Super/Hypersonic Transport

16 views
Skip to first unread message

Pranay Manocha

unread,
Aug 18, 2002, 4:08:13 PM8/18/02
to
Hi,
In my opinion, we need to build a global network of super/hyper-sonic
travel. Most (if not all) systems, are air-based. Japan/Australia
recently tested a hypersonic aircraft (so did Nasa) - but these, even
if they succeed, will be small aircraft. and prohibitively expensive
for the average 'commuter'.

Why not then, build (as my idea goes) Hypersonic trains?
Trains (or Land-rail transport) going along at Mach 8 (or more),
sounds like a ridiculous idea, but think about the points in favour.

a) We already have the technology to build HyperSonic engines.
b) Rail transport provides a stable platform (less unexpected
turbulence etc).
c) Trains can carry the masses. Small Aircraft cannot.

My idea revolves around building a railway track - say from London to
Hong Kong - enclosed in a tunnel - in which the air pressure has been
reduced to a near vaccuum (to reduce air drag). Building a tunnel
track like this will be prohibitively expensive - but imagine the
benefits. Europe to Asia in 1 hour. 100 trains each way everyday. 200
people onboard each train. Thats 40,000 people who can use the service
on any given day. Probably more, if we accomodate for it.

Sure, my idea sounds ridiculous, and a lot of scientific fact is
missing from it - but it is surely an idea worth pondering... ?

Do post your feedback,
Cheers,
Pranay

The Slug

unread,
Aug 19, 2002, 12:17:04 PM8/19/02
to

"Pranay Manocha" <pra...@gmx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:241abfe3.02081...@posting.google.com...
> Hi,

> Why not then, build (as my idea goes) Hypersonic trains?
> Trains (or Land-rail transport) going along at Mach 8 (or more),
> sounds like a ridiculous idea, but think about the points in favour.
> Pranay

Hi Pranay,
You forgot to mention that your tunnels could reach city centres- no
more long bus journey to out of town airports. On the other hand think of
the fuel costs, the greenhouse emissions, the difficulties of rescueing
people after a crash. I always liked the appropriate technology philosophy,
Nice idea though,
The Slug


Pranay Manocha

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 8:03:29 AM8/21/02
to
"The Slug" <bl...@blah.net> wrote in message news:<aM889.1306$2v5....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...

>
> Hi Pranay,
> You forgot to mention that your tunnels could reach city centres- no
> more long bus journey to out of town airports. On the other hand think of
> the fuel costs, the greenhouse emissions, the difficulties of rescueing
> people after a crash. I always liked the appropriate technology philosophy,
> Nice idea though,
> The Slug

Well, as far as I know - the fuel costs, greenhouse emissions, rescue
oppurtunities/plans etc, look pretty bleak - but definitely its much
less effort for a train, than for a plane.

Hypersonic planes will fly at 50,000 feet+, their emissions will go
straight into the ozone layer - and for whom!? for 50 business
travellers! Energy consumption by hypersonic trains, can be minimized
- by reducing controlling air pressure in the tunnels - thus reducing
drag - the rails could be magntized, so the train actually levitates,
thus reducing friction. The environmental costs will definitely be
lower per traveller - than for an aircraft. About rescuing people - we
could make the system so efficient that chances of crashes are
negligible. Anyway, it needs to be researched!

The only drawback for this plan, that I see, is the costs involved -
building an intercontinental tunnel - with the specifications that
such a transport will need - wil run into millions/kilometre of track.

But there must be a cheaper way :-)
And the benefits will definitely outdo the investment

Cheers!
Pranay

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages