Fun Fact: The Chuo Shinkansen being built NOW in Japan is also a big concrete track in which the train rides in. It just uses magnetic levitation to raise the train off the track, with linear motors for propulsion. So the weather and debris problem is and would have been solvable.
@@the_babbleboom - Yeah, but very expensive. So glad its in style now to put up solar panels over parking lots in SoCal, so we have a lot more covered parking. [evil laugh]
The graphics on this ch are seriously amazing. Even very weird stuff get 3Ded. Then inserted into terrain and animated. If he didn't put the computer specs in the info I would have thought it was magic.
One of the main problem with concrete roadways is the concrete does not expand and contract evenly. When concrete was used for the interstate highway system in the colder, mountainous states, it wasn't long before the roadway was so bumpy that it felt like we had a flat tire. They tried using asphalt to cover the concrete, but the two products don't adhere to each other. In many places, the concrete was removed and replaced with asphalt.
many a concrete road in uk was tarmacked each county had its own problems when travelling/ oxfordshire later glouster later wiltshire great fun for us kids
@@raypitts4880 Thanks. You probably don't have the frost heaves we have here. Two days before Christmas this year, our over night low was 37 below zero Fahrenheit. The whole Month of November and December(until this last week) the temperature never got above freezing. That plays hell with concrete cracking and spalding off, creating pot holes. Lots of fun. Happy New Year.
Elon succeeds with everything he does, he will figure it out plus i think this technology has secretly been around for a long time and in use for those underground military bases.
@@ATomRileyA So basically, your dumb thoughts on the matter is that Elon will both invent an idea that has been around for ~200 years, but also it already exists in operation currently, so Elon won't be inventing anything. Did I get your particular brand of psychosis correct? E: Low hanging fruit, Elon can't keep hold of a family to save his life, lol not successful in everything he does by a long shot.
The "hyperloop" was already invented, tested and failed back at the end of the 19th century. There were a few pneumatic railways built. The way the loop is going it isn't going to be built either. Even Elon isn't putting any big money towards it.
First thing i thought was what effect snow and debris on the "track" would have. The "track" would have to be kept spotless at all times. Rain could have been drained off but i can see the drain holes getting clogged up with ice & debris very quickly.
Somebody prove it in Rollercoaster (Intamin bobsled) They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry. And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed. Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
@@hobog again, Mack solve this with those grate design. But not only a waste of material for proper rail design (relevant to both), it shakes your brain for its speed despite the super small gap. Imagine doing that but 350 km/h
@@dzonikg that or porous concrete we have now, not sure how that will effect the noise created by the wheels though or how long it’ll last compared to normal concrete
I don't think you listed the biggest problems with this design: The drive wheel was so large, it was impossible to move between carriages. While a solid rubber-tired wheel might move along o.k. at 160 KPH, at speeds like 300 KPH -- modern HSR speed -- the centrifugal force on a huge rubber-tired wheel might tear apart the tire. I would had incorporated metal surfaces in the track, and use that as a ground, as well as lateral support, to allow the train to be propelled with single-phase power.
@@lundsweden No, because centrifugal force increases directly with distance from the rotational axis. Even a 4 meter wide wheel is turning fast when rolling at 400 kph. I think the wheel will hold up, but the tire -- presumably solid rubber -- would fly apart. Look how often jet airliner tires blow during a landing, admittedly while absorbing the shock of an airliner landing on a runway.
Oh dear god. Do the math. A wheel four times the diameter spins at a quarter the speed. Acceleration is proportional to the square of the revs times the diameter. So four times the size is 1/16 x 4 so only has a quarter of the force. Now ever looked at the speeds of road cars? 300kph is normal.
Presumably a major issue with the train would also have been from the rubber wheels. Steel wheeled rains work well because there is very little drag between the wheels and tracks. Attempts at building trains with rubber wheels have always been considerably less efficient, maintenance heavy and usually not very comfortable
@@qdaniele97 Yep that's one of the attempts I was thinking of, alongside a few others such as Paris, Montreal and Mexico city. They tend to work okay in some metros because they are cheap; accelerate to metro speeds quite quickly; and allow for tight turns(making the only option in some metro scenarios) . The problem is, rolling resistance is much higher and so they generate much more drag leading to higher energy consumption and a bumpier ride. These problems can be seen as an acceptable compromise at metro train speed but become exacerbated as the train gets quicker.
@@benrgrogan Yep, they use them on some metros due to extremely tight turns and steep slopes, but they are much more inefficient and create some unexpected problems like increased heat and noise.
@@benrgrogan Wouldn't they also create more friction heat, heating up tunnels and the like in metros considerably more than steel counterparts? I believe the metro system in London is having a similar issue due to poor design, I can only imagine how bad it'd be with rubber wheels instead.
I love the self-awareness of this episode, the other ones constant praise without explaining feel grating after a while. Entertaining explanation can be hard to come by, so it's nice to acknowledge shortcomings in a funny way!
A smooth ride with solid rubber wheels? Ever gotten a shopping cart with a nick on one of the caster's? How do you cast concrete without expansion joints, or slight irregularities between pours? Imagine hitting those at high speed. And how many Russian freeze/thaw cycles would those guideways survive before crumbling, especially if built to the usual Soviet construction standards?
Shopping carts don't have suspension though. They also don't see the kind of maintenance that a train would. The concrete criticism, on the other hand... that's a reasonable concern.
It's surprisingly smooth, check those Intamin Bobsled rollercoaster. Rubber wheel riding on smooth trench, or those wooden bobsled on random US theme park Hard to find? Because there're only total 2 of them in the world remaining. Because they knew how absolutely pain is it to keep it really-really dry, or else either you get splash-brake effect or aquaplanning.
The Soviets had some amazing engineering minds that could have accomplished so much. It's such a shame that the political environment has never allowed the potential to come to reality.
Most people don't realize the amount of espionage that both sides did during the war. The soviets were ahead in some areas, the US in others. All the spying kept the peace and rapidly advanced tech for everyone. Totally undone by the massive failure of leftists politics.
Let's see elevated with holes on the track smaller then the diameter or the wheels, and a slot scooper train / heated parts would take care of snow etc. May not be cheaper, but I could see amazing potential in this. Longevity or those tires though...
The wheels are a big problem with this "train" design, worn down wheels? needs a crane for the whole carriage to be lifted, brake down motor? same again. They would need so many preassembled wheels to be available at all times at all locations coz you cant tow this thing. What about track switching? impossible. There are so many flaws with this design that It is much cheaper to build and operate a standard railway.
Diagonal slot could work for drainage and only a small portion of the wheel would not have contact, much like slotted brake rotors provide additional heat dissipation. Track changes would require the train to slow significantly but would not be impossible, much like when roller coaster cars are serviced. If the rubber on the wheels was not a heavy/thick layer it wouldn't have much mass & if it were adequately cooled wouldn't overheat & blow out. Steel belts (like a modern tire) would resist diameter growth. An air blade, much like a pressure slot under a street sweeper could clear loose debris. Something akin to snow sheds could protect the track like a normal track would use. Not saying there wouldn't be teething pains, but just like other new ideas it would need to be developed.
Wow a lot of people who are clueless with these responses lol. #1. Hyper loop is more Elon BS and would be infinity more expensive #2. It was never said the tires were pneumatic, solid would make more sense for momentum purposes, and to protect against blowouts. #3. Changing the wheels out when needed would he easy, not much different than what they do now to change wheel trucks and wheels. Crane, lift, replace, lower. #4. Would not need to slow down for properly designed drain holes with solid wheels #5. Some solar panels over the top, or wind wall fans on the side of the track (uses the air pushed by the train to spin them) would supply more then enough power to make the sections heated when needed for melting
It is hard to compare a wooden monorail for the working model with a concrete one. The idea was good, but why it was not developed into a real prototype it is a mystery (probably because it was too advanced for the era).
But the kind of stabilization, power output and aerodynamics it requires is commonplace nowadays. And it's also one of the four possible trains you can have (as far as I know) that don't require tracks (the other three are transit systems based on regular wheels, electrodynamic levitation and ground effect).
If you guys wonder how actually a nightmare the maintenance would be. Somebody already prove it in Rollercoaster (Intamin bobsled) They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry because of concern those water pool would either make it sudden splashing jerk (which leads to accident) or full aquaplanning (which leads to yet, another accident) And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed. Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
With how large the wheels are, the concrete trough could be designed with rather good sized drainage. Standing water should not be an issue. For the possibility of debris, I wonder if a "cow catcher" out front with an aeronautical design that could clear the track with a created air pressure or vacuum from the train's forward speed. A dry snow could just blow away from such. But a wet snow could prove interesting.
@@ronfullerton3162 I'll tell you. The same exact Mack rollercoaster (which solve the standing water problem) ride REALLY SHAKY. Despite BOTH using rubber wheel and using pretty fine gap. And it's only under 60 km/h. And yes, the amount you spend fixing it is way unnecessary compared to just use... Standard rail. Cmon it's 2023 already, 380 km/h on standard rail is a common occurrence nowadays
So you permanently lose the rolling efficiency of steel on steel. You have a gigantic wheel that would tear through the cabin in an accident. You ride in enormous concrete water troughs of undetermined length that must expand and contract, but always stay aligned. In the end, you’ve made a less efficient train that uses much more concrete and steel (rebar) than a traditional railway, while introducing novel problems.
Oooh! I've read about that from a old soviet journal named "Modelist-konstructor" about 25 years ago. Would be a pretty interesting concept, if not some major flaws.
Interesting, but I'm glad high speed trains that exist in service don't have wheels in the way of people who want to walk from car to car. I miss seeing a lot of train stuff from you and hopefully there's more in the future. I must've got you mixed up for Mustard which made more train stuff.
The best thing about soviets is that they cared for innovation and even supported talent and innovation, although it later failed but still it's a big thing he was given that amount and support
I must confess at being shamed by my ignorance of Russian innovation during the Soviet. Where they tripped over their own shoelaces was, when an innovation ran against the prevailing ideology. We (USA) are emerging into this exact same shoelace problem and whether we like it or not the shoelaces will eventually win.
@@buddyroeginocchio9105 It is intentional that you were lead to think poorly of the Soviets. I'm not saying I'm a fan of communism, but of course they did some things right.
A journalist in my country actually proposed a 200km/h trolleybus (based on the SuperBus prototype from the Netherlands) running along a dedicated expressway lane as a cheaper alternative to high speed rail between Singapore & Kuala Lumpur
Fun fact, this was how the Disneyland monorail came up about they decided to go for a statically pleasing look, and instead of making it go on a concrete slab, they decided to wrap the train around a pillar and that how it fleet got started the Mk-7 are a modernize version of the Mark ones design
would be interesting to see a modern take on this idea. the use of computers to control the gyroscopic movement. might be possible to make it truly useful. mod the rail a bit so its less likely to accumulate water or snow.
@@lavaboatcubesupportsukrain7539 And what if the rubber part comes loose from the wheel like a tread coming off a truck tire? There could be some really good damage!
The problem with all gadgetbahns is that they are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. There is nothing a monorail can do that can't be done better by a regular train and they usually come with a host of new problems.
If this would be proposed today I would agree with you but considering that at that time such speeds on standard tracks were seen as impossible because of numerous technical problems this idea could be actually seen as a viable option.
@@geography_czek5699 Someone did something like this on rollercoaster (Intamin Bobsled) It always been closed for several days if there's just a rain because how painful to keep it water-free
Not entirely correct. You're talking about converting old technology to monorails. There's of course not much advantages to harvest, because the rolling stock is setting performance limitations. However, for modern technologies, monorails are the future. Trains can safely reach higher curve speeds as monos. Apply maglev tech to monorail, and you'll literally be flying.
@@soknightsam Thats a hypothesis of the original engineers, in reality rubber wheeled trains are always deeply inefficient and almost always a big compromise compared to steel wheels.
after rain or snow this would be a pain to take of those tracks they are literally giant channel.... it is also impossible to travel through the carriages
Better a plexiglass one. But coat would be high. Also air pressure would increase resistance. Better just have holes for drainage and a service car with scrubbers cleaning it daily.
Great animation, but you missed some important details, it had 3 (phase) overhead wires and the pantograph you drew would create a short circuit, that's why this Soviet (not Russian) train had this arrangement: 2:31
What would you think about a video about the _Paris-Orleans Aerotrain_ ? It was a marvelous story and a marvelous project that came down (litterally) at the very peak of it's glory. For me it would be great... a bit like the vid of yours about the "American Cousin" of the Caspian Sea Monster but about Monorail trains. Think about it.
