this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
110 points (97.4% liked)

Futurology

1771 readers
129 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 23 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Cool, but come on, put some over head wires up!

[–] intelisense@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I wonder if overhead wires make sense with the state of battery technology now? It must be cheaper to build battery-powered trains than install and maintain all that infra before you even factor in the cost of adjusting bridges and tunnels to accommodate the overhead wires.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

What are you talking about?

Batteries have planety of drawbacks compared to overhead wires.

  • Weight - Batteries way a LOT, meaning that locomotives need to be stronger, meaning they will be heavier, meaning that need stronger bridges and sturdier tracks.
  • Lifetime - Batteries are consumed as they are used and recharged, they are also not as easy/cheap to replace as pantographs.
  • Range - Batteries has limited range, normal electric trains have unlimited range.
  • Charge time - Batteries need charging, normal electric trains does not.

Normal electric trains are technically the ideal transportation, you have unlimited range and don't need to carry the fuel.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 3 points 3 days ago

Don’t forget acceleration, one of the main reasons passenger trains care about weight is that you can get up to and down from line speed quicker, thusly saving trip time and allowing for more frequency/capacity from the same number of trains and drivers.

The extra weight from the batteries means you don’t get said benefits from going to battery electric as compared to overhead line.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)