Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Boring Company FAQ

boringcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 472 posts

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#381

Post by cname »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #32
HappyTypist wrote: post #4

This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.

This IS public transit. Public transit without the last mile (or in LA, the last 5 miles) problem. This freedom-supporting tech also thwarts the tyranny inherent in public transit (schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc.)

> ...schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc.

Reading this, the first thing that comes to mind is daily traffic in the city.

Rush hours are scheduled. You spend so much time waiting at lights, in traffic jams, etc. The roads are congested due to inherent capacity limits. And you're forced to interact with antisocial individuals speeding, texting, making dangerous lane changes, etc.

30 to 40 thousand people are killed every year in car crashes [in the US alone]. Millions are injured. I think I'd rather take my chances with the occasional "antisocial" person on public transit. Of course, given the ubiquity of cars and the massive (socialized) infrastructure to support them, they are useful sometimes.

There's also the fact that in many place you're practically forced to own a car (or at least are convinced that you absolutely need one (or two)). How is that not "tyrannical"?

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#382

Post by mabramo »

elif wrote: post #359
Gravityloss wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your assumptions are not valid. Subways usually go much more often than once per 10 minutes.

In the US?

In NYC, yes. During rush hour, the local subways come every 5 minutes at most. I think a safe estimate is about 15 trains every hour.

The express subways are spaced out a little more, closer to 8 or 10 minutes, depending on the line.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#383

Post by cat199 »

pjc50 wrote: post #370
josephg wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But then we should ask why don't we do that anyway? Sure. Why didn't we have electric cars before tesla? Why didn't Boeing or Lockheed Martin make reusable rockets? Alan Kay said something[1] recently that has been bouncing around my head for the past few days. He said that many people think darwinian processes (like the economy) optimize. "One my degrees is in molecular biology, and I can tell you, any biologist w…

> It seems strange to think that companies would leave money on the table, but in older industries I think this is exactly what happens. This is probably true, but it's also deeply heretical for believers in market efficiency.

or evolution...

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#384

Post by [deleted] »

so33 wrote: post #191
maxander wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Boring Company isn't just looking to build tunnels either- there's going to be a bunch of interesting infrastructure to get cars onto those electric sleds and operating them, and that'll need maintenance and access and etc too. For what its worth, it hints that those sleds will also become public transit platforms as well - "if one adds a vacuum shell, it is now a Hyperloop pod" - but Musk will want to call it so…

>For what its worth, it hints that those sleds will also become public transit platforms as well So this is something I've been trying to address all thread, so excuse me picking your comment. You can only create a public transit platform by having _dedicated_ infrastructure. We know this because cities like London and Paris (and not-so-big Vancouver) all have mostly-to-fully automated trains with 90-second headways…

[deleted]

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#385

Post by wbl »

ricardobeat wrote: post #237
so33 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For what its worth, it hints that those sleds will also become public transit platforms as well So this is something I've been trying to address all thread, so excuse me picking your comment. You can only create a public transit platform by having _dedicated_ infrastructure. We know this because cities like London and Paris (and not-so-big Vancouver) all have mostly-to-fully automated trains with 90-second headways…

You are making too many assumptions about the system. For example, their goal seems to be multiple stacked tunnels vs a single one for metro, plus trains don't go 125mph.

BART hits 80 and is slow. 150 mph is very attainable.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#386

Post by [deleted] »

ricardobeat wrote: post #237
so33 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For what its worth, it hints that those sleds will also become public transit platforms as well So this is something I've been trying to address all thread, so excuse me picking your comment. You can only create a public transit platform by having _dedicated_ infrastructure. We know this because cities like London and Paris (and not-so-big Vancouver) all have mostly-to-fully automated trains with 90-second headways…

You are making too many assumptions about the system. For example, their goal seems to be multiple stacked tunnels vs a single one for metro, plus trains don't go 125mph.

[deleted]

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#387

Post by njarboe »

ktta wrote: post #211
njarboe wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car in the video looks like Model S size. About 16 feet long. Add 2 feet on each end for an even 20 feet for the sled. At 125mph one gets 660,000 feet per hour. So if you can pack the cars next to each other, the maximum is 33,000 cars per hour. So 33,000 people per hour with each person getting a space that would rent in SF for $1000/month. Pack that sled space with people at the same density as a train at rush…

It is very easy to come up with theoretical numbers and look nice. We already know know the subway infrastructure works. Forget what exists currently, and try to calculate the theoretical throughput of the subway system. I bet you'll come up with much more that what it is currently. On first look at your calculations the flaws I find are these: 1. 125mph is a very, very optimistic number in my opinion. In reality I t…

There is a lot details to work out of course but Musk surely has thought about this more than you or me, with a brain that is optimized for this sort of thing. He has the clout to talk to the best people in the field, people to do computer simulations, and a record of success in very hard businesses. He is serious about this. Look at the open jobs list. More people trying and doing and less people just criticizing the better. My biggest concern would be Musk spreading too much of his focus away from SpaceX and having that venture flounder.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#388

Post by rsync »

hwillis wrote: post #218
flashman wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Airflow is necessary to keep passengers safe. This has just made me wonder what happens in emergencies or system failures. Are the tunnels wide enough to open your door or climb out a window? How far apart and numerous are emergency exit hatches? