I wonder how hard acceleration and deceleration would be.

Without ever needing to stop, drunks can safely return to driving our trains again. Everybody wins.

Elijah Mccoy would be proud

Genius!

Except that instead of complaining about having to wait for trains, people will complain about waiting for the loading car to show up. Then when it does, they'll complain about waiting for the train....still.

Someone please tell me how this solves any problems. - And for that matter, how it won't create new ones.

M>> ^MarineGunrock:
Except that instead of complaining about having to wait for trains, people will complain about waiting for the loading car to show up. Then when it does, they'll complain about waiting for the train....still.
Someone please tell me how this solves any problems. - And for that matter, how it won't create new ones.


Thats easy, the energy it takes to stop and accelerate a train at each stop takes tremendous amounts of energy... therefore by using a simple deceleration rail on the top of each train the boarding cart merely uses the inertia of the already moving train to launch and dock boarding cart. Saves the train having to stop...therefore increasing the number of stops/stations you can have in a rail line without increasing the number of trains you would have to run. This would save HUGE amounts of energy, and therefore HUGE amounts of money, and is INCREDIBLY efficient.
Smart people do not usually complain about waiting for trains, they are usually on time. It's the people on the train already that have to constantly stop to pick other people up, making the journey ever longer depending on the amount of stops.
Your welcome for doing the thinking for you.

> Your welcome for doing the thinking for you.

Your polite attitude really shines through.

^Really, what a dick. Anyways, MG if you've ever dealt with public transportation trains, the time it saves isn't for getting off/on, its that once your ON the train, you wont have to stop at every stop before yours. This will ultimately make trips faster.

He needs an editor. Here is what I could do on such short notice:

That's easy. The energy it takes to stop and accelerate a train at each stop takes is tremendous! Therefore, by using a simple deceleration rail on the top of each train, the boarding cart merely uses the inertia of the already moving train to launch and dock boarding cart. This saves the train having to stop and increases the number of stops/stations you can have in a rail line without increasing the number of trains you would have to run. It would also save HUGE amounts of energy and money; moreover, it would be INCREDIBLY efficient.

Trains would be more likely to be on time with this innovation.

Your welcome for doing the thinking for you, but that should be expected cause your are a marine...

What about underground stations ?

I would NOT want to be there the first time this malfunctions.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'train, animation, station' to 'train, animation, station, momentum, invention, Taiwan' - edited by yoghurt

This is a design by Taiwanese inventor Peng Yu-lun. More info here and here.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'train, animation, station, momentum, invention, Taiwan' to 'train, animation, station, momentum, invention, Taiwan, transportaion, efficient, green' - edited by yoghurt

Tags for this video have been changed from 'train, animation, station, momentum, invention, Taiwan, transportaion, efficient, green' to 'train, animation, station, momentum, invention, Taiwan, transportation, efficient, green' - edited by yoghurt

if MG is going to make a retarded and bitchy driveby comment without thinking it through, i think a condescending reply is justified.

I could do more editing:
"Don't be so retarded. The train doesn't stop. Therefore it's faster and uses less energy. If you thought about that for ten seconds instead of trying to be snide and pitting your wits against japanese transport engineers you wouldn't look so stupid right now."

Very clever. Although it would probably need some kind of gate or barrier on the platform to stop late passengers trying to enter the boarding cart at the last minute.

^duh, yeah, probably. getting cut in half might be a good deterrent though.

All the vile commentary being spewed forth still never answered the question of how people would stop bitching about waiting for something. It's human nature. I understand that it would save enrgy for the train. That wasn't my question.

Smart people do not usually complain about waiting for trains

Except that there aren't that many smart people in the world.

You welcome for letting you know that you answered a question no one asked.

your question was "Someone please tell me how this solves any problems. - And for that matter, how it won't create new ones."

Even though it was alrady stated, I'll give a go here:

1) it solves the problems that trains encounter when stopping in the station. This has to do with friction, heat, traffic coordination etc. Not having to stop allows for MUCH more traffic. Could conceivably run trains every minute without difficulty. If you only have to wait one or two minutes for a train to pick up the boarding cart, you won't have TIME to complain.

2) as stated in the description of the video (and as explained by several other people) the common complaint is not in the waiting for the train itself, but the constant delays once because of the stops once you board the train. If you rode public transportation, you'd know what we were talking about. Trains are generally on time. When they aren't, its because the train is delayed in other station at a stop. With this system, that won't (or rarely) happen because the train itself never stops.

People will complain about something, sure, but it won't be the train delaying them.

As to your second question, it doesn't create any more problems than already exist so far with train transport; the system is merely adding an element that erases several known problems. Believe it or not, sometimes problems CAN be solved and no new ones created. It happens.

You're right. I should have been more specific. What I meant was "How this solves teh problem of people bitching about something they have to wait on."

I don't believe that is the main (or even incidental) problem addressed with this design. I don't think that was even submitted as an issue with this design. This design was probably invented for efficiency and safety reasons. Not having to wait on the train was just a bonus. And so far as not waiting on the train goes, you wouldn't, because according to the design, the boarding cart would ALWAYS be in the station, thus there's only the main train to wait for, but as I stated, this design could make it so there's a train running every literal minute.

If you only have to stop because it's YOUR stop (by going upstairs to the boarding cart) then your trip will technically be non-stop.

What if more people need to get off at a stop than can fit in one of those top cars? Critical failure. Interesting idea but tremendously impractical.

^- you have GOT to be kidding me.

What if people get stuck in traffic on the way to the station, so they miss their train? This "new" design does nothing to help that. What if not only the miss their train but they left earlier to make it on time, so they missed their favorite show also? big help.

I think the real problem with this is that it requires everyone in the top car wanting to get on, and off at the same stop.

I'm guessing the top car works like a "local" train, and stops at every station, while the bottom one works as an express train, rarely stopping.

If you had enough "top" cars, you could be be depositing a top car, and picking a new one up at the same time, at every station.

What would make it ideal would be for there to be a way for people to move from the top train to the bottom, then you'd never need to stop the train, except for maintenance.

The top car needs to be light, though, or you're just wasting your time. I'd imagine it could be, since it wouldn't need an engine, just brakes.

>> ^smibbo:
^- you have GOT to be kidding me.


That's actually a pretty good question. It looks like the capacity of the larger train would be several times the capacity of the loading car, so what if most of the people want to get off at a single destination, like a sporting event or something?

Oh, this can't POSSIBLY go wrong!

So, I've got to wonder what happens the first time safety fails and someone is in the middle of the top and bottom cars when they start separating...

I've hurd

I've herd tranes

I've heard trains crash sometimes. Does this do anything to solve that!?!!

*asia?

Adding video to channels (Asia) - requested by Fjnbk.

Damn, I love a good semantics flame fest!
..don't flame me.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:
He needs an editor. Here is what I could do on such short notice:
That's easy. The energy it takes to stop and accelerate a train at each stop takes is tremendous! Therefore, by using a simple deceleration rail on the top of each train, the boarding cart merely uses the inertia of the already moving train to launch and dock boarding cart. This saves the train having to stop and increases the number of stops/stations you can have in a rail line without increasing the number of trains you would have to run. It would also save HUGE amounts of energy and money; moreover, it would be INCREDIBLY efficient.
Trains would be more likely to be on time with this innovation.
Your welcome for doing the thinking for you, but that should be expected cause your are a marine...


If you're going to be all stuck-up and edit other people's stuff, you can at least correct "your welcome."

It's YOU'RE welcome! YOU'RE! It's a contraction. YOU ARE=YOU'RE! Get it right.

*wink* @ Grinter. Semantics flame fest. Yay!

oh, wow. if y'all weren't so damn funny sometimes, i'd almost wish i hadn't read this page. thanks, everyone. great find, eric.
amazing what undiscovered innovations can be staring us all in the face, eh?

MG, for example, there is a bullet train between Kyoto and Tokyo that makes several minor stops at towns along the way, but 90% of the passengers go the full distance from Tokyo to Kyoto. Eliminating those minor stops would reduce the duration of the trip by 5-10% for those 90% of the passengers going the full distance. This system allows that speedup without abandoning service of the small towns. That's the whole point of it.

Holy shit. I wasn't even serious when I asked that question. Anyone here ever heard of rhetoric?

What do people DO with the saved time?

When I read the title, I was thinking of how they used to grab mailbags with hooked sticks out the window of the moving train in the 1800's. Mmm... this is much better.

this system isnt going to help for short trips, but for longer trips,1-2 hours with 1 or 2 stops. i agree with the people who say that this system isnt going to do much. i live in switzerland which just happens to have the best public trans system (train) in the world. there is no problem. at a stop you need a minute or two to walk to the next platform anyways and the trains have to wait for another train to stop. there are only delays because another train is on the track. for this system to work, each train would need its own track. but since thats to expensive it wont happen. also, i have noticed that train officials use the stops to kick drunks and train hoppers off. if anything, i could see this system causing more problems that it would help.

You all seem to be missing something. I don't think the loader car is used as the ONLY way to get on or off. Just used when less than X number of people want to get on and off. If more than a loader's worth of people want to get on or off, the main train would stop because then it would WORTH STOPPING. Having the entire train stop for 2 or 9 or 23 people to get on or off is a waste. The loader car would have an abitrary capacity that if exceeded would be economical for the entire train to stop. The train would have slowed down entering the station for safety anyway. Maybe down to 120km/h from it's crusing speed of 300 km/h.

I would assume that once the loader car is on the train, there's some kind of staircase or turbolift that would take you down to the main cabin of the train.

All passengers could ride in the main cabin, moving up to the loading/unloading car when their stop is announced.

Truly a cool idea. Go Taiwan!

>> ^kronosposeidon:
Without ever needing to stop, drunks can safely return to driving our trains again. Everybody wins.


Except for the terrorists.

I'm just glad MarineRock and I managed to sir up some meaningless conversation, interesting but still meaningless.

You're not portuguese!

Bob Marley & The Wailers' "Stop That Train" song would make little sense after this gets implemented...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gocRym8JEg

Wow, This has got to be the longest discussion that never went anywhere I've seen in a while.

Kudos for the up-thinking on this design. Innovative!

Now.., are the people expected to access the lower train through a trap door, or are these smaller moduals just for the quick station to station jumps while the people on the lower sections need to wait for a more major stop in order to disembark?

Just a thought!

It's clear from the length and content of this discussion that customers are never satisfied and trains are a menace to society. I think we can make everyone happier by eliminating public transit altogether and having everyone drive everywhere, thereby putting each person in control of their own transportation.

Have we addressed what would happen if someone was in the hatch when the loader starts moving?
Follow-up: Who picks up the rolling head?

>> ^doogle:
Have we addressed what would happen if someone was in the hatch when the loader starts moving?
Follow-up: Who picks up the rolling head?

yes, something like that was mentioned.

My frame of reference is limited to few cities with trains, but it seems there wouldn't be enough space on the top rail's car to accommodate the demand, unless the entire train is line double decker bus style. Also since most trains travel to and from centralized locations it seems as if it would create a bottle neck of sorts of passengers trying to in and out of the car quickly enough. Also what about trains the run on the same track. It seems this design would have almost no effect except expanding the space already allotted to train tracks.

People will always complain, MG. In this very thread, there are complaints about your complaints about hypothetical complaints from lazy passengers yet to be born. That's one of the things we humans do best.

I'd actually be more worried about grim decapitations and equipment failure.

That said, I dig infinity train.

"Never kill a customer."
Monty Python

"How this solves teh problem of people bitching about something they have to wait on."

by running many smaller trains more frequently.

Actually Asimov had a similar idea, a series of conveyor belts getting progressively faster from platform to track, you hop across them to get up to speed, then board the train.

The principle is the same, that stopping and starting a huge train full of people who don't want to stop is incredibly inefficient.

Asimov's system was more for travel within a city as opposed to between cities, like an infinite metro conveyor.