 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
General information
|
|
 |
General criteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Status of development: test series |
| |
|
|
|
|
A transrapid route is currently built in China. In Germany two lines are being discussed at present. |
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
Time horizon for broad application: in > 10 years |
| |
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Expected technological development: highly dynamic |
| |
|
|
|
|
Transrapid being a relatively new technology with virtually no in-service experience still offers potential for further optimisation in many fields. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Motivation:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Development of an ultra-high-speed ground transportation system to compete with short and mid distance air travel. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Benefits (other than environmental): big |
| |
|
|
|
|
Transportation service
- Short travelling time
- High riding comfort
Infrastructure
The track for a maglev system can be constructed more flexibly in
topographically difficult areas, since much smaller curve radii (2250 m) are
permissible than for conventional railways (3250 m). The reason is that maglev
is independent from wheel-rail adhesion and the vehicle encloses the driveway so
that there is no danger of derailment. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Barriers: high |
| |
|
|
|
|
Incompatibility of infrastructure
The Transrapid being a system technologically incompatible with conventional
railway systems, it would need a completely new infrastructure and a
step-by-step transition from one system to the other is impossible.
Costs
The high investment costs of infrastructure represent the main obstacle for
the implementation of maglev systems.
Lack of in-service experience
The introduction of a new technology is always associated with a number of
risks for the operator, especially high uncertainties about the downtime of the
system and the maintenance costs.
Acceptance
The controversial discussion in Germany on the (finally abandoned) plan for a
Transrapid route from Hamburg to Berlin showed that there is a high level of
scepticism about the benefits and worries about the risks of Transrapid
systems. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Success factors:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Successful and economic operation of the first Transrapid lines in China and Germany could eliminate scepticism and facilitate a further diffusion. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Applicability for railway segments: medium |
| |
|
|
|
Type of traction: not applicable
|
| |
|
|
|
Type of transportation: passenger - main lines, passenger - high speed, passenger - regional lines, passenger - suburban lines, freight
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Transrapid offers high speed ground transportation for passengers and high value goods. The main benefit of Transrapid being the short travel time, the system is especially attractive for national long distance or international passenger transport. On shorter domestic lines (such as the planned route between Hamburg and Berlin), the time gain compared to conventional high speed lines or even cars is often too small to justify the high costs. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grade of diffusion into railway markets:
|
| |
|
|
|
Diffusion into relevant segment of fleet: 0 % |
| |
|
|
|
Share of newly purchased stock: 0 % |
| |
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Market potential (railways): highly uncertain |
| |
|
|
|
|
In principle, it is the most developed and promising option for high-speed ground transportation beyond 350 km/h. However, investment costs for infrastructure are very high and a rapid diffusion within the next twenty years is uncertain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Example:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
Environmental criteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Impacts on energy efficiency:
|
| |
|
|
|
Energy efficiency potential for single vehicle: 5 - 10% |
| |
|
|
|
Energy efficiency potential throughout fleet: not applicable |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Other environmental impacts: ambivalent |
|
|
Economic criteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vehicle - fix costs: high |
| |
|
|
|
|
According to the feasibility study commissioned by the German Federal Government on the “Metrorapid” project for a transrapid from Düsseldorf to Dortmund (79 km), the total initial investement for the vehicles required for the operation of the Metrorapid will amount to 0,57 billion EUR. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vehicle - running costs: significant reduction |
| |
|
|
|
|
It is difficult to compare the running costs of a typical conventional rail
system with those of the transrapid mainly because of lacking in-service
experience with the latter.
There are some indications that the operation costs (not including the
wirte-off of infrastructure and vehicle investment) will be lower:
- The levitation technology reduces material wear and thus reduces
maintenance of track and vehicles
- For equal (high) speeds, the energy consumption of the transrapid will be
lower than that of conventional high speed systems. For different speeds (e.g.
400 km/h for the Transrapid and 330 km/h for a high-speed rail system), the
energy consumption of the transrapid will “only” be about 20% higher.
- The Transrapid is well fitted for an automatic operation which would
reduce personnel costs
According to the feasibility study commissioned by the German Federal
Government on the “Metrorapid” project for a transrapid from Düsseldorf to
Dortmund (79 km), the annual operation costs of the system will amount to about
51 million EUR. This includes costs for energy, personnel, maintenance,
insurance, administration etc. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Infrastructure - fix costs: high |
| |
|
|
|
|
According to the feasibility study commissioned by the German Federal Government the “Metrorapid” project for a transrapid from Düsseldorf to Dortmund (79 km) will require an infrastructure investment of 2,56 billion EUR. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Infrastructure - running costs: (no data) |
| |
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Scale effects: high |
| |
|
|
|
|
Being a new technology with a market that is just emerging, scale effects in vehicle technology are to be expected. Scale effects in infrastructure will be comparably small. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Amortisation: not applicable |
| |
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
 |
Application outside railway sector (this technology is railway specific)
|
|
|
Overall rating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Overall potential: promising |
| |
|
|
|
Time horizon: long-term |
| |
|
|
|
|
The on-going discussion on the Transrapid technology is very controversial, especially in Germany. The principal technological feasibility has been demonstrated, but the financial hurdles are very high. An unbiased environmental assessment of maglev technology shows interesting potential in some areas. If compared to air travel, energy efficiency is clearly in favour of transrapid technology. The comparison with conventional high-speed rail transport is not as striking, but is likely to be still in favour of maglev technology at least if equal speeds are compared. From an energy efficiency point of view, the transrapid therefore deserves consideration. This does not say anything about the need and the economic feasibility of such a system. The biggest potential of the Transrapid is expected to lie in long national and international passenger transport where the time gain is significant compared to future high-speed railway systems achieving up to 330 km/h. |
Technologies
go back to technology list
previous technology 
date created: 2002-10-09
add technology
show overview
show evaluation
show details
print data sheet
print screen
Evaluation briefing
Technology list