French Aerotrain

The Aerotrain was the brainchild of Bertin, a French engineer who also did some aviation-related work (search for the keywords "Bertin" and "Aladin" on this very forum).
Several dozen miles of the concrete structure meant for the Aerotrain's tracks still exist to this day. I used to look at it with dreamy eyes as a kid, traveling along the N20 national road down on the way to holidays, imagining the train running fast over it.
 
Aerotrain was extremely cool and futuristic, but both track and gas turbines were expensives, and it ended killed by the TGV - unfortunately.

And poor Jean Bertin nearly got a contract with the French government, only to lose it after a month, only to die from brain cancer 18 month later. The story end is a total heart break... :(
 
Not only a bit of info on the Aérotrain program (in particular the penultimate Aerotrain 180 HV) including some footage, but also mentions some of the competing & spinoff designs overseas, especially the RTV 31 [sometimes written down as RTV-31] prototype for the Tracked Hovercraft program, and the Rohr Urban Tracked Air-Cushion Vehicle (UTACV).
 
Last edited:
Aerotrain, 1970s


www.anothermag.com

The Retronaut's Top 10 Posts

“The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.” There are few lines so frequently quoted as L.P. Hartley’s opening to The Go-Between, and it is a sentiment very much borne out by the eclectic content of the Retronaut...
www.anothermag.com www.anothermag.com
 
Ironically, a major reason for the scrapping of the Aerotrain program was a flawed cost estimate that claimed that the TGV (at the time called the TurboTrain à Grande Vitesse) would cost less to build and operate. In reality it turned out to be far more expensive than the Aerotrain would have been.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Interestingly, he seems to consider the French Aerotrain and other related hover train concepts as a totally separate topic.
Click to expand...

Whereas the US Aerotrain was a conventional, but lightweight and streamlined trainset.
 
Grey Havoc said:
sites.google.com

rohraerotrain

Rohr Industries, Inc.'s Aerotrain prototype built in Chula Vista, California (ca. 1973). John Driscoll was a mechanical engineer for the project. NOTE: The raised track in the background was used to demonstrate Rohr's ROMAG vehicles to businesses. It was showcased at Transpo '72. This is the story
sites.google.com sites.google.com
Click to expand...
 
Grey Havoc said:
Ironically, a major reason for the scrapping of the Aerotrain program was a flawed cost estimate that claimed that the TGV (at the time called the TurboTrain à Grande Vitesse) would cost less to build and operate. In reality it turned out to be far more expensive than the Aerotrain would have been.
Click to expand...
I'd be surprised if that were true. The Aerotrain would have required all-new track, instead of being able to use existing track near existing stations. The Aerotrain would have used jet engines, which are less efficient than electric propulsion, making for higher running costs.
 
The initial TGV development and construction costs alone were truly eye watering (and operating costs were/are pretty dire), even by the debased standards of today. And that is even not taking into account various other costs that have been incurred over the years and decades, excluding things like the next generation of TGV ‘M’ trains. The cost of the TGV program in its first two decades or so has been claimed by some to be higher than the amount of money that France spent on its entire nuclear weapons program during the Cold War. Almost certainly an exaggeration, but an understandable one.

The TGV was and is actually a great achievement, but the Aérotrain likely would have outshone it in service in most scenarios, at a much lower cost in money, time, and other resources.
 
i have doubt if Aerotrain would have be cheaper compare to TGV
Aerotrain change regular in concept, the most know is 180 250 with huge fan in back

640px-Aérotrain_i80_250.jpg

The last proposal had to use linear motors in tracks similar to German Transrapid
This would have made new Tracks very expensive build in 1970s compare to the cheaper 180 track.
And Aerotrain 180 250 and TurboTrain à Grande Vitesse had one big issue that in 1973 became their dead.
both used thirsty gas turbine resulting in high operation cost and after 1973 it became out of question to use them.

TurboTrain à Grande Vitesse became electric power TGV, while Aerotrain program died with Jean Bertin in 1975.
Some people blame the President Giscard d'Estaing who formally annulled the contract for the Aérotrain Cergy-La Défense line.
but that is 24 km line today part of RER A line of Regional Express Network
Original was proposed Paris - Orléans with 120 km would make more sense,
But would be economic ?
biggest issue with Aerotrain 180 250 is limited seating and small size with 80 seats
compare to TGV train with two power cars and eight carriages, with 345 seats.

Here the Ticket sales vs used Trains on track is important factor.
The TVG is here superior to Aerotrain...
On long-distance with speed of 430 km/h could Aerotrain be better as TVG with 279 km/h
but now Aerotrain face Airliners as competitions...
 
Last edited:
The TGV runs on completely separated tracks as well, so the tracks of the Aerotrain would have been much cheaper because of the low weight of the vehicle and relative cheap building materials (mainly concrete). The first prototypes of the TGV ran on Gas turbines, just like the aero trains. I guess what killed the Aero train was Lobbyism on one hand and the oil crises on the other. The TGV switched to electric propulsion and France invested heavily in nuclear power, both worked against the Aerotrain. Also the short train length of the Aerotrain compared to the TGV was surly a drawback.

I’m not sure, which system makes more noise, the Aerotrain or the TGV, would be interesting to know.
 
Nicknick said:
The TGV runs on completely separated tracks as well
Click to expand...
That is only true when TGV goes at very high speed.
When it enters big cities to reach the central station, in areas where high speed is anyway not allowed, it runs on the same _existing_ rails as every other train.
And thus avoids the huge cost of building a new dedicated infrastructure when real estate is very expensive.
 
this is indeed true for the big cities, thestops at the smaller cities are mainly outside of the city centers. in the big cities the lightweight structure of the aerotrein could have been built above the conventional rail system to enter the big cities. The not so fast high speed trains in Germany are loosing a lot of time to enter and get out of the city centers. Japan choosed a different gauge for the high speed rails and seperated them completely from the rest of the rail system, that why they are extremly reliabel and efficient. It is not really an advantage to use the existing infrastructure.

The final nail in the coffin was the the high oil consumption of the gas turbines and the low capacity. France wanted to become more independend from energy imports and invested heaviely in nuclear power, a truely wise decission as we see today....
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom