 |
|
EV WORLD EXCLUSIVE ARTICLE |
The LeviCar System would combine the privacy and convenience of an automobile with the efficiency of a railroad, and door-to-door speed competitive with that of a jet aircraft, for distances of up to a thousand miles or more, using power from clean stationary sources.
This five-car, manned MagLev train set hit a top speed in excess of 550 kph (340+ mph) on Japan's Yamanashi test track in April 1999.
|
A proposal to mate GM's AUTOnomy Skateboard vehicle concept with MagLev train technology.
Open Access Article Originally Published: September 13, 2004
How fast does a jet airliner fly? The conventional answer is about 560 m.p.h., which is, after all, pretty fast.
Now, how fast is a jet’s passenger’s average speed, from door to door, for the entire trip? Well, that can be much slower.
If you’ve ever flown for business, especially as a consultant, does this sound familiar? You get up very early in the morning, drive to the airport, fighting morning rush hour, try to find a good parking space, maybe take a bus or underground train to the terminal, wait in two or three long lines (including security) before you get to your gate, maybe wait some more before the plane loads its passengers, and sit in the plane for half an hour before it takes off. Then, the plane is airborne only a few hours, and lands several hundred to over a thousand miles away. You’re not done yet. You have to claim your luggage, get your rental car, figure out the controls on your rental car, and drive to your destination. By the time you get there, you’re too tired for any creative thought, except maybe for filling out your previous week’s expense report. Driving to a vacation with your family can be even worse, with all those kids in tow.
Now, how long does this all take you? My experience as a consultant, traveling from the northern suburbs of Philadelphia, PA, to the southside of Jacksonville, FL, made total travel time to be over six hours for a distance of about 750 miles, as the crow flies. Of course, the crow doesn’t have to deal with airport security or rental cars. This is an average speed of less than 125 m.p.h., less than one-fourth of the airplane’s maximum speed while in flight. This is not so fast. No wonder a lot of people prefer to drive this distance, rather than fly!
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you could combine the convenience of a private car with the door-to-door speed of a jet airliner, without all the hassles of changing vehicles? There is a way:
A couple of years ago, General Motors introduced a modular concept car called AUTOnomy. A thin chassis contains the power-and-propulsion system, plus ventilation and other systems. The passengers and their luggage are in a separate body, mounted atop the chassis, and secured with eleven docking connectors. A version called “Hy-Wire” used hydrogen fuel cells to power in-wheel electric motors, plus the “X-Drive” drive-by-wire system, using a joystick instead of a steering wheel. This new automotive architecture has many advantages, with fewer fluids, fewer things to break down, easier servicing, and more flexibility in how they are used.
Also, there is a frictionless monorail technology called MagLev (short for “Magnetic Levitation”) that allows land vehicles to travel as fast as 325 m.p.h. on controlled monorail tracks. Power is supplied by stationary sources, which are easier to run from “green” energy.
Now, putting the body from an AUTOnomy car on a special chassis for the MagLev system can combine the best features of both. I prefer to call this special chassis a “bogie”, from a standard railroad term for a wheeled undercarriage that supports rail cars. The same MagLev monorails can be used for standard MagLev passenger and freight trains, and for this system of private car bodies mounted in MagLev bogies, which I like to call the “LeviCar” system.
Picture how your trip would be much simpler. You would, as before, start by packing your car and driving - not to an airport that might be twenty to fifty miles away or more, but to a MagLev station within ten miles. Then, instead of taking your bags out of the car and schlepping them from one place to another, you leave them in the car. You might even stay in the car yourself. What happens is that the lower part of your car, the road chassis, is removed, and the upper part is placed on a MagLev bogie, which is on a spur of MagLev monorail. If needed, a streamlined fairing or dome can be placed over the car body. After a few automated safety checks, including a wind-tunnel check, the combined vehicle, or LeviCar, glides towards its destination on the MagLev system.
GO TO NEXT PAGE >>
|
| Times Article Viewed: 14961 |
|
|
|
Reader Comments
A valid email address and confirmation is required before your comment can be posted. Comments not confirmed within
24 hours are automatically deleted.
29 comments so far...
03-May-2006
20015
| |
check this web page:
http://www.geocities.com/gblsys/index4a.html
some of these ideas date back to the 1960s since then many are trying claiming them--jack
Posted by: jack marchand
|
|
30-Jun-2006
26973
| |
june 30, 2006
ATT'N:EV-World
Gentlemen: With the present EVs there is too much anxiety for the owner to
feel free to travel long distances. The alternative is one minute battery swap stations and they also
interface with my high speed maglev system presented to US DOT which was selected "top gun" by a TRW
study for the DOT back in the 1960s'. A few years ago transportation interests finally saw a new direction
from my web site and are now trying to claim it as theirs.--As is,the plug-in EV has its limitations. So
the EV in the future will be part of a bigger infrastructure to suit everyone's advantage. GM is now even
considering my seperation of the passenger capsule from its bottom carrier. Which they call the AUTOnomy
skateboard. (the motorized wheels, support frame, including the swap batteries). My upper capsule will
also withstand a vacuum negative pressure while traveling at very high speeds exceeding the Concorde.
It's a "whole new ball game". And ...no.! EVs are not dead --the're coming. -OIL..Let 'em shove it..!!
Check this web site--
http://trillions.topcities.com/dualmodemaglev.html
also visit these pages
http://trillions.topcities.com/electriCar.html
and tell the world..A new way is imminent.
Jack Marchand
Posted by: Jack Marchand
|
|
05-Apr-2006
17046
| |
Author's note:
The website at
http://www.LeviCar.com has been upated, with
a better format, and a link to a new story about
LeviCar. The story is also available at
http://www.LeviCar.info.
Soon, I will be adding a couple of blogs
here at EVWorld.
Posted by: Joshua Levin
|
|
20-Apr-2005
7254
| |
remember you still need a huge power source esp for a lg city, and as traffic,with full speed computer control(but pop growth_)its going to be a challenge"
Posted by: ava brown
|
|
19-Sep-2005
9622
| |
Looks good to me.
Posted by: GEORGE DAVIS
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4697
| |
Not to be negative here but this has the futuristic flavor of the old World's Fair and the 1950's and 60's industrial utopias where big corporate ideas bring good things to life. We have a simple version of this today where one can reserve a spot on a train to transport your car on long train trips. Problem is that is costs a bundle and isn't any faster than actually diving there. Why not just figure out how to do this more effectively for today's cars, on today's tracks, with some modest improvements to our current rail system? Make it available on routes that are shorter but have high air passenger traffic like NY to DC and the like. Even if the start and end time was the same door to door as a flight it's still more conventient. The formula for something like this is COST+CONVENIENCE+TIME = Winner Idea. This should be the driver for the concept development, not some fantasy out of Popular Science. Do we really need to go overboard on all these ideas? Let technological evolution figure out the best path. This to me is another way to validate having our tax dollars fund studies for the automotive hydrogen future and specifically line the pockets of GM to continue their research costs on their HyWire concept/H2 vehicle. I think they make enough - thank you very much!"
Posted by: Serafino Carri
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4699
| |
I love to read ideas like this. I rode the "Shinkansen" speed train in Japan and came back the the US to try and figure out why we can't have that here. It boils down to choices. We choose independent cars vs mass transit. This would offer a blend of the two. I too am a consultant and the block time to travel long distance is long.
I also think eventually we will give up the antiquated idea that we need to own everything. It see a future where you get off a high speed train and jump into a waiting car in whatever city you are in. Luggage could be sent door to door so you don't have to go from car to van to curb to bag claim to van to car!! "
Posted by: Laura Meeks
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4700
| |
Since the 70s I have always loved the idea of MagLev trains but I thought they were extremely expensive. Has something changed recently that makes them more affordable? "
Posted by: Peter W
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4701
| |
Great concept. Very similar to the HiLoMag concept articulated by Francis Reynolds during the past few years. He has written a book about it which has not yet been published - but has many articles posted at http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans Do a search with Reynolds or dualmode to find them. A good summary article was published in the Futurist
magazine a couple of years ago. There are many others working on similar dualmode concepts that would provide fast, door-to-door transport much more effectively than conventional technologies ever will be able to do."
Posted by: Jerry Schneider
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4703
| |
The goals of The Perfect Synthesis are very closely met by the ITC Rail which is a proposed publicly accessed rail system that is designed to be the new Standard Gauge for the United States as a full integration with the US Interstate Highway System. The ITC Rail, or Interstate Traveler, supports all existing automobiles and freight without requiring any specialty built cars.
www.InterstateTraveler.us
"
Posted by: Justin Sutton
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4708
| |
I am also familiar with the ITC referenced by Justin, and see it as a simpler and more effective, yet ultimately very similar idea to the one proposed here. I also think that Sarafino has a very good point in some ways. The initial cost of such a system would be very high and would require simultaneous universal acceptance to work. However, to upgrade our current rail system just to the high-speed electric standard of Europe's TGV-type systems, with top speeds between a third and a half those demonstrated by maglev, would be prohibitively expensive as well. Also, the American public is not one for bad trades. If a new trasportation system is not both faster and easier than that to which they are accostomed, it will fail. We've seen that point proven with the failure of EVs thus far. I say, if you're going to invest anything in a totally sustainable tranportation system, then you might as well do it right and use 21st century technology instead of 20th or even 19th."
Posted by: Rob Tennant
|
|
14-Sep-2004
4713
| |
I romanticize about maglev trains as much as the next person, but here is my cold water. Chicago would have about five of these stations at ten miles apart if the track traversed the city in a straight line. How long would it take to load at these stops? And we know the train is not reaching a speed of 325mph between stations."
Posted by: Paul Westberg
|
|
15-Sep-2004
4717
| |
Author's reply to Paul Westberg:
Each 'station' would actually be a terminal, and the only LeviCars to stop there would be those starting or ending their trips. From its originating station, a LeviCar would ride on a spur until it joins a line in the national MagLev network -- something like an on-ramp. Likewise, as it leaves the network (off-ramp), the LeviCar will be switched on to a spur that takes it to its destination station. All other LeviCars will bypass all other stations, until they approach their own destination stations."
Posted by: Joshua Levin
|
|
15-Sep-2004
4719
| |
Check out Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit at http://www.cprt.org/, especially their links to other sites, such as Sky Tran. Great ideas blending the advantages of the personal car and energy efficiency while dropping the cumbersome aspects of 'light' rail and other 'mass' transit systems."
Posted by: Bill Roush
|
|
15-Sep-2004
4725
| |
This is a very interesting system I call dual mode with a car that can be used on normal roads as well as on a guide way. I prefer a much simpler way to accomplish the same thing at www.autotransys.com"
Posted by: Randy Swier
|
|
15-Sep-2004
4728
| |
Your platoon of cars would start at one of the off line stations, close to your house, and proceed to a station most likely at least a hundred miles away that is closed to your destination. If the traffic is very congested it might be worth the trip to the next station but acceleration and deacceleration would be most of the trip."
Posted by: randy swier
|
|
16-Sep-2004
4734
| |
More of these, please. Since Americans wish so much to remain private and insular, riding in their personal modules or navigating awkward international dealings elsewhere in the world, literally going it alone, a LeviCar maglev system would address at least the first part of the situation and bring some satisfaction. Privacy, autonomy, energy efficiency .. We could still keep our own space separate and get there faster and more efficiently with such a mass transportation idea. I thought about Dr. Levin's article yesterday whilst riding at speed as a passenger in the diamond lane of the L.A. Frwy, and observing countless other single driver cars stuck in the daily mess that statistically confirms 48 hours a year for most commuters that are wasted as they wait to get to where they're going. Where is it all leading, I ask you? This is surely deep thrombosis of a different kind. Yikes!"
