is it usual in English speaking countries, or at least in the US, to write "kilometers per hour" as "kph"?
I mean, this is the first time I saw it written this way, as in my country, and in other metric system countries I saw it, is always expressed as "km/h".
(Similarly for combustible consumption. We don't write "lpkm", we use "km/l".)
Re: (Score:2)
We also use km/h in Canada.
I'm guessing USAmericans invented "kph" as a direct translation/conversion of "mph" since they don't use "m/h".
Re: (Score:2)
We primarily use it for distances in more common vernacular. Scientists and engineers will often write it more as you describe.
To answer your question, we do say "mpg" as miles per gallon. Of course this is using the imperial system.
So yes, "mph" is pretty common and "kph" is just a nice way we try to make it more clear to an international audience by using the metric system. I have never seen "lpk". Again we are dropping the "m" off of the general abbreviation of "km" for kilometer.
You have to remember tha
Re: (Score:2)
It is normal in the UK. Engineers and scientists will tend to write km/h but laypeople tend to write kph or mph. I guess it's because they normally say "kilometres per hour" or "miles per hour".
Similarly fuel consumption is often expressed as KPL (kilometres per litre) or MPG (miles per gallon). The latter is often confusing because UK gallons and US gallons are not the same, and in the UK fuel is sold in litres but MPG has been kept as a hold-over from the days when it was sold in gallons.
Of course the mor
Re: (Score:2)
It is normal in the UK. Engineers and scientists will tend to write km/h but laypeople tend to write kph or mph. I guess it's because they normally say "kilometres per hour" or "miles per hour".
The UK seems to be really schizophrenic about measurements. In the EU, it's easy to adjust to everything being metric, but in the UK you keep encountering imperial distances and temperatures.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and it's bloody annoying. They don't teach imperial measures at school (maybe one lesson on converting to metric) and have not for decades, yet it is used all over the place.
Distance signs are in metres for walking and cycling and in miles for driving.
At least on the TV they mostly use centigrade now, with occasional conversions to Fahrenheit. Some newspapers still use Fahrenheit as the primary scale though.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK also sticks to imperial beer.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
But football fields is a unit of area, not length.
Hey China! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
in other news ... china buries train (Score:3)
somehow I see this going the same as the last time they made an announcement about the speed of their trains.
1. a train derails killing a large number of passengers
2. rather than report it, the government decides it'll just bury the train and passengers
3. they get caught, and now all trains need to go slow.
What we lack in technology we make up for (Score:2)
What we lack in technology we make up for in bureaucracy, limited vision, and late arrivals.
Using stolen tech (Score:2)
China literally raided the offices of companies they were working with and stole all of their computers and files. Other stupid companies in the EU and Japan sold them tech. Now, the Chinese are trying to patent and sell the same tech back to them. Do you really want to ride on a high speed train, assembled using technology they stole and don't really understand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
This is China we're talking about (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think USAmericans are just so damn proud of their pre-school measurement system based on body parts, they don't want to use anything else!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)