Unpopular belief: autonomous vehicles won't reduce traffic; car utilization will increase to saturate capacity.
Show this thread
-
Hopefully more trains in more places, going up to about 300km/hr. Not sure there’s a general theme beyond that. Economics currently runs out past 300km/hr with existing technology.
-
-
Increased cost required to power train through increased air resistance (or align trackway) not usually worth benefit in travel time reduction. A lot more power to save five minutes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Evacuated tube or similar are proposed alternatives to decrease air resistance and make over 300km/hr reasonable. But the verdict on whether or not the increase in construction costs is worth it isn’t in yet.
-
Air resistance is of little concern over 300km/h because the cross section of a train is very small. Cornering speed, tunnel section and flying ballast under the train makes the infrastructure much more expensive for little increases under 600 km runs.
-
The infrastructure is also expensive, but it’s absolutely not true air resistance is negligible. The Shanghai maglev runs at lower speeds than the system design for all but a few runs per day because the energy usage over 300km/hr wasn’t worth it. Other lines are similar.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.