I wonder if anyone could have improved this design with 21st century technology? It’s an interesting design even if current railroad technology work just fine.
Maybe the same self centering groove, but the track is a screw-foundation elevated aluminium mesh? Then a magnetic effect would levitate the train. Also, the driving wheel could engage with magnetic metal in places along the aluminum mesh like gears to provide traction on inclinated track.
The reason why projects with crazy designs always fail, is because sometimes things go wrong, which can lead the project into being cancelled as it does not meet the standards for safety nowadays.
Hey Nick, I have a video recommendation for you. It would be interesting how the original a340 with IAE SuperFans would have sold and maybe even revolutionized aviation.
The ALWEG monorails, such as used in the Disney parks and Seattle, use a concrete beam. That design, though, straddles the beam with horizontal wheels to take the overturning loads while the vertical wheels support the train.
its hard to run 2 fully botted channels. Dude cant even crack 2k comments on a 1.8 million viewed video.... he is or his sponsor is paying for the fake success
Living in a former Soviet country and seeing the crumbling concrete bridges and buildings everywhere I can't say that this monrail would've stood the test of time.
никогда не слышал о мостах в ссср где они разваливались. как раз наоборот. они строились на века. конечно время от времени такие сооружения и разваливались но уж очень редко
@@ArthurBrooklyn Personally, I never stated that I know of any that fell, but almost every Soviet built bridge in Latvia is crumbling to pieces and full of cracks and holes as well as the Khrushchyovka buildings.
Stylish on the outside, maybe it wasn't going fast enough to get much rigidity in space from the wheels? In any event the three-wire overhead connections would no doubt have been a serious pain to install and maintain.
8:14, Correct, It only needed a more *wider-arch road* & slimmer tall twin-wheels, with a small *beacon middle beam, + inductive* 🔋recharger. (Boring forgot that🔋for cars in Vagus.) More universal render, road truck/RV & Train beam line express.
The pantaoraph's bow collector would wear out very quickly since the overhead lines (OHLs) do not zig-zag across it as on a normal electric train. Since it has 3 OHLs for positive, neutral, and ground (instead of feeding neutral and ground through the rails like a normal electric train), it cannot zig-zag.
GREAT DESIGN AND IDEA.WITH THE TWO AIR INTAKES TODAY WE COULD INSTALL HYPERSONIC ROCKET ENGINES AND WE COULD HAVE LOCKING TRACKS TO LOCK THE WHEELS TO THE TRACK.
You have a mistake on the map: At the beginning of the XIX century, Finland was part of the Russian Empire. As well as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia ... And all this was before the formation of the USSR.
The thing for me is the wear and tear of the rubber tires, especially going at high speed, and swapping them out for new tires when the engine is INSIDE? A true nightmare for the engineers
If it was a floating axle, from only one side, then it probably wouldn't be that bad. A maintenance hatch on the side opposite side from the axle attachment could be opened, at a wider service depot, and you swap it out that way.
Well i was thinking about the purpose of the holes in the front and my idea is, that its the aero brake for the wheels. If there would be flap inside the hole that could be operated and there would be some sort of small wing like things sticking out of the wheel. When you open the hole via the flap the air will flow directly onto the wheel and will collide with the wings on the wheel. That would create relatively smooth breaking force. (Hope you got what i meant, i suck at explaining :D )
Got what you're saying but how would that create any more braking force than plainly air colliding with a flat surface the size of the hole? The fact that you channel the flow to the wheel doesn't make more air enter the system.
@@u1zha yeah, you'd need much bigger air brakes on the outside to stop that way. I'd guess its just a good way to get air into the beefy motors in the wheels to cool them
I'm at 3 mins perhaps you will address this but the thing about trains it the steel-on-steel wheels that reduce the roll resistance. A bus (what this is here) has normal wheels with massive roll resistance. Also, this isn't a monorail as it has just a curved road under it, making it have the drawbacks of a monorail, complicated gates. A curved road would have the nice effect of suffering far more from environmental effects such as rain and snow.
M I Yamashook had to be an accomplished engineer and visionary to bring his idea from concept stage to research prototype. Testing reveals design weaknesses and perhaps fatal concept weaknesses, this alone may have been enough to cancel the project. Scale of economics was more likely the strongest obstacle, railroad infrastructure, paved roads and emerging passenger aviation had already captured the attention of the planners. Military flexibility would also be a factor. No doubt with sufficient ( but not excessive) resources this design could have achieved some viability. Perhaps there were just too many major areas in need of simultaneous refinement.
And that's why the SSTs are no more. Expensive, twitchy, dangerous but fast planes with small passenger numbers and no cargo capacity to boost profit vs cost.
Oui, l’idée est intéressante sauf si de l’eau ou de la neige rend le ciment glissant, aqua planing, verglas, n’assureront pas la stabilité. De plus, le ciment bouge, se fissure avec le froid et l’humidité. Le socle doit reposer sur des terrains solides.. etc, …
I feel like in the right environment and with some tweaks in the design like maybe retractable stabilizer wheels and drainage groves at the bottom of the track for water to run out of, this could’ve been a viable means of transportation. The idea was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
getting from car to car would be a problem unless that green outline is a doorway. they should build 2 half wheels so the gap in the wheels would allow one to go from car to car
3 overhead wires means to have 3 isolated collectors, like tram shoes. The video has a pantograph like trams, which would shortcut the 3 wires. Having good contact with the wires is a major problem for trolleys. Sometimes they dewire.
There is a fundamental flaw, the wheel will try to climb out from the trench. Its diameter changes which means the center of the tire will have high speed than the edges. This in turn means the edges will drag along the trench and try to climb out with gravity pulling it back down until the forces equalize.. and then you get the wobble. Most likely the front and rear wheels will try to climb the opposite sides of the trench too, making it snake around the half pipe. It needed two set of wheels, at an angle to make it stead, and most likely some kind of limited slip differential. To make a monorail with one rubber wheel the "road" has to be convex and the wheel concave. That way the edge of the wheel rotates fastest and it will self-center. If you look at old belt drive, they have convex, a "bulging" wheel and not concave. It looks counter intuitive until you start to look at speeds across the belt width. Everytime there is an error the belt will self center on a bulging wheel. With a tire on a trench the mechanism is a reversed but we are still looking at speed differences across the width of the tire.
This is one idea from the past that needs to be tried again. A curved steel roof, like the ones seen in industrial yards, could solve any debris issues though at a slightly increased cost.
Flaws are obviously common with every other monorail system - costly and complex interchange mechanisms and uncertain possibility of high speed interchanges. Plus those flaws related to rubber tires - higher running cost, both in energy and wear terms, also multiphase catenary wires system complicates current collector which is unable to distribute wear from side to side anymore. Also very special problem of this exact project is big wheels that isolates carriages so at least no more dining cars possible.
If they had given the track a roof and partially enclosed sides it would eliminate the main flaw, debris accumulating on the track. The sides could be designed in such a way that they could use columns with space inbetwwen for a view and airflow. A plow/snow blower on the front could shove any debris/snow off the track and over the sides. For transporting goods, a full tube with a few gaps in the side every km or so to prevent air being compressed in front of the vehicle and enable access for maintenance would work very well, like a hyperloop without all the silly vacuum stuff that just isnt practical.
But, you still need to keep it literally, absolutely, water free. Like intolerably water-free. Why? Somebody prove it in Rollercoaster decades later (Intamin bobsled) They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry because of concern of either making everything suddenly jerk or just completely aquaplanning. And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed. Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
@@dzonikg Yes, then you made those ride like a hell Just look at those Mack bobsled, despite the gap is waaaayy smaller and only like, 60 kmh max, it shake your brain really hard
It snows a lot in Russia. Wouldn't a foot of snow on the track be too much resistance? Compare that to regular train tracks: There's space under the train for snow that the train doesn't come in contact with.
the amount of maintenance the concrete tracks would require to keep them operationally safe would be tremendous and extremely difficult to maintain over such long stretches. Traditional rail for instance can still function even when heavily damaged, and is monumentally more simple to repair and replace
When the Siberian tundra becomes farmland. And Canada has 'The Wild Wild North' as the next frontier to exploit... And 'Colonize Mars' becomes a real 'Colonize Antarctica' instead... There may yet be a need for something like this, maybe with gyrostabilization and some electromagnetic siderail repulsion help. The idea of cheap to build long range transport for a next frontier might yet see its heyday.
Fun Fact: The Chuo Shinkansen being built NOW in Japan is also a big concrete track in which the train rides in. It just uses magnetic levitation to raise the train off the track, with linear motors for propulsion. So the weather and debris problem is and would have been solvable.
It also uses rubber wheels until they are stowed away above a certain speed.
there is this crazy invention we made that's called a "roof"
@@the_babbleboom - Yeah, but very expensive. So glad its in style now to put up solar panels over parking lots in SoCal, so we have a lot more covered parking. [evil laugh]
@@pacificostudios still better than putting solar panels under the roads lmao
@@the_babbleboom Put them in the dumpster where they belong.
Wether you think the Soviet Union’s engineering teams were crazy or not, you gotta admit this monorail looks SICK
considering they are only on minimum wage salary. not paying attention to them innovating with crazy ideas
Monorail are excellent when they are used correctly.
they knew how to make a hobby fun/interesting... even crazy like this
It almost has a diesel punk style to it.
Look at Hovertrains guys! Insane stuff!
The graphics on this ch are seriously amazing. Even very weird stuff get 3Ded. Then inserted into terrain and animated. If he didn't put the computer specs in the info I would have thought it was magic.
Where did he list such specs? And what program this was all done in? I'm not seeing such and am likewise curious.
@@quillmaurer6563 Channel Description
how long does it take to make graphics like these
@@MGLpr0 Ah, looks pretty hefty. I also wonder what rendering software all this is done in, that isn't mentioned. Blender? Something commercial?
it's actually a lot like Mustard's channel nowadays, maybe copying their style.
One of the main problem with concrete roadways is the concrete does not expand and contract evenly. When concrete was used for the interstate highway system in the colder, mountainous states, it wasn't long before the roadway was so bumpy that it felt like we had a flat tire. They tried using asphalt to cover the concrete, but the two products don't adhere to each other. In many places, the concrete was removed and replaced with asphalt.
many a concrete road in uk was tarmacked
each county had its own problems
when travelling/ oxfordshire later glouster later wiltshire
great fun for us kids
@@raypitts4880 Thanks. You probably don't have the frost heaves we have here. Two days before Christmas this year, our over night low was 37 below zero Fahrenheit. The whole Month of November and December(until this last week) the temperature never got above freezing. That plays hell with concrete cracking and spalding off, creating pot holes. Lots of fun. Happy New Year.
Still more ambitious and much more likely to work than our modern day spaceman's Hyperloop.
Elon succeeds with everything he does, he will figure it out plus i think this technology has secretly been around for a long time and in use for those underground military bases.
@@ATomRileyA So basically, your dumb thoughts on the matter is that Elon will both invent an idea that has been around for ~200 years, but also it already exists in operation currently, so Elon won't be inventing anything. Did I get your particular brand of psychosis correct?
E: Low hanging fruit, Elon can't keep hold of a family to save his life, lol not successful in everything he does by a long shot.
@Martin_Hayes The Hyperloop and Musk's traffic tunnels are two completely different projects ,though.
so this one almost became the sovietloop ?? xd
The "hyperloop" was already invented, tested and failed back at the end of the 19th century. There were a few pneumatic railways built. The way the loop is going it isn't going to be built either. Even Elon isn't putting any big money towards it.
First thing i thought was what effect snow and debris on the "track" would have. The "track" would have to be kept spotless at all times. Rain could have been drained off but i can see the drain holes getting clogged up with ice & debris very quickly.
Somebody prove it in Rollercoaster (Intamin bobsled)
They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry. And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed. Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
@@bocahdongo7769 wow, I totally missed that this is an issue with bob-bahns
@@hobog again, Mack solve this with those grate design.
But not only a waste of material for proper rail design (relevant to both), it shakes your brain for its speed despite the super small gap. Imagine doing that but 350 km/h
For rain just built little holes for drain
@@dzonikg that or porous concrete we have now, not sure how that will effect the noise created by the wheels though or how long it’ll last compared to normal concrete
I don't think you listed the biggest problems with this design: The drive wheel was so large, it was impossible to move between carriages. While a solid rubber-tired wheel might move along o.k. at 160 KPH, at speeds like 300 KPH -- modern HSR speed -- the centrifugal force on a huge rubber-tired wheel might tear apart the tire. I would had incorporated metal surfaces in the track, and use that as a ground, as well as lateral support, to allow the train to be propelled with single-phase power.
Big wheels spin more slowly, right? They never made this, which proves the concept did'nt work, at least with the technology they had back then.
@@lundsweden No, because centrifugal force increases directly with distance from the rotational axis. Even a 4 meter wide wheel is turning fast when rolling at 400 kph. I think the wheel will hold up, but the tire -- presumably solid rubber -- would fly apart. Look how often jet airliner tires blow during a landing, admittedly while absorbing the shock of an airliner landing on a runway.
Yup, the material requirement and cost associated with the tires would be unimaginable.
Oh dear god.
Do the math.
A wheel four times the diameter spins at a quarter the speed.
Acceleration is proportional to the square of the revs times the diameter.
So four times the size is 1/16 x 4 so only has a quarter of the force.
Now ever looked at the speeds of road cars? 300kph is normal.
@@brucebaxter6923 Exactly!
Presumably a major issue with the train would also have been from the rubber wheels. Steel wheeled rains work well because there is very little drag between the wheels and tracks. Attempts at building trains with rubber wheels have always been considerably less efficient, maintenance heavy and usually not very comfortable
The underground metro trains in Turin use rubber tires (on strange flat metal "rails" covered in semicircular grooves).
@@qdaniele97 Yep that's one of the attempts I was thinking of, alongside a few others such as Paris, Montreal and Mexico city.
They tend to work okay in some metros because they are cheap; accelerate to metro speeds quite quickly; and allow for tight turns(making the only option in some metro scenarios) . The problem is, rolling resistance is much higher and so they generate much more drag leading to higher energy consumption and a bumpier ride. These problems can be seen as an acceptable compromise at metro train speed but become exacerbated as the train gets quicker.
@@benrgrogan Yep, they use them on some metros due to extremely tight turns and steep slopes, but they are much more inefficient and create some unexpected problems like increased heat and noise.
@@qdaniele97 Also in Santiago de Chile, same system, with rubber tires.
@@benrgrogan Wouldn't they also create more friction heat, heating up tunnels and the like in metros considerably more than steel counterparts? I believe the metro system in London is having a similar issue due to poor design, I can only imagine how bad it'd be with rubber wheels instead.
Just a salute for all the heroes of the past who tried and failed but provided the future generations with critical data. RIP..
I love the self-awareness of this episode, the other ones constant praise without explaining feel grating after a while. Entertaining explanation can be hard to come by, so it's nice to acknowledge shortcomings in a funny way!
I've sold monorails to Novosibirsk, Vladivostok and Omsk and by gum it put them on the map
There is nothing on earth like a bonadide electrified 6 car monorail
@@ultimax42 Monorail! Monorail! Monorail! Monorail! I heard those things are awfully loud?!
But Main Street is still cracked and broken!
These are the mustard videos we wait for between mustard videos
Without any of the actual insight of Mustard videos. Claiming a giant tire would have the same efficiency as steel wheeled trains.
A smooth ride with solid rubber wheels? Ever gotten a shopping cart with a nick on one of the caster's? How do you cast concrete without expansion joints, or slight irregularities between pours? Imagine hitting those at high speed. And how many Russian freeze/thaw cycles would those guideways survive before crumbling, especially if built to the usual Soviet construction standards?
Shopping carts don't have suspension though. They also don't see the kind of maintenance that a train would.
The concrete criticism, on the other hand... that's a reasonable concern.
It's surprisingly smooth, check those Intamin Bobsled rollercoaster. Rubber wheel riding on smooth trench, or those wooden bobsled on random US theme park
Hard to find? Because there're only total 2 of them in the world remaining. Because they knew how absolutely pain is it to keep it really-really dry, or else either you get splash-brake effect or aquaplanning.
@@bocahdongo7769
They also have holes in the metal to get water away. Its a huge issue
The Soviets had some amazing engineering minds that could have accomplished so much. It's such a shame that the political environment has never allowed the potential to come to reality.
They probably could have gone to space for all we know.
In previous political system they did not have a chance to apear. The truth is always discovered in compares.
Most people don't realize the amount of espionage that both sides did during the war. The soviets were ahead in some areas, the US in others. All the spying kept the peace and rapidly advanced tech for everyone. Totally undone by the massive failure of leftists politics.
What do you mean? SImilar ideas appeared in other countries and were still never developed.
@@Somajsiberehe us High speed Rail idea. Even though it would be exstream beneficial to the US they still don’t build it. even at there sea boards.
"Insane" and "Monorail". These are words that go together well.
It's also not a monorail.
Let's see elevated with holes on the track smaller then the diameter or the wheels, and a slot scooper train / heated parts would take care of snow etc. May not be cheaper, but I could see amazing potential in this. Longevity or those tires though...
Calculate how much power per mile would be needed to keep it ice free - you'll see. Even Hyper Loop would be cheaper to build/operate!
The wheels are a big problem with this "train" design, worn down wheels? needs a crane for the whole carriage to be lifted, brake down motor? same again. They would need so many preassembled wheels to be available at all times at all locations coz you cant tow this thing. What about track switching? impossible. There are so many flaws with this design that It is much cheaper to build and operate a standard railway.
Imagine a tire blowout on this, derail for sure
Diagonal slot could work for drainage and only a small portion of the wheel would not have contact, much like slotted brake rotors provide additional heat dissipation. Track changes would require the train to slow significantly but would not be impossible, much like when roller coaster cars are serviced. If the rubber on the wheels was not a heavy/thick layer it wouldn't have much mass & if it were adequately cooled wouldn't overheat & blow out. Steel belts (like a modern tire) would resist diameter growth. An air blade, much like a pressure slot under a street sweeper could clear loose debris. Something akin to snow sheds could protect the track like a normal track would use. Not saying there wouldn't be teething pains, but just like other new ideas it would need to be developed.
Wow a lot of people who are clueless with these responses lol. #1. Hyper loop is more Elon BS and would be infinity more expensive #2. It was never said the tires were pneumatic, solid would make more sense for momentum purposes, and to protect against blowouts. #3. Changing the wheels out when needed would he easy, not much different than what they do now to change wheel trucks and wheels. Crane, lift, replace, lower. #4. Would not need to slow down for properly designed drain holes with solid wheels #5. Some solar panels over the top, or wind wall fans on the side of the track (uses the air pushed by the train to spin them) would supply more then enough power to make the sections heated when needed for melting
It is hard to compare a wooden monorail for the working model with a concrete one. The idea was good, but why it was not developed into a real prototype it is a mystery (probably because it was too advanced for the era).
