วีดีโอ

I was gonna say... RMC collab soon!?!

passive maglev is real, Inductrack (from lawrence livermore national laboratories) uses a halbach array to create a large one-sided magnetic field to create levitation in a track that us made of just copper coils. to work however there needs to be relative motion though, so inductrack needs external propulsion like a ducted prop or jet engine. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductrack

I also saw four small shadows under the prototype. Those are definitely wheels.

They reinvented induction breaking and claim its the future of transport.

They reinvented induction breaking and claim its the future of transport with less friction :)

@@matthiasraudi6423 like in order to eliminate 10N of rolling resistance, they introduced 1000N of magnetic resistance. "I've won but at what cost"

I was just wondering why they disabled comments on the follow-up videos...

​@@frien_d I just checked their patent application US20220381075. There, it is stated (analogously): "Since the horizontal magnetic flux favors a path that encounters the most ferromagnetic material (the top part of the rail with the largest cross-section), a vertical force is created that pushes down on the rail relative to the permanent magnet field generator." This actually makes sense, so it DOES work after all 🤯

@@frien_d ​ I just checked their patent application US'075. There, it is stated (analogously): "Since the horizontal magnetic flux favors a path that encounters the most ferromagnetic material (the top part of the rail with the largest cross-section), a vertical force is created that pushes down on the rail relative to the permanent magnet field generator." This actually makes sense, so it DOES work after all 🤯

I just checked their patent application US20220381075. There, it is stated (analogously): "Since the horizontal magnetic flux favors a path that encounters the most ferromagnetic material (the top part of the rail with the largest cross-section), a vertical force is created that pushes down on the rail relative to the permanent magnet field generator." This actually makes sense, so it DOES work after all 🤯

I just checked their patent application US'075. There, it is stated (analogously): "Since the horizontal magnetic flux favors a path that encounters the most ferromagnetic material (the top part of the rail with the largest cross-section), a vertical force is created that pushes down on the rail relative to the permanent magnet field generator." This actually makes sense, so it DOES work after all 🤯 Even simpler: the magnets are attracted to the thick top part of the rail as soon as they are pushed below that part. Not sure however if that will create enough force to actually lift really heavy stuff like trains.

I think as one opinion above you could attache one side of the magnet to the rail by the side rollers and other side to the bracket...

@@DavidG2P it makes sense but what about the designs they have with the magnet on top of the rail with only rollers on the sides?

@@shiuido359 I haven't seen such a design by them anywhere. Where do you see that design? To my knowledge, the magnets are always at the sides.

If the magnets are arranged in pairs, no net current will be produced and any heat produced will dissipate through the air gap between the rails and magnet?

I am afraid not. This works only plain tracks currently.

I think the problem of track switching wouldn't be too difficult to solve. All it needs is a stabilizing wheel system that's movable upwards in case the vehicle reaches the track switches. The wheels on one side would lift passively and automatically, pushing against some strong springs; and they would go back to their initial position after leaving the track switching area. The stabilizer wheels on the other side would be enough to stabilise the vehicle in the meantime. The switches may need to be redesigned though.

@@attilakovacs5803 Speed, on the other hand, is a critical factor, at high speeds the automatic correction of the wheel system can cause serious problems. In the case of partial stabilization, a reduction in speed is required, which guarantees safe operation. Since this is being built as a high-speed railway, the reduction in speed at every switch makes the journey less comfortable. The modification of switches also strongly affects the operation of traditional trains.

Bruh its been 6 years since the video uploaded, and we havent seen any aplicable train moving.

