In the ’70s, the UK tried to build a train that hovered. It was fast. It looked like something from science fiction. And it actually worked — at least for a ...
You’re talking about a 70’s prototype, but that does not mean it would need a kerosene turbine if it was made nowadays. Actually, the Aérotrain S44 used a linear electric motor.
A train brakes by blocking the wheels on two relatively small rails, and the wheels can lose traction.
An aerotrain reverses its propulsion, using it as a brake. No slippage possible here.
It can also bite the rail, having a way bigger braking surface, as well as having an interface dedicated to braking directly on the rail instead of a brake on a wheel on a rail.
And in emergencies, you can even stop the suspension and let the aerotrain rest directly on the rail to brake. That’s a bit brutal and causes damages (at least back in the 70’s), but that stops the Aérotrain quite fast and is way better than derailing or hitting something.
Ok so first if all anlinear electric motor is really expensive all the things that you said that were good about the aérotrain then dont apply annymore.
The amount of thrust you have to generate to stop a decently sized train is huge, that kind of turbine would be super loud and blow tons of debris around.
If you brake with biting the rail you will also have lots of wear.
I dont even get why you would need to brake that fast? With a vehicle that heavy you will never be able to brake so fast that you could stop if something happened a hundret meters in fro t of you. And even if you bite down on the rail to stop near instantly the kinetic energy of a few hundret tons moving at lets say 70km/h would just destroy the rail.
You’re talking about a 70’s prototype, but that does not mean it would need a kerosene turbine if it was made nowadays. Actually, the Aérotrain S44 used a linear electric motor.
A train brakes by blocking the wheels on two relatively small rails, and the wheels can lose traction.
An aerotrain reverses its propulsion, using it as a brake. No slippage possible here.
It can also bite the rail, having a way bigger braking surface, as well as having an interface dedicated to braking directly on the rail instead of a brake on a wheel on a rail.
And in emergencies, you can even stop the suspension and let the aerotrain rest directly on the rail to brake. That’s a bit brutal and causes damages (at least back in the 70’s), but that stops the Aérotrain quite fast and is way better than derailing or hitting something.
Ok so first if all anlinear electric motor is really expensive all the things that you said that were good about the aérotrain then dont apply annymore.
The amount of thrust you have to generate to stop a decently sized train is huge, that kind of turbine would be super loud and blow tons of debris around. If you brake with biting the rail you will also have lots of wear.
I dont even get why you would need to brake that fast? With a vehicle that heavy you will never be able to brake so fast that you could stop if something happened a hundret meters in fro t of you. And even if you bite down on the rail to stop near instantly the kinetic energy of a few hundret tons moving at lets say 70km/h would just destroy the rail.