The non-stop train idea

[destrekor]

PEOPLE DIE

i imagine the passenger car would have to signal ready long before the train arrives, or it'd do an auto stop. or some even more fancy mechanism to conditionally latch onto the train. actually that's probably needed anyway because this is too complicated to not use some kind of fine control.

it's a clever and interesting idea, though i don't know. trains accelerate pretty fast already. there's an upper bound to the acceleration dictated by comfort level and I imagine it's not too far off the current acceleration capabilities of trains. this seems overly complicated. priorities might shift so that efficiency would become a bigger factor, but I think acceleration capabilities of trains would increase as well.

Such long-distance non-stop trains would likely be very lengthy in terms of number of train segments.

On the top, there would probably be some kind of Linear Synchronous Motor (LSM) or Linear Induction Motor (LIM) track to help control the shuttle's smooth adjustment to speed from 0. I'd imagine it'd feel like a roller-coaster launch at a more manageable level.
Could also force the train to slow down somewhat to help make that more feasible. Still traveling at high speed, but not top-speed. It's merely the act of stopping that's the main drag on long-distance transportation, so slowing down, to say, half speed, for a short distance at each station, would drastically reduce total trip time.

 

[dighn]

Such long-distance non-stop trains would likely be very lengthy in terms of number of train segments.

On the top, there would probably be some kind of Linear Synchronous Motor (LSM) or Linear Induction Motor (LIM) track to help control the shuttle's smooth adjustment to speed from 0. I'd imagine it'd feel like a roller-coaster launch at a more manageable level.
Could also force the train to slow down somewhat to help make that more feasible. Still traveling at high speed, but not top-speed. It's merely the act of stopping that's the main drag on long-distance transportation, so slowing down, to say, half speed, for a short distance at each station, would drastically reduce total trip time.

hmm yes. the biggest gain in time would probably be from the boarding process, which would no longer be added to the travel time of the train. that's probably significant enough to justify such complexity. then again, there are probably easier ways of solving that particular problem.

 

[Terzo]

I'm assuming there would be some way to go from the attached car to the main train?

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

What if you had to go two stops instead of one? How would you stay on the train until it stopped at the correct one? What if you changed your mind in the middle of a transit? How would you move between cars? And how do you ensure that everyone gets on the right car?

 

[Leros]

I'm assuming there would be some way to go from the attached car to the main train?

Nah, the whole train is just a flatbed truck on which these little pods lie. You can only move one train station at a time. If you want to go further, you have to run back to the departing pod before the doors close.

OF COURSE YOU CAN!!!

 

[pray4mojo]

What if you had to go two stops instead of one? How would you stay on the train until it stopped at the correct one? What if you changed your mind in the middle of a transit? How would you move between cars? And how do you ensure that everyone gets on the right car?

I think you're missing the point of the lower passenger train.

 

[SonicIce]

people are still having to get on and off a car. i don't see the point. how is it unlike what we do now. train stops you get on, train moves to destination. Seems like a waste.

The advantage isn't as much for the passengers as it is for the train company. They can keep the train moving. The entire train doesn't have to stop and wait for everyone to board. It could double the volume of passengers per day depending on number of stops and length. Sitting train = not making money

 

[AndroidVageta]

Only problem I see is carrying capacity...If you consider the CG model presented to us you are talking, what, 20-30 people per car and perhaps only 1 or 2 cars per train? As opposed to the 100's of people that can be packed on a train now?

I see and understand the technology here, I really do...it just isnt practical is all...

 

[Leros]

Only problem I see is carrying capacity...If you consider the CG model presented to us you are talking, what, 20-30 people per car and perhaps only 1 or 2 cars per train? As opposed to the 100's of people that can be packed on a train now?

I see and understand the technology here, I really do...it just isnt practical is all...

The top train is just an entrance to the bottom train. It will have stairs or an escalator to the bottom.

 

[SonicIce]

Only problem I see is carrying capacity...If you consider the CG model presented to us you are talking, what, 20-30 people per car and perhaps only 1 or 2 cars per train? As opposed to the 100's of people that can be packed on a train now?

I see and understand the technology here, I really do...it just isnt practical is all...

yea that might be a limitation. one of those little cars aint gunna fill up a whole train

 

[AndroidVageta]

The top train is just an entrance to the bottom train. It will have stairs or an escalator to the bottom.

Ahhh completely didnt think or notice that. Comment withdrawn!

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I think you're missing the point of the lower passenger train.

So...the train picks up the car, the passengers go into the train, and then when they need to get off they go back up into the car?

I guess that makes sense.

But something else: What if the car isn't big enough for the number of people that want to get off?

 

[Toonces]

So...the train picks up the car, the passengers go into the train, and then when they need to get off they go back up into the car?

I guess that makes sense.

But something else: What if the car isn't big enough for the number of people that want to get off?

Exactly.

A hybrid system might work for commuter trains, where a small amount of people board at each station using the cars, then the train conventionally stops at the major stations at the end of the line.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

But it won't work so well for circular tracks or tracks where there are multiple points where a huge amount of people may want to get on or off.

 

[darkxshade]

Would be practical only for long distances like cross-continental tracks and it would have to have say at least 20 stop for it to be useful. I don't see this working too great for city subway systems.

 

[brblx]

dumbest idea ever.

the only way this would be practical is if the train was in space, where 100% of the propulsion would be used for acceleration only. since we have that friction thing here, the gains from such an idea would be far outweighed by the impracticality.

 

[Leros]

Would be practical only for long distances like cross-continental tracks and it would have to have say at least 20 stop for it to be useful. I don't see this working too great for city subway systems.

I've heard of people riding these high speed trains for an hour to get into places like Tokyo where they work. Think 200km/hour for an hour. Pretty far. Imagine if you have 3 or 4 stops at majors cities along the way. This kind of system could cut the travel time in half.

 

[mooncancook]

What happens on those big stops where half of the passengers need to get off? How about just build faster trains instead.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

what a lame-brain idea