Hello there... I am also new to Ironlev. I'm a lifelong maglev admirer. When I saw these videos, my mind went to Germany in the late 1960s. Did the TransRapid folks design or build something like this passive floating platform as a step to their first prototype? Then I thought of the L0 in Japan. JNR started maglev research almost a decade before the Germans. Did they consider a passive-platform option before going with SCLev? I'm a big believer in not re-inventing wheels...no pun intended? Anyways, there's a good chance someone tried this option, failed and kept the receipts. Maybe TransRapid wasn't myopic or racist but found the JNR report on why passive-levitation failed: they decided not to reinvent that wheel. Cousin Wiki is helping me for a bit. Reinventing wheels can be useful and even necessary when a new generation sees limitations to old methods or problems that already had solutions buried by obsolescence or greed. I think maglev was buried by the latter. By the 1990s, France successfully adapted and expanded the Shinkansen model. TransRapid was finally ready for market when two issues came up: incompatibility and safety. First, maglev requires a track system completely different and separate from the existing railway system. TGV needed some new tracks for full high-speed use but a not whole new network. Germans had a lotta questions about where that new system would be going, what DB would want to remove or replace to build it, and the cost of running it on top of already-existing railways that connected to the rest of Europe. These questions lead to the second issue: safety. Maglev's cruising speed of 500km/h is twice that of TGV. Someone noticed that the only thing on land that moves anything near that fast are aircraft landing and taking off. The German goverrnment decided that any maglev track would require the same space around it as a runway: 300m on either side. TGV requires no such clearance. If DB wants TransRapid, it will need to acquire literally millions of hectares of land and clear it all, or dig tunnels, or both. Some Germans accuse China of stealing maglev. I think TransRapid cashed in on the world's first and only gadgetbahn scam. I heard that the Chinese company bought the technology and trainset then cancelled their order for the linear propulsion system after delivery of the first couple hundred metres of track. That account might be true. Either way, TransRapid ended up in Shanghai in 2001 and Germany was happy to advocate for its heavy industries to expand into the world's fastest-growinf economy. The track required twice as many towers and thousands of pylons due to mushy ground but that kind of thing doesn't stop Chinese infrastructure. What did stop it was exactly what stopped it in Germany: incompatibility and safety. You know the rest: the 30km line to the airport was supposed to be the gateway drug to an 800km inter-city link with Beijing. At this point, China Railways had ordered several modified Shinkansen and TGV trainsets, aka CRH-2, and was ready to build and convert track for their arrival. Also, Shanghai Metro was continuing to build Line 2 out to the airport. The city terminus' location separate from the downtown transit hub and overpriced tickets kept ridership low and therefore unprofitable. The inter-city plans went to the back burner. The safety issue was a surprise to me and I wonder if it truly was an issue to Chinese officials. The airport line had gone through mostly farmland. In 2006, planners proposed an extension of the line to the nearby city of Hangzhou as a way to put lipstick on that white elephant. The new line would have a 78m corridor as opposed to the 600m German minimum. Residents organized to stop the build, citing EMF hazards. Shanghai scientists reported that health risks were non-existent. The people were angry enough that they protested in public even after Hangzhou police rejected their application for a public protest permit. The next proposals in 2008 were approved with substantial track sections designated for underground construction...and substantial cost increases. By 2010, plans for a CRH-3 high-speed line from Shanghai to Hangzhou were approved and maglev stayed on the back burner. The only thing the Shanghai Maglev built beyond its original line was a museum. I wonder if it breaks even on annual visits. I hope it displays Transrapid's pride in making exactly one sale to anyone anywhere after thirty years of effort. I hope it details every report from Chinese industry that shows that maglev was a turkey, a useful experiment to be gotten at a fire-sale price or a way to compete with Japan. I hope it highlights the engineering reports that were ignored before and during construction that could have saved money in remediation or rebuilds or maybe even abandoning the project altogether. I hope they document the decades of public debate in Japan and internal discussion in JR, highlighting the foolhardiness of JR to complete L0 in spite of the Shanghai example. I hope the museum exhibits all the attempts to expand maglev since 2001, in China and elsewhere, including the demolition of the TransRapid test track and the fantasy JR proposal in Texas. Finally, I hope they install and maintain a working model of the Ironlev that visitors can play on. And I hope that it's power supply is hooked up to bikes that simulate real-time energy use by conventional and maglev trainsets. You mentioned that Ironlev might have gotten more attention if the founders had thought of it at a Starbucks in California. Superconductivity research has definitely been a thing in Silicon Valley long before the first Starbucks. The patent on superconductors in maglev went to Brookhaven National Lab on Long Island, literally on the other side of the USA. This bit of geography should get the attention of all the governments and transportation agencies along the Northeast Corridor. The technology to build maglev not only from DC to Boston but as a loop through Montreal, Toronto, Detroit and back has been right there all along. There's been more money than ever in the last decade from either side of the duopoly of US politics to spend on inter-city and interurban passenger rail. The Corridor is fully electrified and desperately needs passenger-only or passenger-priority rights-of-way and track repair or replacement. And yet the only major thing Amtrak can get is to finally take delivery of the TGV 2.0 trainsets they ordered a dozen years ago as replacements for their current TGV 1.0 sets. And of course maglev lost out on California HSR before Shanghai turned out to be a bust. To be fair, in the 1990s everyone could look at TGV's massive success inspiring the completion of the Chunnel, spreading and adapting across Europe, while Transrapid was being left in the dust. And they could see the L0 chugging along, slow and steady, nowhere near ready. TGV was a proven option and Cali needed to choose. I think about all the high-speed trains and their origins. Cars and highways were displacing the institution of railways. Huge businesses and institutions needed to pivot. Japan, 1950s:: not everyone has a car yet and we're not allowed to build weapons right now and also the Olympics are coming so let's build the fastest inter-city express trains so businessmen can commute effectively. Germany, 1960s: we're too big and built-up to shoot bullet trains on land...but what if we built an L with superconducting magnets? Japan, 1960s, 70s: hey, the USA patented superconductor maglev tech! Let's use that and keep working on the bullet trains for now. France, 1970s: everyone's flying across the country and YIKES petrol ain't cheap no more! What if we built fast trains that were more comfy and convenient than flying? Germany, 1980s: TGV is cool, also cheaper, reliable, faster to build...let's make our own and call it ICE. And Transrapid? Here's a test track. Your day will come. Italy, Spain, also 1980s: hey France! Sell us your TGV tech! Maybe we can put some of those airlines out of business! UK, 1990s: oh all right, France, let's have some TGVs and build that damn tunnel already. China, 1990s: fastest growing economy, building almost everything for the whole damn world, fourth-largest area and we STILL have coal locos? Time to order some bespoke Western gear so we can haul ass in manufacturing...and also haul people's asses around the People's Republic. Canada, 2000s: yeah, no, sorry, we have the biggest, most profitable freight rail companies in the world. People fly more often to warm vacation resorts than we ever travel to visit family. No need for new corridors here, sorry. USA, 2000s: yeah, the woke elites of New York and California whinges so they can fuss over their overpriced electric choo-choos. The rest of us will get where we're going in our private vehicles, subsidized by a military-industial complex that delivers cheap fuel from the rest of the world at gunpoint. USA, 2020s... Say, Brightline? Did you offer a two-hour trip from suburban LA to the middle of the desert? Never mind them pedestrians you're hitting at all those level crossings in Florida...cost of doing business. Let's shake on it! When can you start? I won't get those five hours of research back. But I enjoyed it. Ironlev's self-propelled platform from March 2024 looked promising... TBTH my hope fades every time they mention Hyperloop or the hanging monorail. Gadgetbahns smell like parasites looking for billionaires to plunder. And much as I believe billionaires shouldn't exist, their wealth must be shared with the workers who created it. No gadgetbahn has succeeded at providing even a portion of long-term public transit, let alone inter-city transport.

The wheels are not supporting the weight, magnets are. So no, it's not just wheels.

@@Flyingwigs The wheels are *under the magnets*. Magnets still transfer force. Go put a strong magnet under a piece of metal and lift it, you will feel the weight. Thats shy magnetic shock absorbers in a car still work. Unless like a maglev the magnets are braced off/reppeling the *track* which they arent here they serve no purpose. The entire point of this is it runs on normal non maglev track.

Si puo fare gli scambi ma con un meccanismo diverso. E questo modificherebbe lo scambio come lo conosciamo adesso. Quindi andrebbero modificati gli scambi attuali. Penso che sia molto costoso.

@@utentesempliceitalia9761 da quello che ho letto la filosofia del progetto innovativo prevede di mantenere l'infrastruttura così com'è senza modificare l'armamento, quindi tragga lei la conclusione...! Aver pensato il progetto senza partire dai punti critici della via i deviatoi) rischia di stravolgere l'architettura del sistema e quindi annullare l'innovazione presentata.

Ancora oggi, 2024, non hanno spiegato come risolverebbero il passaggio sui deviatoi, se non lo risolvono questo progetto è morto e sepolto su un binario morto...!

Bring a railroader in the track dept. I immediately thought, and what happens when your riding on jointed track? The guide wheel is hanging about an inch underneath the head of the rail. All fine and dandy for cwr (continuous welded rail) but the minute you hit a rail joint it’s gonna either rip that wheel off or bend it outwards. Have seen too many derailments to ever see this particular design working efficiently.

@@jakebryan01 yeah there are a number of physical incompatibilities - switches and grade crossings came to my mind first, but you're correct of course on joints. Plus, running on current track alignments means you'd be limited to their track speeds from limiting curvature, like in the northeast corridor in the USA. what this means though is that you can use current rail construction techniques, technology, and means of production to create new grade separated track for these trains. with new alignments higher speeds would be achievable.