Hyperloop

Musk is a guy with a track record of pulling off crazy stuff. Not only is he behind tesla but he is also behind SpaceX which is the company that sent the first private spacecraft to the space station.

His preamble neatly sums up why I voted against our stupid high speed rail project, as planned it simply can't compete with air travel.

If ticket price of the hyperloop is low enough then it might have a chance... Using small light cars and mounting the entire system on pylons is a clever bit of engineering. It reduces the cost of securing right of way, Since the whole thing can be mounted on shock absorbers it also reduces earthquake risk, and it allows for easier implementation of slip joints to deal with thermal expansion.

The idea looks cool.

So does this "Rocket Train faster than the speed of sound" article I'm looking at in one of my 1950's era Mechanix Illustrated magazines.

Shawn

nocones wrote: I think the results of a depressurization are being overblown. the hype for this has swollen well out of proportion and it really had no chance to survive under such pressure. People are shaking at the opportunity to point out the risk of earthquake damage.

It would either be really quick or really really long depending on what happens.

Will wrote:

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: I like that someone is doing some big thinking. When I was a kid the world was full of space races and threats of nuclear oblivion from previous big thinking.

I do agree with this point completely. My initial reaction to pretty much all new technology is to e36 m3 all over it and theorize as to why it won't work. Sometimes I'm even right. But there does need to be someone out there thinking outlandish thoughts in an attempt to make the world a better place. As the old Apple commercial said, the ones who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who usually do. So yeah, I still think this is a pipe dream (no pun intended). But at least someone is still dreaming, and I hope people like me don't fling so much poo that it stops them from coming up with crazy dreams in the first place.

Big thinking is good.

But I'm trying to comprehend how making a tube that has to be, well, pretty darn stable, will be less expensive than just a platform train. The tube either has to be on the same platform or underground (which is WAAAAAYYYYY more expensive).

The cars will have to be similar sized to smaller commuter airliners- as the space between the cars will nned to be just like planes- at that top speed, you need to have space to speed up and slow down and not drive the customers nuts. Or at least in shorter areas, the top speed isn't realistic.

There are a lot of more practical questions than the need of a pressurized tube.

I didn't read the article so maybe it has already been answered but what might a ticket to ride that thing cost? Just like the the super sonic jet the Concorde, it went out of business because most people couldn't/wouldn't pay 3-4 times the cost of a regular ticket to save half the flight time. Overall sounds to interesting though.

Don't we already have these in the future?

If your interested the plan is here:

http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf

There is some optimistic math on this. Using their piping diameters and length for the tube just based on steel costs at $.33/lb you get ~$600 million.. Per Tube in material only. The PDF claims 650Million total for both tubes including all flanges, escape hatches, fitings, logistics and installation costs. I'm thinking the tube will easily run 2Billion alone after you count both 380 mile tubes all the extra steel for mounting and costs construction/installation costs by the time you count everyone along the way getting a little profit over costs for every step.

But - he's got a lot of people thinking, which is a good thing in itself. Even if this doesn't get built as described, there may be spinoff versions for freight, or even if it just encourages real high-speed rail, it's worth the proposal. I'd be happy with a 200 mph bullet train that ran coast to coast on schedule, I'd take it for sure to avoid the hassle of airports.

Yeah seriously. If there was an HSR between Houston and Dallas, we'd be riding that thing every weekend.

Does the tube cross the San Andreas Fault? What happens when it heats up and cools down? Will there be places to take up the difference? Will the device still work if you have these in place?

Jim Pettengill wrote: But - he's got a lot of people thinking, which is a good thing in itself. Even if this doesn't get built as described, there may be spinoff versions for freight, or even if it just encourages real high-speed rail, it's worth the proposal. I'd be happy with a 200 mph bullet train that ran coast to coast on schedule, I'd take it for sure to avoid the hassle of airports.

Thing is, once this becomes a viable form of transportation, it would not take much to make high speed rail- especially this speed- just as much hassle as air travel.

We just saw what happens with high speed rail when it's poorly 'driven' in Spain. Let alone other kind of issues.

Not sure why that is missed all the time.

Even if it's just as much hassle as air travel, it'd be a fraction of the cost. He's projecting ballpark of $20/person, so if he's off by 300%, I'd still take that over a plane ticket any day.

In the paper, he addressed compensation for geologic activity (including earthquakes) and thermal expansion.

Actually, the biggest thing we need in rail travel is regulations that allow on-time passenger service. when my wife and I were in Scotland a couple of years ago, we traveled by train, and the schedule was dead on. If the train was scheduled to leave at 10:42, you had better be on board because the rain will leave (and arrive) on time. The way I understand it, the biggest problem we have here in the States is that current regulations regarding freight travel don't prioritize passenger service, so delays pile up. It's not that Amtrack are so screwed up, but that they can't control schedule delays (although I've heard that there is plenty to improve with Amtrack itself).

I have a lot of questions, but I didn't read the whole thing yet. Besides the price the math seems a bit optimistic in how many people he can move in a given time but it is still a great idea, and looks like it could be considerably cheaper to run than HSR. It's too bad that he seems to be the only well known big thinker. We can't rely on one guy to be our space program and handle our intercity commuting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beach_Pneumatic_Transit

unevolved wrote: From what I read, there's airlocks at undetermined intervals where cars can pull off of the main line to load/unload. Although the capsules are going 700mph, there's something like 23 miles between each car at peak usage, so it should be doable.

Wow. That means they're almost 2 minutes apart.

I wish we just had a train from Las Vegas to LA with stops at inland empire area.

The one road we get out there is ridiculously retarded, it makes no sense what so ever. How is there not a train?