QotNews Hacker News, Reddit, Lobsters, and Tildes articles rendered in reader mode.
An experimental bullet train in China broke its own world record for acceleration, going from zero to 800km an hour in about five seconds, potentially paving the way for ultra-high-speed transportation.
Yes it would be. I don’t get why people who don’t know what they’re talking about just randomly make claims like that. 4g of acceleration for 5 seconds is safe. You make the acceleration 10 seconds for comfort. It’s safe either way. This is a pet peeve of mine
I'd suggest going even faster and accelerating in a shorter amount of time, but once we start moving at relativistic speeds it actually becomes counterproductive. Like Miller's Planet in Interstellar. We would move at such a high speed that the people at the meeting I'm going to will have aged years by the time my train gets there. And as such I will have been years late. Quite the dilemma.
I believe that's incorrect. The distance to your meeting is very short, even light itself takes less than 1s to circle the Earth. Unless you're meeting aliens.
... You're still confined to the distance you traveled. If you travel to another location on Earth at light speed, it still wouldn't take more than a second. The only difference with 0.9999c would be that you experience 0 travel time.
The only way you can "arrive at the end of the universe" is if you shoot off into space without crashing into anything for trillions of light years.
Yeah I wasn't still talking about the meeting lol I was just saying if we constantly looped around the track at light speed forever. Should've made that clear, cheers!
4g is fine, except when the axis of acceleration differs from the axis of support. If a plane pulls 4g, you get heavier but it’s fine as long as you know it’s coming. Not physiologically very challenging for healthy adults (ignoring children, infants, the infirm, pregnant, disabled and the elderly). When the axis of acceleration is orthogonal to the pull of gravity though, the effect would be like suddenly standing the train up on its end - then accelerating mostly straight up at 3g.
Anyone that put a bag down in the aisle, or dropped a laptop, or a baby, is going to see that fly backwards at incredible speed and impact what (or who) it collides with in a potentially devastating impact.
Quite aside from that, the physics issues of accelerating a train to that speed in 5 seconds make this a certain typo, it without doubt takes 5 minutes, not 5 seconds. That would be 300 seconds, an acceleration of about 0.75ms^-2 - which falls at the top end of average existing high speed train accelerations.
You‘d have women holding infants flying all over the place. Old people, people caught off balance. A train isn’t like a plane where you’re strapped in.
Probably just to test the systems. Even if it were safe, people it wouldn't be comfortable at all and you don't really save a lot of time vs accelerating to top speed steadily over a couple of minutes.
In case you're serious, a 911 Turbo S can do 0-60 in 2 seconds, that doesn't mean every Turbo S is blasting off at every stoplight. This test shows the capability of the system, it allows passengers to reach their destination faster, even without "unsafe" acceleration. It also allows for longer trains that can seat more passengers as it's plenty powerful enough to accommodate for that.
Fuxing is a family of chinese high speed trains(steel wheeled not maglev) which does reach 350km/h on the fastest train services on some important hsr lines.the fastest train(maglev) in existance is L0 series maglev shinkansen which has a manned record speed of 603km/h and planned commercial speed of 505km/h. Though it is not commercially open yet as the chuo shinkansen line is under construction you can ride it through invites or lottery during test runs
It’s a maximum power test on skeleton train cars. Real one would be much heavier and needs to get up to 787 speed with partial power. The test track is multi kilometers. They need to test the partial vacuum tube air resistance too.
Extreme isn't necessary, but constant acceleration and deceleration cycles significantly slow down high speed rail. It's a one ton test vehicle anyway so same tech accelerating a real train is much more reasonable.
“Bullet train” is doing absurd amounts of work here. This was a 1.1-tonne experimental model on a one-kilometre test track, not a passenger train. Reaching 800 km/h in 5.3 seconds means about 4.3g of acceleration; commuters would need fighter-pilot restraints, not tickets. A real train accelerating at 1 m/s² would require roughly 25 kilometres to reach that speed. The experiment is impressive, but calling its launch-system performance “ultra-high-speed transportation” is scientifically illiterate clickbait—like calling a railgun a metro because both use tracks. The Independent supplied the buzzwords; OP and the mods supplied the complete absence of critical thought or arithmetic.
Its good to see boundaries being pushed technologically.
If silicon valley had its way, public transportation would not exist. All cities would be built for cars, and all cars would either be robo taxis or ride shares.
