Topic moved from General by dthead on 10 Oct 2016 21:40
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
So Eddy;  you've now decided to do a bit of amateur psychology eh?

Sponsored advertisement

  justapassenger Minister for Railways

Which is better to unleash on the world: amateur psychology or amateur engineering?

At least with the latter there is the consolation that the Japanese PM is likely to say no and nothing will come of it but some wasted electrons (or photons if you're on FTTP).
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

Many people have said on different forums they would not like to go fast in a deep tunnel

Forget about the Japanese maglev as they can only do 500kph due to air resistance

China wants 1,000kph trains but does not have the tunnel technology yet and that is why they are buying up nearly all the TBM makers now

Korea wants 1,000kph trains and even though they are not as good as us at mining they have done some pretty impressive things
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
North or South Korea?
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

South
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
When you've stopped insulting all the Korean miners reading this thread could you explain how this monstrous idea would work. Give evidence, refereeing to credible third party sources.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

Sorry  if they are offended

It is not hard to see their 2017 desire to  develop a 1,000kph train in Google

If the general public feels like you it will  never  happen here
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
People are sick of 1000 km/h projects, they want Terraspan's 4000 mph train instead. Scott wrote to me and said my SkyMagLev project was better presented, with rigorous costing and technical proof, but yours is sexier and easy to sell. You just need to outline funding and technical details, and provide proof for some of your more outrageous notions and it could be a goer. The printing out all the money bit raised his eyebrows. Also says Maglevy is no good as it would have to be north of 600 k  per house and that will kill demand. Until then, my project or one or the three other competing ones will go forward.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

Assumming Canberra and Albury grow to 5 million each it would only be an average maglevy per property bought of $10,000 to recover the $35b

There would be 1,000 workers for ten years and jobs bring growth.
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
What's the time frame for this 5 million people in each of Canberra and Albury? How are you going to get that many people to want to live there and how are you going to provide water and other essential services? How many will be living in Sydney and Melbourne by then? 100 million? Typical of your twisted logic eddy, assume the ridiculous and everything falls into place.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

What's the time frame for this 5 million people in each of Canberra and Albury? How are you going to get that many people to want to live there and how are you going to provide water and other essential services? How many will be living in Sydney and Melbourne by then? 100 million? Typical of your twisted logic eddy, assume the ridiculous and everything falls into place.
billybaxter

I have to thank you for pointing out problems that I can then think about.


Any proposition is based on assumptions that only time will tell if they were correct or not so I assume an increase of 100,000 per year each for Albury and Canberra and depending on how many people live in each house it would take maybe 100 years to recover the $35b at 2% or $10,000 average and as you have pointed out any larger maglevy may deter people from moving out there.



But we must take into account the profit from Magtube also paying off the principle and assuming it costs $10,000 per trip then   enough trains to take the 30,000 people daily at 2,000 persons per train would cost $150,000 per day or with 10m people per year with an income of $2b and running cost of even $100m there would be enough profit to pay off the principle a lot quicker.  
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Any proposition is based on assumptions that only time will tell if they were correct or not so I assume an increase of 100,000 per year each for Albury and Canberra and depending on how many people live in each house it would take maybe 100 years to recover the $35b at 2% or $10,000 average and as you have pointed out any larger maglevy may deter people from moving out there.
But we must take into account the profit from Magtube also paying off the principle and assuming it costs $10,000 per trip then   enough trains to take the 30,000 people daily at 2,000 persons per train would cost $150,000 per day or with 10m people per year with an income of $2b and running cost of even $100m there would be enough profit to pay off the principle a lot quicker.  
"eddyb"

Eddy - enough of the fairy stories!  You assume something, then treat it as a fact, and proceed to produce random figures to "prove it".
This whole subject has been the same. You provide no engineering expertise at all; just things which you believe will work. What a pity that you don't use your boundless energy for some good, practical purpose.
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
The whole Murray Darling basin from SE Qld to SA has a current population of about 2 million and has chronic problems with water, yet to provide a showcase for somebody else's totally unproven technology and to satisfy a need that is already met by air transport, you wish to build two cities of 5 million people!
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

The whole Murray Darling basin from SE Qld to SA has a current population of about 2 million and has chronic problems with water, yet to provide a showcase for somebody else's totally unproven technology and to satisfy a need that is already met by air transport, you wish to build two cities of 5 million people!
billybaxter

Once again a good point about water supply.