Actually, a real prototype was made. Around 2 km of concrete tracks made circular, and 2 or 3 carriages. Max speed was 60 or 70 km/h.
@@Blackyellowwildfox Well 300 kp/h was overestimated, somewhere between 120-150 is more realistic for the era (fully developed).
But the kind of stabilization, power output and aerodynamics it requires is commonplace nowadays. And it's also one of the four possible trains you can have (as far as I know) that don't require tracks (the other three are transit systems based on regular wheels, electrodynamic levitation and ground effect).
Quite agree. Being too advanced often translates just as easily into "not enough money for another fifty years."
If you guys wonder how actually a nightmare the maintenance would be. Somebody already prove it in Rollercoaster (Intamin bobsled)
They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry because of concern those water pool would either make it sudden splashing jerk (which leads to accident) or full aquaplanning (which leads to yet, another accident) And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed.
Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
Thank you for an actual decent answer
With how large the wheels are, the concrete trough could be designed with rather good sized drainage. Standing water should not be an issue. For the possibility of debris, I wonder if a "cow catcher" out front with an aeronautical design that could clear the track with a created air pressure or vacuum from the train's forward speed. A dry snow could just blow away from such. But a wet snow could prove interesting.
@@ronfullerton3162 I'll tell you. The same exact Mack rollercoaster (which solve the standing water problem) ride REALLY SHAKY. Despite BOTH using rubber wheel and using pretty fine gap. And it's only under 60 km/h.
And yes, the amount you spend fixing it is way unnecessary compared to just use... Standard rail. Cmon it's 2023 already, 380 km/h on standard rail is a common occurrence nowadays
It reminds me of something out of thunderbirds. Like the monorail that lady Penelope was on.
Brennan Monorail is build in the early 1900 as self balancing mono rail. It do not woble around as the soviet one does.
"This train could have revolutionised railway tracks" *shows train bumping around like crazy* riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You might want to check out some of British Pathés archived footage on many early British railways... 🚂🔀🇬🇧😉
The french also had a concrete monorail at one point, but their experimental trains were jet-powered.
and they had no traction wheels. They were basically guided hovercrafts
So you permanently lose the rolling efficiency of steel on steel. You have a gigantic wheel that would tear through the cabin in an accident. You ride in enormous concrete water troughs of undetermined length that must expand and contract, but always stay aligned.
In the end, you’ve made a less efficient train that uses much more concrete and steel (rebar) than a traditional railway, while introducing novel problems.
USE THE METRIC SYSTEM
Everyone like this comment so it gets top
Oooh! I've read about that from a old soviet journal named "Modelist-konstructor" about 25 years ago. Would be a pretty interesting concept, if not some major flaws.
I think it's more complicated to build an elevated concrete trough rather than lay two metal rails on the ground.
Interesting, but I'm glad high speed trains that exist in service don't have wheels in the way of people who want to walk from car to car. I miss seeing a lot of train stuff from you and hopefully there's more in the future. I must've got you mixed up for Mustard which made more train stuff.
The best thing about soviets is that they cared for innovation and even supported talent and innovation, although it later failed but still it's a big thing he was given that amount and support
I must confess at being shamed by my ignorance of Russian innovation during the Soviet. Where they tripped over their own shoelaces was, when an innovation ran against the prevailing ideology. We (USA) are emerging into this exact same shoelace problem and whether we like it or not the shoelaces will eventually win.
@@buddyroeginocchio9105 It is intentional that you were lead to think poorly of the Soviets. I'm not saying I'm a fan of communism, but of course they did some things right.
This is the best trolleybus ever designed.
Ahh but a trolleybus is all it could ever be.
A journalist in my country actually proposed a 200km/h trolleybus (based on the SuperBus prototype from the Netherlands) running along a dedicated expressway lane as a cheaper alternative to high speed rail between Singapore & Kuala Lumpur
Fun fact, this was how the Disneyland monorail came up about they decided to go for a statically pleasing look, and instead of making it go on a concrete slab, they decided to wrap the train around a pillar and that how it fleet got started the Mk-7 are a modernize version of the Mark ones design
would be interesting to see a modern take on this idea. the use of computers to control the gyroscopic movement. might be possible to make it truly useful. mod the rail a bit so its less likely to accumulate water or snow.
With that large of wheel, the track could be designed with ample drainage slots.
I wonder how long the rubber wheels would last
@@lavaboatcubesupportsukrain7539 And what if the rubber part comes loose from the wheel like a tread coming off a truck tire? There could be some really good damage!
@@ronfullerton3162someone already tried on rollercoaster
It shakes your brain really hard despite only 45 mph
The problem with all gadgetbahns is that they are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. There is nothing a monorail can do that can't be done better by a regular train and they usually come with a host of new problems.
If this would be proposed today I would agree with you but considering that at that time such speeds on standard tracks were seen as impossible because of numerous technical problems this idea could be actually seen as a viable option.
2:55 it can go faster for much less power consumption.
@@geography_czek5699 Someone did something like this on rollercoaster (Intamin Bobsled)
It always been closed for several days if there's just a rain because how painful to keep it water-free
Not entirely correct. You're talking about converting old technology to monorails. There's of course not much advantages to harvest, because the rolling stock is setting performance limitations. However, for modern technologies, monorails are the future. Trains can safely reach higher curve speeds as monos. Apply maglev tech to monorail, and you'll literally be flying.
@@soknightsam Thats a hypothesis of the original engineers, in reality rubber wheeled trains are always deeply inefficient and almost always a big compromise compared to steel wheels.
Lower cost of maintenance than highways because concrete is more durable than tarmac.
after rain or snow this would be a pain to take of those tracks they are literally giant channel....
it is also impossible to travel through the carriages
a way to improve it could be the entire track being a tunnel, prevents anything getting on the track
Better a plexiglass one. But coat would be high. Also air pressure would increase resistance. Better just have holes for drainage and a service car with scrubbers cleaning it daily.
Great animation, but you missed some important details, it had 3 (phase) overhead wires and the pantograph you drew would create a short circuit, that's why this Soviet (not Russian) train had this arrangement: 2:31
What would you think about a video about the _Paris-Orleans Aerotrain_ ? It was a marvelous story and a marvelous project that came down (litterally) at the very peak of it's glory. For me it would be great... a bit like the vid of yours about the "American Cousin" of the Caspian Sea Monster but about Monorail trains. Think about it.