Some people here are missing that acceleration and deceleration is quite important for these trains.
Where I live we have a train (Eurostar) that can drive over 300km/h, but because the distance between individual stops is relatively small(eg Antwerpen - Brussels is only about 40km) , it can not reach that speed over a significant part of the trajectory.
Having a train that reaches top speed in a short distance would allow more stops and more efficient and faster routes.
If the train would be able to harvest the energy while decelerating it would even become very economical(I assume the Maglev technically can but don’t see it mentioned).
Off course the acceleration power at 1 ton is much less than at say 100 ton, (which would take 500 with same system). And from this article we can’t assume how well it scales to higher power. (linear with weight)
But the stresses on components, aerodynamics, power transfer and communications to train etc are not depending on weight, so this test is already very relevant.
If my math is correct, and it is, that is 4.53G of force to accomplish that in 5 seconds. Now I would be fine with that, in fact I’d find it fun. It would be pretty miserable if you don’t like roller coasters or anything with a sudden change in direction. Particularly for people with a bit more weight on them.
Innovation? Maybe it can serve as the foundation for something greater, or maybe not. Would be nice for my taxes to be used for cool tech instead of going to random corporations and thr military.
It's why we end up having to try it, I'm sure the first person to even try coffee or edible mushrooms was thought crazy.
I mean trains are definitely better in terms of greenhouse gase emissions than most forms of transport. But both would be great. There's a lot more useless shit the government should cut down first than bleeding edge train technology.
If you can get trains up to 800 km/hr, you can massively reduce the number of flights / reserve them for areas where putting down high speed tracks isn't feasible. And trains used MASSIVELY less emissions than jet fuel consuming planes per passenger. So it isn't wasteful to do this if it cuts down on a massive emissions generator like flights.
It would be like saying EVs are wasteful because they aren't public transportation like buses or trains. They aren't AS good as those options, but are substantially better than gas vehicles for emissions.
Tech like this is how we get carbon emissions down while maintaining the current or better quality of life. A train that can do plane speeds will spend far less fuel
melekin | 12 hours ago
Footnote: only fighter pilots are allowed.
Milksteak529 | 11 hours ago
Gotta wear the inflatable pants.
guy-le-doosh | 9 hours ago
Someone with inflatable pants is making a video himself as a Top Gun pilot blowing it up.
Helldiver_of_Mars | 3 hours ago
They better be brown or come with a diaper.
mothandravenstudio | 13 hours ago
Errr that wouldn’t be safe for normal humans.
AtomicShart9000 | 13 hours ago
Thats why they will first breed super humans to ride it then build it to cart around those super humans
empty_graph | 11 hours ago
That's about 4g. 4g for 5s would be safe if you're in your seat, but definitely not comfortable or practical.
sowdowgg | 8 hours ago
Do they have backward facing seats? Or those table type seats in a bullet train?
demzrdumez | 5 hours ago
definitely not wanting to be facing backwards
empty_graph | 2 hours ago
Not if it accelerates at 4g
DrakeDre | 3 hours ago
I can confirm that 4g is not comfortable at all. (Dive spirals with paraglider)
Wurm42 | 5 hours ago
"Safe" for a healthy young adult. Pity the train-riding public includes other demographics....
HeartyBeast | 11 hours ago
“I’m just trying to drink my coffee here”
Lower_Ad_1317 | 10 hours ago
You sir shall wear your coffee and enjoy it.
”anything else I can get you”?😋
HeartyBeast | 9 hours ago
Thank you for a chuckle at the start of the day
say-nothing-at-all | 12 hours ago
You reckon?
Commercial airplane takeoff gives you 0.3 G-force.
shing3232 | 11 hours ago
you wouldn't carry people with that speed. accelerate to target speed in 30s would be more practical
goldboybronx | 10 hours ago
Yes it would be. I don’t get why people who don’t know what they’re talking about just randomly make claims like that. 4g of acceleration for 5 seconds is safe. You make the acceleration 10 seconds for comfort. It’s safe either way. This is a pet peeve of mine
Epic_Tea | 10 hours ago
You know what, take 30 seconds. Why are we trying to get up to speed so fast? We're not leaving orbit
goldboybronx | 9 hours ago
No. No more than 10. I’ve got places to be.
Epic_Tea | 9 hours ago
Lol.
i_dont_wanna_sign_up | 9 hours ago
How about 0.1s? You'll arrive at your final destination in life immediately.
goldboybronx | 8 hours ago
I'd suggest going even faster and accelerating in a shorter amount of time, but once we start moving at relativistic speeds it actually becomes counterproductive. Like Miller's Planet in Interstellar. We would move at such a high speed that the people at the meeting I'm going to will have aged years by the time my train gets there. And as such I will have been years late. Quite the dilemma.
i_dont_wanna_sign_up | 8 hours ago
I believe that's incorrect. The distance to your meeting is very short, even light itself takes less than 1s to circle the Earth. Unless you're meeting aliens.
goldboybronx | 8 hours ago
Ah shoot forgot about how short the actual trip would be haha. Though if we hit light speed it would apply. We would arrive at the end of the universe
i_dont_wanna_sign_up | 8 hours ago
... You're still confined to the distance you traveled. If you travel to another location on Earth at light speed, it still wouldn't take more than a second. The only difference with 0.9999c would be that you experience 0 travel time.
The only way you can "arrive at the end of the universe" is if you shoot off into space without crashing into anything for trillions of light years.
goldboybronx | 8 hours ago
Yeah I wasn't still talking about the meeting lol I was just saying if we constantly looped around the track at light speed forever. Should've made that clear, cheers!
ParentPostLacksWang | 5 hours ago
4g is fine, except when the axis of acceleration differs from the axis of support. If a plane pulls 4g, you get heavier but it’s fine as long as you know it’s coming. Not physiologically very challenging for healthy adults (ignoring children, infants, the infirm, pregnant, disabled and the elderly). When the axis of acceleration is orthogonal to the pull of gravity though, the effect would be like suddenly standing the train up on its end - then accelerating mostly straight up at 3g.
Anyone that put a bag down in the aisle, or dropped a laptop, or a baby, is going to see that fly backwards at incredible speed and impact what (or who) it collides with in a potentially devastating impact.
Quite aside from that, the physics issues of accelerating a train to that speed in 5 seconds make this a certain typo, it without doubt takes 5 minutes, not 5 seconds. That would be 300 seconds, an acceleration of about 0.75ms^-2 - which falls at the top end of average existing high speed train accelerations.
mothandravenstudio | 3 hours ago
It is not in the context of a train.
You‘d have women holding infants flying all over the place. Old people, people caught off balance. A train isn’t like a plane where you’re strapped in.
ProtoplanetaryNebula | 8 hours ago
Probably just to test the systems. Even if it were safe, people it wouldn't be comfortable at all and you don't really save a lot of time vs accelerating to top speed steadily over a couple of minutes.
iPoopAtChu | 4 hours ago
Y'know it doesn't HAVE to accelerate that fast right?
mothandravenstudio | 3 hours ago
Then what’s the point of the test and the article.
iPoopAtChu | 2 hours ago
In case you're serious, a 911 Turbo S can do 0-60 in 2 seconds, that doesn't mean every Turbo S is blasting off at every stoplight. This test shows the capability of the system, it allows passengers to reach their destination faster, even without "unsafe" acceleration. It also allows for longer trains that can seat more passengers as it's plenty powerful enough to accommodate for that.
m0j0m0j | 7 hours ago
Yeah, only sitting in an SUV by yourself in a traffic jam is safe for humans.
nsaisspying | 4 hours ago
You would have travelled about half a kilometre in those 5 seconds!
Is my math wrong? Seems illegal.
loozerr | 12 hours ago
Always funny to read the comments when it's a Chinese invention - that seems to make everything pointless.
Milksteak529 | 11 hours ago
It's a one ton maglev sled, not a train. Still awesome, but not what the title suggests
ddcrx | 12 hours ago
Thing: Meh
Thing, Japan: OMGGGGG
Thing, China: NOOOOOO
Training-Banana-6991 | 10 hours ago
Thing in japan is actually a train you can ride and not some test sled in a 200m track like an aircraft carrier catapult.
loozerr | 10 hours ago
> The world’s fastest commercial maglev train, the Fuxing rail in China, achieves a top speed of 350km an hour.
Training-Banana-6991 | 10 hours ago
Fuxing is a family of chinese high speed trains(steel wheeled not maglev) which does reach 350km/h on the fastest train services on some important hsr lines.the fastest train(maglev) in existance is L0 series maglev shinkansen which has a manned record speed of 603km/h and planned commercial speed of 505km/h. Though it is not commercially open yet as the chuo shinkansen line is under construction you can ride it through invites or lottery during test runs
RockyCreamNHotSauce | 4 hours ago
It’s a maximum power test on skeleton train cars. Real one would be much heavier and needs to get up to 787 speed with partial power. The test track is multi kilometers. They need to test the partial vacuum tube air resistance too.
HeartyBeast | 11 hours ago
Well extreme acceleration in a train does feel rather pointless, and isn’t inherently linked to high speed travel
loozerr | 10 hours ago
Extreme isn't necessary, but constant acceleration and deceleration cycles significantly slow down high speed rail. It's a one ton test vehicle anyway so same tech accelerating a real train is much more reasonable.
diablosinmusica | 10 hours ago
I haven't seen Japan using something smaller than a car and calling it a tran yet.
loozerr | 10 hours ago
Is my car not a car because it's around the same weight?
diablosinmusica | 4 hours ago
Is it a sled on launcher?
loozerr | 3 hours ago
Regular euro hatchback
diablosinmusica | 3 hours ago
So, it's an actual car used as a car. Not a sled on a launcher.
Soulegion | 13 hours ago
Could be useful for automated bulk transport over long distances.
fhwoompableCooper | 10 hours ago
What's the point of going 800km in 5 seconds vs spreading the load over 01 or even 15
Suspicious-Whippet | 12 hours ago
No it absolutely wouldn’t.
b20339 | 11 hours ago
Why do you say this?
Suspicious-Whippet | 11 hours ago
Too much energy imo
b20339 | 11 hours ago
We regularly transport commodity goods via internal combustion engines fed by diesel fuel. We can't come up with something more efficient than that?
jawshLA | 10 hours ago
Well if we figure out fusion, the price of energy could theoretically make this less expensive to run.
Swimming-Can-3434 | 4 hours ago
Magnets
Marwaimusoont | 10 hours ago
That is for last mile delivery. Most of it flows through ships and trains.
Suspicious-Whippet | 11 hours ago
I really hope we do.
Pardot42 | 12 hours ago
In many besides the US, yes. We vote against our own happiness. Consistently. You can bet on it
Pat0san | 12 hours ago
Imagine having gone to the toilet, and then ”bang…”.
Fuzzy974 | 9 hours ago
0 to 800km per hour in 5 seconds?
And who can use this? Maverick from Top Gun?
Kavinsky12 | 7 hours ago
Too close for missiles. Switching to guns.
costafilh0 | 12 hours ago
Finally! We are getting there.
Can't wait for trains to be faster then comercial planes!
rocket_beer | 8 hours ago
It is faster.
You walk downstairs, pick a stop on the route, swipe, hop in, hold the hook, and then walk out at your destination.
No plane ever had that end-to-end speed
vasta2 | 8 hours ago
Oh yeah? We still have 45mph Amtraks!
Beginning-Anything74 | 3 hours ago
“Bullet train” is doing absurd amounts of work here. This was a 1.1-tonne experimental model on a one-kilometre test track, not a passenger train. Reaching 800 km/h in 5.3 seconds means about 4.3g of acceleration; commuters would need fighter-pilot restraints, not tickets. A real train accelerating at 1 m/s² would require roughly 25 kilometres to reach that speed. The experiment is impressive, but calling its launch-system performance “ultra-high-speed transportation” is scientifically illiterate clickbait—like calling a railgun a metro because both use tracks. The Independent supplied the buzzwords; OP and the mods supplied the complete absence of critical thought or arithmetic.
___77___ | 11 hours ago
People stop bitching. It’s awesome.
Vanillas_Guy | 11 hours ago
Its good to see boundaries being pushed technologically.
If silicon valley had its way, public transportation would not exist. All cities would be built for cars, and all cars would either be robo taxis or ride shares.
empty_graph | 11 hours ago
Most of Silicon Valley actually just wants faster public transport in from SF
robothobbes | 8 hours ago
800km per hour looks Greek to me
SignAllStrength | 7 hours ago
Some people here are missing that acceleration and deceleration is quite important for these trains.
Where I live we have a train (Eurostar) that can drive over 300km/h, but because the distance between individual stops is relatively small(eg Antwerpen - Brussels is only about 40km) , it can not reach that speed over a significant part of the trajectory.
Having a train that reaches top speed in a short distance would allow more stops and more efficient and faster routes.
If the train would be able to harvest the energy while decelerating it would even become very economical(I assume the Maglev technically can but don’t see it mentioned).
Off course the acceleration power at 1 ton is much less than at say 100 ton, (which would take 500 with same system). And from this article we can’t assume how well it scales to higher power. (linear with weight)
But the stresses on components, aerodynamics, power transfer and communications to train etc are not depending on weight, so this test is already very relevant.
ballsosteele | 7 hours ago
You guys know just because it's capable of going 0-800km in five seconds doesn't mean it will, right?
PartyLikeIts536 | 5 hours ago
High acceleration is not a necessary for high speed.
StarfishPizza | 4 hours ago
I mean, it would be insane to go 1600 miles in ten seconds from one place to another. Alas, the reality is always very different.
Artistic-Tip2405 | 4 hours ago
Has China invented inertial dampers?
chromatic45 | 3 hours ago
I always love reading comments on Chinese breakthroughs. So much denial and hate. That's why they keep winning.
Materva | 3 hours ago
That's going to be around 4Gs, about the same as the Gravitron ride at the fair.
Rex_Mundi | 2 hours ago
Plaid.
DoubleDDay69 | 2 hours ago
If my math is correct, and it is, that is 4.53G of force to accomplish that in 5 seconds. Now I would be fine with that, in fact I’d find it fun. It would be pretty miserable if you don’t like roller coasters or anything with a sudden change in direction. Particularly for people with a bit more weight on them.
Darock- | 2 hours ago
How many G?
lordm43 | 12 hours ago
clickbait. the test was done on an uncrewed, smaller scale model. the acceleration mentioned here would be totally unsafe for passengers.
DanoPinyon | 12 hours ago
Yes, but the. Technology. Is the topic.
Milksteak529 | 11 hours ago
The technology is nothing new. This is just a scaled up railgun. Also you should proof read your comments before clicking the "Post" button.
DanoPinyon | 11 hours ago
The topic of the piece is the technology. The topic. Tech.
WRT proofreading, two spaces after a period is still OK.
Milksteak529 | 11 hours ago
You. Overuse. Periods. And nobody is impressed.
DanoPinyon | 4 hours ago
Here's a hankie. There, there.
Toadfinger | 13 hours ago
WTactualF for? To get there 20 minutes faster?
Lexidoge | 12 hours ago
Innovation? Maybe it can serve as the foundation for something greater, or maybe not. Would be nice for my taxes to be used for cool tech instead of going to random corporations and thr military.
It's why we end up having to try it, I'm sure the first person to even try coffee or edible mushrooms was thought crazy.
Toadfinger | 12 hours ago
Trying to get carbon emission levels down would serve the absolute greatest good. Then play with toys.
Lexidoge | 12 hours ago
I mean trains are definitely better in terms of greenhouse gase emissions than most forms of transport. But both would be great. There's a lot more useless shit the government should cut down first than bleeding edge train technology.
Toadfinger | 12 hours ago
That's not a valid excuse to be wasteful like this.
MrClickstoomuch | 12 hours ago
If you can get trains up to 800 km/hr, you can massively reduce the number of flights / reserve them for areas where putting down high speed tracks isn't feasible. And trains used MASSIVELY less emissions than jet fuel consuming planes per passenger. So it isn't wasteful to do this if it cuts down on a massive emissions generator like flights.
It would be like saying EVs are wasteful because they aren't public transportation like buses or trains. They aren't AS good as those options, but are substantially better than gas vehicles for emissions.
GandalfTheSmol1 | 11 hours ago
Tech like this is how we get carbon emissions down while maintaining the current or better quality of life. A train that can do plane speeds will spend far less fuel
roboreddit1000 | 11 hours ago
I read about this a while ago. It is not actually a train. It is a test bed with the ultimate goal of being the first stage of an orbital rocket.
The headline is, at best, misleading. The picture in the article is a lie.
ArmpitNoise | 9 hours ago
222m/s over 6 seconds is barely 4g
My skepticism is focused on the trolley staff.
Shaken, not stirred.
SensitivePotato44 | 8 hours ago
4g? I’ll take the bus thanks.
arealuser100notfake | 13 hours ago
No one needs to go that fast
devilishycleverchap | 13 hours ago
Fly anywhere recently?
Head-Gift2144 | 13 hours ago
Plenty of reasons to go that fast. Zero reason to accelerate that fast though.
DanoPinyon | 12 hours ago
Um, you're not a speed freak, are you.