Posted by: Dave Cutter
|
|
02-Oct-2004
4907
| |
Interesting concept, but I fear it would be a publicly financed mass transit system for the wealthy."
Posted by: David Park
|
|
03-Oct-2004
4935
| |
Author's reply to David Park:
My hope is that this will be, eventually, a profit-making industry.
The MagLev system would be built to handle freight, providing a more economical,
safer, and faster way to transport goods, without trucks or truck drivers, except
for the first few miles and the last few miles.
Thus, the system could be built such as to make money even before passengers use it,
and, during this time, a lot of safety issues could be worked out.
From the start, the system will be compatible with future passenger MagLev vehicles,
including both mass-transit vehicles and LeviCars.
At first, only the rich would afford LeviCars, but, as the manufacturing processes
become more mature and economies of scale take hold, everyone would
be able afford one.
Look at how OnStar has migrated from luxury cars down to common Chevrolets.
As far as your reference to "mass transit",
it turns out that it may be more stressful taking mass transit than driving.
See
WebMD: Commuting Stress Hurts Heart.
That is probably why we Americans don't use it as much as many expect.
"
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
22-Sep-2004
4785
| |
I've thought of (basically) this idea before, and called it 'Personal Mass Transit'. Interesting that it is so common of an idea (see Justin's comment, Bill's comment). The first time I read about somebody else having this concept, and actually doing something about it was at EVWorld. An article about the RUF Dual Mode Trasport System (http://www.ruf.dk/). They cal it dual mode, just like Randy.
I really think something along these lines is where we want to head. Getting there is where the big issues will be."
Posted by: Greg Andeson
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4795
| |
Author's reply to Serafino Carri (and Rob Tennant):
You make reference to Amtrak's Auto Train service, which only runs from Lorton, VA (just south of
Washington DC), to Sanford, FL (just north of Orlando). Its idea is that it will take hundreds of
miles off your drive to Florida. I often saw the Auto Train passing through Jacksonville, but not
stopping there. That was one of my inspirations for my idea.
I am hoping to derive a system for modular cars that is distinct enough from GM's to avoid infringing
their currently-pending patents.
Last I spoke to them, in February, it takes about 45 minutes to perform a chassis swap. I am
hoping for a system that will reduce this time to five minutes for doing it yourself in your own
driveway, or a fraction of a minute at a service station or MagLev terminal. Not that I don't
want to give GM credit for the work they have already done, I just don't trust them completely.
GM and other big companies have, in the past, bought patents just to suppress them.
The important thing is to have a standardized interface between the chassis and the car body that will
take the stresses of both road and MagLev rail use, and be compatible with possible marine and aviation
use. This would be a national or international
standard that will remain in use over the course of decades, so it must be carefully selected.
Also, a standardized interface can help mitigate problems if different nations or regions use
different MagLev rail structures,
or if new MagLev-rail architectures are introduced over time. The LeviCar
proposal is designed for maximal interoperability."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4796
| |
Author's reply to Laura Meeks:
Thank you for your comments. I would like to point out that, in the LeviCar system, you probably
only own the car body. Everything else is purchased as a service, either as a lease (the road
chassis), or the trip."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4798
| |
Author's reply to Peter W:
Overall costs should be lower per passenger mile than airplanes or
individually-powered cars. I have not worked out the details myself,
but these web pages should help:
Intercity passengers - the maglev solution, and
Capital costs are discussed in the second paragraph.
(Thanks for this, of course, is to the Danby-Powell people,
Maglev 2000 of Florida Corporation.
I expect that LeviCar would be a bit less efficient than shown in this, but not so much so that it
would be less efficient than current cars or airplanes."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4799
| |
Author's reply to Jerry Schneider, Justin Sutton, Greg Anderson (and Rob Tennant):
Thank you very much for the references. I want take this opportunity to explain how the LeviCar
system differs from Reynolds' and other proposals.