After looking more into the economics of Magtube it appears that it does not even rely on a Maglevy at all although it would help.


I do not know how many people the water supply can carry in Albury or Canberra but I suppose it depends on how wisely it is used in the future as it is a real waste flushing toilets with potable water.


Still think it would be just as easy to make Albury a suburb of Melbourne and Canberra like a suburb of Sydney.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Still think it would be just as easy to make Albury a suburb of Melbourne and Canberra like a suburb of Sydney.
"eddyb"
Nonsense.A suburb is a locality within a defined Urban Growth Area.  Melbourne will be the world's biggest city if Albury ever becomes a suburb.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

Still think it would be just as easy to make Albury a suburb of Melbourne and Canberra like a suburb of Sydney.
Nonsense.A suburb is a locality within a defined Urban Growth Area.  Melbourne will be the world's biggest city if Albury ever becomes a suburb.
Valvegear
I should have said make Albury like a suburb of Melbourne and Canberra like a suburb of Sydney
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
I should have said make Albury like a suburb of Melbourne and Canberra like a suburb of Sydney
"eddyb"
That is a totally meaningless statement. It's as sensible as saying let's make Hobart a suburb of Philadelphia.
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
So, if we flush our toilets properly we can have Magtube? I won't bother asking about your new economic research because I know you won't tell us, or it will be another Stanley Steamer. You've got some creative ideas eddy, but you're starting at the wrong end, 'caressing the dog's balls' as the Russians say. Start with what exists and build from that rather than coming up with a dream and then fudging your stats trying to prove it can be done.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

I read a high speed train uses the eqivilent of .33 litres per passenger per 100 km which is about 10% that of a plane

Anyway I think it would only cost $10,000 to run a Magtube train from Sydney to Melbourne so to carry the 10 million per year it would only cost $100 million and if it kills off air travel on that route it would have a gaurenteed income of $2b per year income allowing the construction cost of $35b to be repaid
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Anyway I think it would only cost $10,000 to run a Magtube train from Sydney to Melbourne so to carry the 10 million per year it would only cost $100 million and if it kills off air travel on that route it would have a gaurenteed income of $2b per year income allowing the construction cost of $35b to be repaid
"eddyb"
Eddy; you just don't get the message, do you? We don't want to know what you think. We want facts, backed up by solid, expert evidence.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

When doing anything new assumptions would have to be made as well as facts

Would you agree with this fact " a high speed train uses the equivilent of .33 litres per passenger per 100km"

Would you agree that in ten years there will be 10 million people travelling between Melbourne and Sydney

Would you agree the tunnels would cost about the same as NWRL

If so we may discuss any other problems you may have with Magtube
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic

Would you agree with this fact " a high speed train uses the equivilent of .33 litres per passenger per 100km"
Would you agree that in ten years there will be 10 million people travelling between Melbourne and Sydney
Would you agree the tunnels would cost about the same as NWRL
"eddyb"
I would definitely not agree with any of them.
Your first one is not a fact and could not possibly be. What size train? How many power units? How many kW?

All three points are assumptions made  by you and you are not an expert - something we have been trying to tell you for ever, but you keep on feeding us bullsh1t ideas with no expert opinions or evidence.
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

With construction, and commissioning of Sydney second airport, in the pipeline, HSR, of any type, is unlikely in the short/medium term. Regardless of technology used. Particularly, untested on commercial level. IE Magtube.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

There are a number of no airport signs out that way and it would be a brave politician to actually start it

There is good borrowing and best borrowing
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

No airport sign=no airport?

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Nightfire, Pressman

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.