I wonder if anyone could have improved this design with 21st century technology? It’s an interesting design even if current railroad technology work just fine.
Maybe the same self centering groove, but the track is a screw-foundation elevated aluminium mesh?
Then a magnetic effect would levitate the train.
Also, the driving wheel could engage with magnetic metal in places along the aluminum mesh like gears to provide traction on inclinated track.
The reason why projects with crazy designs always fail, is because sometimes things go wrong, which can lead the project into being cancelled as it does not meet the standards for safety nowadays.
I don't think safety standards would have been too much of a concern to the USSR if the new monorail would help improve economic output... 😉
Hey Nick, I have a video recommendation for you. It would be interesting how the original a340 with IAE SuperFans would have sold and maybe even revolutionized aviation.
The ALWEG monorails, such as used in the Disney parks and Seattle, use a concrete beam. That design, though, straddles the beam with horizontal wheels to take the overturning loads while the vertical wheels support the train.
The rocking is Just like amtrack E60 Electric locomotives.........
7:32
7:39 "that issue would only be exasperated" ............. Mrs Malaprop is delighted!
I suggest you also make a channel that features a topic about concept cars that never built or never made into mass production.
its hard to run 2 fully botted channels. Dude cant even crack 2k comments on a 1.8 million viewed video.... he is or his sponsor is paying for the fake success
The rocking side to side can be stoped if you use additional wheels on the side supporting it.
By this point it’s a train
@@FoundAndExplained but it wot shake like a train.
@@FoundAndExplained It's almost as if trains are better, and this silly cold war era idea died for a reason. 🤯🤯🤯
Living in a former Soviet country and seeing the crumbling concrete bridges and buildings everywhere I can't say that this monrail would've stood the test of time.
i live in a capitalist country US and our concrete bridges are falling too...if things are not maintained things will fall no matter who built them.
никогда не слышал о мостах в ссср где они разваливались. как раз наоборот. они строились на века. конечно время от времени такие сооружения и разваливались но уж очень редко
Can you state where a USSR built bridge fell and when.
@@ArthurBrooklyn Personally, I never stated that I know of any that fell, but almost every Soviet built bridge in Latvia is crumbling to pieces and full of cracks and holes as well as the Khrushchyovka buildings.
@@davebeat Well, you have to maintain them. With no proper maintenance any structure will fall apart.
Stylish on the outside, maybe it wasn't going fast enough to get much rigidity in space from the wheels? In any event the three-wire overhead connections would no doubt have been a serious pain to install and maintain.
Alles Utopie! Einschienenbahn ist nur möglich als Hängebahn wie in Wuppertal oder mit Stabilisierung durch Schwungräder
8:14, Correct, It only needed a more *wider-arch road* & slimmer tall twin-wheels, with a small *beacon middle beam, + inductive* 🔋recharger. (Boring forgot that🔋for cars in Vagus.) More universal render, road truck/RV & Train beam line express.
The pantaoraph's bow collector would wear out very quickly since the overhead lines (OHLs) do not zig-zag across it as on a normal electric train. Since it has 3 OHLs for positive, neutral, and ground (instead of feeding neutral and ground through the rails like a normal electric train), it cannot zig-zag.
a high speed monorail, nice.
0:50 "In the early 19th Century it saw an explosion of railway lines" - I think you mean 20th
GREAT DESIGN AND IDEA.WITH THE TWO AIR INTAKES TODAY WE COULD INSTALL HYPERSONIC ROCKET ENGINES AND WE COULD HAVE LOCKING TRACKS TO LOCK THE WHEELS TO THE TRACK.
You have a mistake on the map: At the beginning of the XIX century, Finland was part of the Russian Empire. As well as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia ... And all this was before the formation of the USSR.
It is a predecessor of Shinkansen
The thing for me is the wear and tear of the rubber tires, especially going at high speed, and swapping them out for new tires when the engine is INSIDE? A true nightmare for the engineers
If it was a floating axle, from only one side, then it probably wouldn't be that bad. A maintenance hatch on the side opposite side from the axle attachment could be opened, at a wider service depot, and you swap it out that way.
@@musewolfman perhaps, but I didn't see it modeled in on the 3d design nor on the smaller prototype, so I'm skeptical
Well i was thinking about the purpose of the holes in the front and my idea is, that its the aero brake for the wheels. If there would be flap inside the hole that could be operated and there would be some sort of small wing like things sticking out of the wheel. When you open the hole via the flap the air will flow directly onto the wheel and will collide with the wings on the wheel. That would create relatively smooth breaking force. (Hope you got what i meant, i suck at explaining :D )
I could see that working especially if you designed the airflow to move similarly to the flow in a centrifugal pump.
An anti-turbo?
Got what you're saying but how would that create any more braking force than plainly air colliding with a flat surface the size of the hole? The fact that you channel the flow to the wheel doesn't make more air enter the system.
@@u1zha yeah, you'd need much bigger air brakes on the outside to stop that way. I'd guess its just a good way to get air into the beefy motors in the wheels to cool them
@zhichengwong2081 A diverter could change it from cooling to an air braking system.
Have you heard of a US Stealth Helicopter Called the RAH-66 Comanche?
Not even the mention the emergency brakes, which may have caused the train to shake, a lot.
I'm at 3 mins perhaps you will address this but the thing about trains it the steel-on-steel wheels that reduce the roll resistance. A bus (what this is here) has normal wheels with massive roll resistance. Also, this isn't a monorail as it has just a curved road under it, making it have the drawbacks of a monorail, complicated gates. A curved road would have the nice effect of suffering far more from environmental effects such as rain and snow.
А потом пошел снег...
I want to try to build one out of Lego now and test it out
M I Yamashook had to be an accomplished engineer and visionary to bring his idea from concept stage to research prototype. Testing reveals design weaknesses and perhaps fatal concept weaknesses, this alone may have been enough to cancel the project. Scale of economics was more likely the strongest obstacle, railroad infrastructure, paved roads and emerging passenger aviation had already captured the attention of the planners. Military flexibility would also be a factor.
No doubt with sufficient ( but not excessive) resources this design could have achieved some viability. Perhaps there were just too many major areas in need of simultaneous refinement.