The use of a modular car with
separable body and chassis has many advantages that have nothing to do
with use on a MagLev system. These include ease of repair, in that a chassis swap can repair
almost any problem that renders the car not roadworthy. This reduces lost time by the consumer in
case of a problem.
Once the body is removed, all parts of the road chassis are easily accessible. Also, a chassis
using a fuel-based generator or fuel cell stack to power an
all-electric drive can be easily converted from one fuel to another,
or to an advanced storage battery, by replacing the appropriate parts.
If the chassis is leased as a service, then the leasing agency can
take responsibility for all these things, in exchange for a reasonable fee,
making life easier for the consumer.
If there are regional variations in fuel availability, then a car traveling from one region to another
can adapt to a different fuel by changing its chassis. It might be (theoretically) that eastern
Canada may opt for direct electric power (from hydro) using storage batteries, the United States and
Western Canada might opt for ethanol from agriwaste, while Mexico might want to use hydrogen from
reformed natural gas.
Also, the same chassis may be used with multiple car bodies, or one car body may be mounted on
different chassis at different times, including even a boat hull or an airplane. A chassis can
hold an unmanned storage pod and be slaved to car, thereby forming a self-propelled trailer.
Thus, people would not need a big minivan or SUV to haul all their junk, just an ordinary car to get
around, to which is added a self-propelled trailer when needed.
My hope is that these many advantages will encourage people to get modular cars, even before the
LeviCar system will be available. In the meantime, the MagLev
infrastructure will be built to accommodate freight, displacing conventional rail and tractor-trailer
trucks except for the last few miles.
Also, proper algorithms will be devised to handle the vitally critical matters of automatic control,
before they are used with live passengers. Lastly, the two will be combined.
When MagLev use is considered, the modular-car concept has a lot
of other advantages over other dual-mode proposals. When on the MagLev system,
you are not carrying around your fuel tanks, drive train, road wheels, suspension system, etc.
Probably, the car body will represent only about one third of the total weight of the road vehicle --
so why carry around the other two-thirds? Also, the fuel tanks represent a danger of
explosion.
A system with both MagLev and road components permanently mounted
on the vehicle will have a lot of disadvantages. If the MagLev components get
damaged while on the road, repairs will be both expensive and inconvenient.
Also, the road component would be poorly streamlined for use with a high-speed
MagLev system.
See also my response to Serafino Carri's comments."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4800
| |
Author's reply to Bill Roush:
I appreciate all the work that has gone into inventing such personalized systems, but we Americans love
our cars, and we can't exactly build guideways into every suburban neighborhood. The LeviCar
system requires modular cars with drive-by-wire systems. With the addition of the proper radio
links (wireless digital), such cars can be automatically operated on automated guideways."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4801
| |
Author's reply to Randy Swier:
I cannot find your link www.autotransys.com.
For your second comment, see my reply to Paul Westberg."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
23-Sep-2004
4802
| |
Author's reply to Dave Cutter (and others):
I hope that the LeviCar concept will also inspire other concepts, as well
as spur developement of a nationwide MagLev system."
Posted by: Josh Levin
|
|
09-Nov-2004
5313
| |
Author's note: See
Hydrogen Fireworks!, and my comment on it.
Using the LeviCar system, it might even be possible to use different power
system in different areas. Suppose we have a situation where
someone invents efficient ways to convert natural gas and coal into
hydrogen without a lot of pollution or greenhouse gasses, but it is
expensive to pipe it very long distances. We might have that
hydrogen will be used in most of North America, but Eastern Canada,
upstate New York, and most of New England might prefer electric power.
The two zones would have some overlapping territory,
about as wide as the longest
trip one would take directly by road without using MagLev.
When traveling from one zone to the other, you would relinquish your
road chassis at the Maglev station, and then pick up another road
chassis at the destination station, and it would be appropriate for
the "fuel" used at your destination."
Posted by: Joshua Levin
|
|
09-Nov-2004
5316
| |
Link:
Hydrogen Fireworks!"
Posted by: Joshua Levin
|
|
|
|
|
