Want this question answered?
Magnetic Rails
i dont know. am searching for the same ans.
Two opposing magnets (North in the track and South in the train or vice versa), and a heck of a lot of electricity! * Added - To expand on the over simplification above - powerful electro-magnets are placed in the maglev guideway and in the maglev vehicles. A sophisticated computer control system pulses the magnets to provide both upward lift, forward propulsion, and braking. This lets the maglev move and stop in a straight line - for an actual train, there are many more subsystems and components for the train to actually work.
You can say yes, because it run on electricity and it has no friction other than air resistance, but it isn't so simple. There is constant need for energy to keep train levitating so energy consumption is not lower than high speed train and if speed is low conventional high speed train may win in energy consumption. But if you compare maglev to aircraft, maglev would definitly would win. Maglev tracks are extremly expensive, there is only one Maglev build for regular passengers, between airport and city center in Shanghai. There is doubt if it could be economical to operate and even maglevs aren´t much faster than conventional high speed trains. France TGV record is 571 km/h, but japanese Maglev record is only 581 km/h and this isn't big difference.
Its not that they are not popular its because we would need to build massive new train running areas and we just don't have that.
Maglev (magnetic levitation) trains run by way of a magnetic field generated by magnets embedded in the track. As such, they have little or no need for wheels.
They are very costy and need high quality to run and opperate
Magnetic Rails
Cost, quite simply. As opposed to traditional trains where power comes from the pushcar of the train, a Maglev train doesnt propel itself, the track does. This means that expensive electromagnets with several electrical substations dotted along its path need to be constructed throughout the entire track's length. The initial cost of building these lines is too high for economically disadvantaged countries. The disadvantages of using the Maglev is that the Maglev tracks cost more than railroad tracks do. Whole new sets of tracks would need to be built for the Maglev to run. Many transportation vehicles in Europe run on existing track, like the TGV trains in France. Although Maglevs are pretty quiet, there is still noise caused by air disturbance. Also another disadvantage is that if a high speed line between two cities it built, then high speed trains can serve both cities but more importantly they can serve other nearby cities by running on normal railways that branch off the high speed line. The high speed trains could go for a fast run on the high speed line, then come off it for the rest of the journey. Maglev trains wouldn't be able to do that, they would be limited to where maglev lines run. It would be very difficult to make construction of maglev lines commercially viable unless there were two very large destinations being connected. Of the 5000km that TGV trains serve in France, only about 1200km is high speed line, meaning 75% of TGV services run on existing track. The fact that a maglev train will not be able to continue beyond its track may harm its usefulness.
Cost, quite simply. As opposed to traditional trains where power comes from the pushcar of the train, a Maglev train doesnt propel itself, the track does. This means that expensive electromagnets with several electrical substations dotted along its path need to be constructed throughout the entire track's length. The initial cost of building these lines is too high for economically disadvantaged countries. The disadvantages of using the Maglev is that the Maglev tracks cost more than railroad tracks do. Whole new sets of tracks would need to be built for the Maglev to run. Many transportation vehicles in Europe run on existing track, like the TGV trains in France. Although Maglevs are pretty quiet, there is still noise caused by air disturbance. Also another disadvantage is that if a high speed line between two cities it built, then high speed trains can serve both cities but more importantly they can serve other nearby cities by running on normal railways that branch off the high speed line. The high speed trains could go for a fast run on the high speed line, then come off it for the rest of the journey. Maglev trains wouldn't be able to do that, they would be limited to where maglev lines run. It would be very difficult to make construction of maglev lines commercially viable unless there were two very large destinations being connected. Of the 5000km that TGV trains serve in France, only about 1200km is high speed line, meaning 75% of TGV services run on existing track. The fact that a maglev train will not be able to continue beyond its track may harm its usefulness.
There is no fixed number: it depends on the amount of goods that need to be transported as well as the number of cars required at the destination.
If you are only trying to build the right-of-way and not buy real estate, or construct buildings or stations, or pay for control, communications, and power systems or the maglev train, it is not expensive. Today, the typical right-of-way cost for a low end system (for 9.5 miles it is expected to be low end), this would be under $20 million in the US. To find the cost for the train, you have to decide how big it is and the systems to use, and the testing to be performed to allow you to operate it. And is it an existing approved train system, or is engineering required? And you will need spare equipment to operate during regulatory required maintenance. The train costs could run from $10 million to $100 million - there are too many unknowns. The control systems can vary widely as well, but add in $10 million. This fits in the US "typical cost" today of $10 million per mile for maglev (and that is the low end), as you should be able to get everything done for about $100 million. The good news is operating costs are very low and wear is low, so a return-on-investment is very fast compared to conventional railroad investment.