From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Ussery's MagLev BART idea assailed
Organization: LLNL
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 04:58:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.002542.5517@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:

>Another item of interest regarding recurrent talk of BART
>going Mag-Lev someday (mostly by Will Ussery):

>From _The New Electric Railway Journal_, Summer 1992
>by William S. Lind

>"The Bourbons are Back"
><...> indicates italics

	[Some rather flamey commentary deleted...]

...Who
>else but a ruling house with that motto--and that arrogance--
>could be responsible for BART's determination to proceed with
><low-speed> maglev?

	That was Wil Ussery, and he's not all of BART. He couldn't
stop the purchase of those flat-ended cab cars BART now has :-)

	I talked to a BART planner at the Colma groundbreaking, and he
claimed that Ussery is regarded as something of a twit by other BART
management. He also seemed to draw a blank on the subject of maglev,
as if he wasn't terribly familiar with it.

	I haven't seen any references to maglev in any of the
non-Ussery BART lierature, so I can safely assume that that is out of
the picture.

>Yes, you read that correctly--low-speed maglev.  The only
>putative virtue of maglev (a train that is magnetically levitated
>above its roadbed) is superior speed potential.  With the French

	And also, no moving parts, with all the attendant friction,
which gets rid of one big source of trouble. Furthermore, the load
will be more evenly spread on the vehicle and the track, which may be
an additional plus.

>According to an article that appeared in the January 20, 1992
><San Francisco Chronicle> by noted transit writer Harre W. Demoro:

>"BART President Wilfred T. Ussery is pretty sure that one day
>BART trains will run on a cushion of magnetic force instead of on
>wheels... Major BART extensions as well as the proposed rail
>shuttle between the Coliseum BART station and Oakland
>International Airport are likely candidates for maglev technology,
>Ussery said.

	Maybe a short maglev line between the Oakland Coliseum BART
station and Oakland Airport. But NOT any BART extensions. First off,
what does one do with the existing system? One would have to transfer
between the steel-wheel and the maglev sections of the BART system
unless the whole thing is maglevified.

	And so far, at least, maglev has one big Achilles' heel.
Switches. Existing designs consist of moving sections of the track,
which is rather cumbersome. Would one want to rely on that for BART's
Oakland junction?

	An alternative approach would be to have a more complex track
and a system for selecting which direction to run on. I'm willing to
explain how that system might work for anyone interested; but none of
the test models to date seem capable of that.

>According to him, the counties of Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and
>Solano are likely to join the BART district in a few years.

	I wouldn't bet on that anytime soon, however desirable the
association might be.

	But the Oakland Airport connection would involve only a simple
loop or two-way track; no switching would be necessary in normal
operation.

>`That's enough mileage to do a serious analysis of magnetic
>levitated trains as an alternative to the existing technology,'
>Ussery said.  Eventually, the present BART system could be
>retrofitted with the new equipment."

	But not right away.

>These statement were a bit puzzling on first reading.  How could
>a transit system that has suffered so badly for so long from
>technological gimmickry again set itself up for disaster by
>repeating the same mistake?  It was then I realized the Bourbons
>were indeed back.  Who else would so blithely ignore the lessons
>of the past by a determination to repeat it?

	I can understand that complaint, but I think it might be a
good idea to let others retrofit their systems just to get the bugs
out.

	I know that this sounds rather Alphonse-and-Gaston-ish; I
wouldn't recommend starting such a thing unless a maglev transit
system could be shown to perform as reliably as the existing
steel-wheel ones can.

>Just to be sure I had it right, I called Mr. Ussery and asked a
>few questions.  He confirmed that BART's policy is to adopt
>maglev as soon as it is feasible.  Since speed is not an issue in

	I would not complain about that in principle, but I would
certainly disagree on Ussery's apparent willingness to do it as soon
as possible.

>this application, I asked him what he thought the advantages
>would be?  He replied that maglev could potentially cut BART's
>ower bill by 20-30% (an annual saving of $6-9 million), it would
>be quieter (inside, not outside the vehicle) and have better ride

	It would be quieter on the outside also, since maglevs have no
moving parts to create friction and the resulting noise.

	The Transrapid maglevs run a lot faster than BART, but make a
similar amount of noise. A BART-speed maglev would be a lot quieter
than BART is now.

>quality, and the vehicle would be lighter (BART already has the
>lightest 'heavy' rail car in the industry).

	Lighter? A maglev car will have to have big electromagnets,
and these thingies can get awfully heavy...

	I don't know the weights of any of the maglev prototypes
offhand, so I can't do a detailed comparison.

... He said that the risks, especially if BART were
>first with maglev, would be "the same as being first in other
>cases."  Further, he stated that maglev would bring BART some of

	Somehow, I don't think it's worth it.

>the same problems it had the first time around!  The implication

	What???

... He takes credit, no doubt
>deserved, for getting $75 million in the new transportation bill
>ear-marked for the study of low-speed maglev for transit systems.

	Why is that not worth doing?

	At worst, they will discover that switching is still a big
problem, and that, unless it is resolved, maglev simply cannot be
trusted on a multiply-branching system, of which BART is an example.
Well, BART is not as big in this department as (say) the Washington
Metro or the Philadelphia commuter-rail system, but one
heavily-changed switch is one too many at the current maglev
state-of-the-art.

Xref: sparky ba.transportation:2071 rec.railroad:6704