Switzerland to test ‘hyperloop’ train technologies
swissinfo.ch
swissinfo.ch
I got to make some early promo photos for them [0] and signed a 10-year NDA in the process. However, what I learned (which is public knowledge) that at high speeds even smallest elevation drops would make the passengers feel the free-fall sensation of being on a rollercoaster. Basically at high speeds the elevation change of the vertical vector components of anything more than several degrees can approach the free fall dropping speeds.
I have also taken numerous train rides in Switzerland and driven through large parts of the country and I don't believe the technology can be used there as well as it could have been deployed in other routes in the world that is naturally more flat. So I'm wondering if this mostly an R&D project designed to export an entire tunnel/hyperloop making solution.
[0] https://www.instagram.com/p/BMiyAIdhCJn/ (photo is about 80 frames stacked. Because we only had one welder at the time and I had to reuse him and also to intricately light every parts of this lot)
Actually, it's worse than it sounds. Travel time has a big impact on demand--but only within a small-ish window, about 2-4 hours. Outside of that window, demand does not respond that much to changes in travel time. That means that higher speeds are ultimately about trying to bring more destinations within the acceptable travel time window, but you also have to give up destinations within that window because the stop time penalties are too high.
Switzerland has the issue that it's just too small. With conventional 300-350km/h max-speed HSR, going from the eastern to the western edge of the country could be done in about 2 hours (recall that average speed is going to be less than max speed, particularly when stops are included), which is around the point where going faster means getting no practical benefit for people. It could serve international routes, but then Switzerland is bearing the costs without reaping the benefits, which the citizenry tends not to favor very highly.
There also isn't a lot of demand for Geneva to Zurich in an hour.
There is an aspect of Swiss economy that makes HSR attractive: high degree of decentralization.
The necessary tunnels for Basel would probably cost less than this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel
But Bern<>Zurich is the SBB's bottleneck.
Analogy is a terrible argument. But I kinda think faster transportation beats more transportation every single time.
Probably better to have more ambulances overall, and maybe a few ultra fast ones (e.g. helicopters) for time critical situations.
I think the issue is vertical curvature rather than slope. Traversing a slope at speed is just going to get you a constant vertical component which you will not feel, and not terribly fast, <20kph, about half as fast as a fast elevator. Changing slope is going to get you a vertical acceleration which could fill your tiny capsule with more vomit than one would like. The question is then, can you blend the slopes to keep that under control? Going maximum up grade to maximum down grade at full speed will be something like a 40kph velocity change, at 1G that takes 1.1 seconds, during which time you will drive 360 meters. So, blending over 360 meters gives you full weightless vomit motion or a 2x weight. The blend from full up to full down will probably need to be over a kilometer to keep things clean¹.
␄
¹ The internet is not being forthcoming about real world elevator accelerations. It is too polluted by imaginary physics problems. So I unilaterally decided 1/3g would be ok.
There was a project called Swissmetro [0] in 2005 which had a very similar concept to Hyperloop.
To me the article sounds like: we think it has potential and are going to see if we can make money out of it.
Edit: it can also be very interesting to see if it is cheaper and more confortable than 'low speed' trains. Maybe in the future we use the hyperloops at 80km/h.
With internet, I cant think of a case where there is a need to be urgently, physically, transported from A to B anymore. Maybe weekend leisure trip would be more enjoyable with less travel time.
What I can imagine is an Amazon Hyperloop delivering goods and products faster from delivery center to consumers across countries. No problem about human sickness if there is no human transported. Also, maybe fresh foods like vegetables and fishes would benefit from a faster travel time.
EDIT : also, maybe it sounds silly but... what about transporting gold bars very fast?
I'm happy to hear that legally, physics is still public knowledge.
Nobody really wants to build Musk's hovercraft-like system. They're all maglev in vacuum systems.
Meanwhile, Japan's JR continues to tunnel for the Tokyo-Nagoya maglev. They have 42km of working track and rolling stock. It's expensive, but it's very real.
If you take a look at the SpaceX Hyperloop competition the teams moved away from using air bearings mostly due to the low clearances and the challenges it brought. Maybe on Mars it could be more realistic.
