Plans For U.S. Levitating Train Get Boost
The Proposed MagLev Train Would Get Passengers From L.A. To Vegas In Under 2 Hours
-
Photo
The world's first commercial levitation train leaves Shanghai's Pudong International Airport for a trial run to Shanghai city's new Pudong financial district in China, Thursday Dec. 19, 2002 (AP)
-
Blog
Technology Blog
Blog postings on the latest technology news, tips and tidbits.
-
Section
Eye On Technology
Daniel Sieberg's reports on computers and technology for the CBS Evening News.
Derided by critics as pie in the sky, the train would use magnetic levitation technology to carry passengers from Disneyland to Las Vegas in well under two hours, traveling at speeds of up to 300 mph. It would be the first MagLev system in the U.S.
The money is the largest cash infusion in the project's nearly 20-year history. It will pay for environmental studies for the first leg of the project.
The money had been delayed by a drafting error in Congress' 2005 highway bill, which was corrected along with some other changes by the legislation signed Friday by Bush. The delay had allowed a competing and cheaper diesel-electric plan to emerge as an alternative, but with the money now freed up supporters hope to move forward with the MagLev plan.
The train is meant to ease traffic on increasingly clogged Interstate 15, the main route for the millions of Southern Californians who make the 250-plus-mile drive to Las Vegas each year. There is no train on the route - Amtrak's Desert Wind between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., praised passage of the law, saying the MagLev project "will safely and efficiently move people between Southern California and Las Vegas."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



- 1
- 2
- next
See all 53 CommentsWE NEED TO GO BACK TO MASS TRANSIT LIKE WE HAD MANY YEARS AGO. AND THIS TRAIN WOULD GET A PERSON TO THEIR DESTINATION 3 OR 4 TIMES QUICKER THAN A CAR, BUS, ETC.
FROM WORKING IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR 40 YEARS, I HAVE SEEN MANY THINGS COME TO BE BECAUSE OF SOME, SO CALLED FAR OUT THOUGHT.
You cannot yet say it will never happen because it hasnt been tried here yet.Mass transit is a great success in Europe and can be a success here too.
GOOD FOR YOU PEOPLE...
IF ENOUGH PEOPLE GET BEHIND SOMETHING IT HAS A CHANCE OF COMING TO LIFE...
The route though, come on, Disneyland Las Vegas?
$45 mil as the first leg, just environmental studies.
How about a more improtant route so people can get to work?
I thought this was a joke. It''s infuriating this kind of money is apporopriated for fantasy vacations.
One has to wonder what we look like to the rest of the world with projects like this.
I''d settle for ANY public transportation that could carry me the 17 miles to work in the same amount of time that the MagLev can travel from LA to LV.
They took away many of the rail system and made bike paths out of them. Not a very wise look toward the future in my opinion.
One could travel anywhere within the city, and to surrounding suburbs on this system.
As I recall, you paid one fee upon entering the bus/car, which covered your fare to wherever you exited, or to the end of that route.
These public-transit vehicles were gradually removed as people purchased personal automobiles and riders (demand) declined.
This had nothing to do with %u201C%u201Dbig oil%u201D%u201D. It was, in fact, what people%u2019s wants/demands dictated.
At that time environmental concerns were not considered a factor, nor were concerns about oil supply.
This trend occurred all across America. Causing many large cities%u2019 populations to move/spread outward, creating more and more demand for personal transportation to and from work. This, in turn, expanded the auto industry and so on.
This evolvement in societal norm took decades.
Societies have gone from personal transportation being a simple luxury to an absolute necessity, and it will require a lot of years to reverse.
Gas/oil prices, just like EVERYTHING needed for simple survival today, are now the result of, almost total, monopolization. This monopolization has allowed corporations to completely control our lives, including our government (including the Supreme Court).
Guess whose fault that is? Hint- look in the mirror.
what a jack*a*zz. This sort of transportation needs to be connecting cities in regional locals not a few playgrounds.
Is he going to move out of his mansion??? It must use a lot of energy...
This is the reason that the project will fail. An amount this great would pay for some of the physical line itself if the route was concurrent with existing highways. Take out lanes and run highspeed between the major points and commute trains to the work and bedroom communities between schedules.