A super-train with only 110-120 seats? That's pretty ridiculous, unless it's something of a no-cost-object for party bosses.
And that's why the SSTs are no more. Expensive, twitchy, dangerous but fast planes with small passenger numbers and no cargo capacity to boost profit vs cost.
We still attempt insane alternative to the train nowadays. (Well, scammers do: see ‘Hyperloop’.)
Oui, l’idée est intéressante sauf si de l’eau ou de la neige rend le ciment glissant, aqua planing, verglas, n’assureront pas la stabilité. De plus, le ciment bouge, se fissure avec le froid et l’humidité. Le socle doit reposer sur des terrains solides.. etc, …
I feel like in the right environment and with some tweaks in the design like maybe retractable stabilizer wheels and drainage groves at the bottom of the track for water to run out of, this could’ve been a viable means of transportation. The idea was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
getting from car to car would be a problem unless that green outline is a doorway. they should build 2 half wheels so the gap in the wheels would allow one to go from car to car
1:30 that blueprint is dated 1922 not 1910. We can also tell by the Russian letters that have changed after 1918.
I remember that the french had a train project with a propeler on top of the train.
C'est le _Aérotrain_ 😇
0:23 the shaking of that scale model test doesn't give me much confidence on the comfort of the ride.
3 overhead wires means to have 3 isolated collectors, like tram shoes. The video has a pantograph like trams, which would shortcut the 3 wires. Having good contact with the wires is a major problem for trolleys. Sometimes they dewire.
regardless of its usefulness, I would want to ride on the final version
Stil looking for a argument why this is better then a train.
I missed that little jingle at the beginning of your videos 🔔
There is a fundamental flaw, the wheel will try to climb out from the trench. Its diameter changes which means the center of the tire will have high speed than the edges. This in turn means the edges will drag along the trench and try to climb out with gravity pulling it back down until the forces equalize.. and then you get the wobble. Most likely the front and rear wheels will try to climb the opposite sides of the trench too, making it snake around the half pipe. It needed two set of wheels, at an angle to make it stead, and most likely some kind of limited slip differential.
To make a monorail with one rubber wheel the "road" has to be convex and the wheel concave. That way the edge of the wheel rotates fastest and it will self-center. If you look at old belt drive, they have convex, a "bulging" wheel and not concave. It looks counter intuitive until you start to look at speeds across the belt width. Everytime there is an error the belt will self center on a bulging wheel. With a tire on a trench the mechanism is a reversed but we are still looking at speed differences across the width of the tire.
@@enterprisestobart By constantly making small corrections.
This is one idea from the past that needs to be tried again. A curved steel roof, like the ones seen in industrial yards, could solve any debris issues though at a slightly increased cost.
6:53 Maybe the air ducts were needed for the train to be able to run through tunnels?
looks way more impractical than high speed rail. Rail is cheap to lay, but building a concrete hundred-mile long bridge basically? No shot
Oh man, now I want to go ride the old concrete alpine slide
That pantograph shorting out the three phase wires is driving me crazy. Bad error in the graphics there.
There were too many stupid ideas 100 years ago involving gyroscope.
I would have loved some more technical details on the list of flaws of this design, but the video is of very good quality still 👍
Flaws are obviously common with every other monorail system - costly and complex interchange mechanisms and uncertain possibility of high speed interchanges. Plus those flaws related to rubber tires - higher running cost, both in energy and wear terms, also multiphase catenary wires system complicates current collector which is unable to distribute wear from side to side anymore. Also very special problem of this exact project is big wheels that isolates carriages so at least no more dining cars possible.
2:55 A saguaro cactus grows from the tundra?
My brain hurts!
Huge wheels won't ket crue members to walk from one end to another while the train is out of stations
For stability, he should add wheel on the side of the train which will rest on the edge of the wall. Like kid bicycle.
I would also place wheels horizontally on the sides to press on the walls and ensure the train stays centered.
All of those ideas make for more friction and wear, driving the whole thing pointless compared to a normal train.
Concrete ages and crumbles
If they had given the track a roof and partially enclosed sides it would eliminate the main flaw, debris accumulating on the track. The sides could be designed in such a way that they could use columns with space inbetwwen for a view and airflow. A plow/snow blower on the front could shove any debris/snow off the track and over the sides.
For transporting goods, a full tube with a few gaps in the side every km or so to prevent air being compressed in front of the vehicle and enable access for maintenance would work very well, like a hyperloop without all the silly vacuum stuff that just isnt practical.
But, you still need to keep it literally, absolutely, water free. Like intolerably water-free. Why? Somebody prove it in Rollercoaster decades later (Intamin bobsled)
They always close it for 1-2 days after the rain because how painful it is to keep it dry because of concern of either making everything suddenly jerk or just completely aquaplanning. And it's only for like, 60 km/h speed.
Yeah, Mack solve it by use grate steel instead of smooth trench, but at that point you better be use normal steel rail anyway
@@bocahdongo7769 Just make little holes for water to go
@@dzonikg Yes, then you made those ride like a hell
Just look at those Mack bobsled, despite the gap is waaaayy smaller and only like, 60 kmh max, it shake your brain really hard
I saw that high speed wobble in the first few seconds. No bueno.
It snows a lot in Russia. Wouldn't a foot of snow on the track be too much resistance? Compare that to regular train tracks: There's space under the train for snow that the train doesn't come in contact with.
I thought about the issues alread, when you said they were running on top of a concrete curved slab...
the amount of maintenance the concrete tracks would require to keep them operationally safe would be tremendous and extremely difficult to maintain over such long stretches. Traditional rail for instance can still function even when heavily damaged, and is monumentally more simple to repair and replace
Use the metric system already...
When the Siberian tundra becomes farmland.
And Canada has 'The Wild Wild North' as the next frontier to exploit...
And 'Colonize Mars' becomes a real 'Colonize Antarctica' instead...
There may yet be a need for something like this, maybe with gyrostabilization and some electromagnetic siderail repulsion help.
The idea of cheap to build long range transport for a next frontier might yet see its heyday.
If it was a good idea, somebody had built it by now... There is no such thing as "railway barons afraid of the future" 😂
That was amazing!
Thank you.
this monotrain is absolutely SICK!!
7:39 that issue would only be EXASPERATED? ....no no no! That's EXACERBATED...Now, I'm EXASPERATED!!
Super video 👍👍👍🎥🚂👌.
Greetings Gert