[edit]
Did any of the hyperloop competitors try the addition of a skirt, similar to the UK's old hovertrain?
[edit2]
Googling for "hyperloop skirt" found this article: https://waset.org/publications/10004923/conceptional-design-... which suggests a 2cm clearance, but no clue if that's a reliable source.
Not really. Most of Switzerland's transit is through rail, particularly standard gouge. Introducing a completely new, incompatible form of transit in a highly integrated network is a bad idea. You have to build entirely new infrastructure, stations, etc. All of them incompatible with the existing infrastructure.
It is the same reasons why the Germans didn't chose Transrapid for high-speed rail.
New types of transportation only ever make sense in a place with no or little existing transit infrastructure.
The Swiss network fairly seamlessly integrates multiple forms of transit into one network - both public and private rail, buses, boats, light rail, trams, etc. Bus stops are timed so the trains they connect to are there at the right time for a seamless switch.
Today you rarely ever see infrastructure projects in Switzerland which are incompatible with the existing network. If you build a hyperloop tunnel, only hyperloop cars will be able to use it, and only in the tunnel. If you build a rail tunnel, it is automatically integrated into the huge existing rail infrastructure.
Unless, of course, you built an entire new infrastructure, such as Japan and France did. But Switzerland doesn't need entirely new transit infrastructure today, just localized upgrades.
That's the same reason why maglev hardly ever caught up in the world.
Why would you replace perfectly good existing infrastructure that is used not just for high-speed rail in Switzerland with an entirely new, untested, incompatible system that will provide little incremental benefit while severely crippling the existing rail network?
High-speed rail lines in Switzerland aren't isolated, different-gauge networks like Japan, they are largely part of the same rail network, just with higher speed limits.
Take the new Gotthard Base Tunnel, while it has an operational speed of 200km/h for passenger rail, it is also extensively used for cargo trains (at lower speeds). Building it didn't just reduce the time for trips between Zurich and Milan, the main Nort-South route, but for anyone travelling from the north side of it to the south side of it, as current trains can run through it just as any other railroad.
Particularly, it has a massive impact on cargo, as it was designed from the beginning to reduce congestion in trans-alpine cargo routes. It provides massive network effects not just to Switzerland, but to all of Europe.
Replacing something like this with Hyperloop isn't just a bad idea, is a complete disaster.
Switzerland is probably the last country in the world to need something like a Hyperloop. No wonder we thought about it 50 years ago and shut down the idea:
If so, a little investment now can add up in the long term. This a long way from proven technology, but you make that jump in small investments not a complete replacement of a working system.
Even better, the first track is going to end up as a tourist destination.
The issue is that regular rail can't run on the TGV lines.
Japan/France took a different approach than Germany/Switzerland for HSR. Germany and Switzerland are far less centralized than Japan and France, and that reflects in the network, which began as upgrades to lines between major cities, and new sections with new tracks.
France's system reflects its historical centralization, since the late middle ages. Paris is the economic, political, artistic, demographic center of the country, and just like the first railroads in the country were created to expand central control over the rest of the country, TGV started as a spoke network with a single hub: Paris.
Japan wasn't in the 60's what Switzerland is today.
But it has high speed rail.
And regardless, replacing existing infrastructure with something like the Swissmetro is a terrible idea.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255792073_Swissmetr...
[2] PDF link to English-language report at the bottom of the page: http://www.bfe.admin.ch/dokumentation/energieforschung/index...
A research and development project was funded and launched in the 90s, while the initial concept is credited to Swiss engineer Rodolphe Nieth in 1974.
There is also a recently closed refinery there. The funny thing is that they never budgeted the decommissioning cost when it was built. So there is no money to do it and it's probably going to stay like that forever.
I hope the don't do the same for this project.
http://www.surinenglish.com/local/201808/10/virgin-chooses-i...
Not proof of anything but notice rocket crew always face front.
Edit: I'm not sure if there's an error in my calculations but with 1g acceleration it should take about 25s to get to 900km/h? That seems ok.
If my math is right, in order to accelerate to 900km/h and decelerate to a stop again, all on a 3km track, requires acceleration/deceleration of a bit more than 2g.