Posted by noaanhc
The trains have been successful in Europe and in Japan, but THEY did not have to deal with the ''Kingdom of Kalifornia'' either. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Before this there was the ''bullet train'' from LA to Vegas, the backers gave up. Too many restrictions and too many dinky towns to deal with.
I don''t know why you guys don''t all go monorail. Its simple? Cheap? Relatively reliable (except when struck by lightning), and safe.
Does this little piece of information imbue you with any confidence that a whole new train system is a good idea? Wouldn''t it make sense to re-start that LA-Vegas route for a while if only to gauge rider interest?
Business is important, but citizens and worlers must count for something in these equations. Nothing about the need for CalTrans or L.A. MTA project. Highways, higways, highways is big money for oil companies, parts suppliers, gas refineries, etc.
People only as consumers and not their need of service improvements or government protection has been the way since the 80''s.
We have a US government that is wholly focused on increasing the profits and compensation for multi-national corporate CEOs.
While these same multi-national corporations and CEOs are wholly focused on improving Chinese economic opportunities regardless of the economic costs to the USA.
When you combine a government and corporate world that is out to improve China and scrxw the USA you are seeing the outcome.
I%u2019m not sure the Dems are going to an improvement as our government is bought and paid for by special interests representing other countries such as China, Saudis and Israel.
Does this little piece of information imbue you with any confidence that a whole new train system is a good idea? Wouldn''''t it make sense to re-start that LA-Vegas route for a while if only to gauge rider interest?
Posted by rational_1
You need public subsidy for train services. Americans have long had a difficulty in accepting that, thinking you need to see profit on everything, or toss it. Trains are good for the environment, good for low income people and good for society in general. But to work, given the enormous up front investment, and requirements in terms of frequency and where they go, they need public subsidy. No one has a problem with highways getting built and maintained with public money, but trains, which would cost a tiny fraction of highway spending, are taboo in the US, which, ironically, is perfect for high speed trains, given the large size of the country and population concentrations in major urban centers.
Posted by downsteamjim at 04:22 PM : Jun 07, 2008
See, Corporate Welfare doesn''t work...
Las Vegas - Los Angles: If you build it they will come.
Las Vegas - Los Angeles: If you build it they will come
Posted by cdfoxtrot at 04:45 PM : Jun 07, 2008
I don''t disagree with you on anything you wrote, but it does concern me that they closed down a line between LA to Vegas due to lack of ridership and now propose to build a new expensive one. I didn''t read in the article any estimates of ridership and why their new route will necessarily get more riders than the last one they abandoned. Seems to me the expected usage should be estimated before embarking on something of this scale.
Posted by cdfoxtrot at 04:45 PM : Jun 07, 2008
I don''''t disagree with you on anything you wrote, but it does concern me that they closed down a line between LA to Vegas due to lack of ridership and now propose to build a new expensive one. I didn''''t read in the article any estimates of ridership and why their new route will necessarily get more riders than the last one they abandoned. Seems to me the expected usage should be estimated before embarking on something of this scale.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by rational_1 at 05:24 PM
So if you don''t agree, then you must feel that we need to be driving a SUV everyone and pumping hundreds of dollars of gas away just to live up to your nightmare of commercial greed. Wonderful. The worst thing about people like you is that you are so fixated in your own opinion of superiority that you offer nothing to humanity that is even worth looking at. You are hopeless.
Posted by rudy654 at 10:43 PM : Jun 07, 2008
Uhhhm, I said I didn''t disagree, which meant I agreed with him. The worst thing about people like you (to borrow your phrase) is that you can''t read.
I have ridden on the French TGV in France. (in english: high speed train) Version one is now almost 28 years old. It does 120 mph and runs day in and day out year after year reliably. This thing even leans into the curves like a race car! Version II is 40% faster! The Germans, Chinese, and Japanese also have well engineered systems and have been developing mag-lev systems. These systems serve the public interest, and are VERY fuel efficient compared to cars. This stuff has to be well engineered, yes. We should have invested in the technology when the French did. As a nation we have been too tied to automobiles.
Frank Bowers of Austin, TX
How about a useful corridor, like San Diego to LA? or LA to San Francisco? This is nuts!
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 53 Comments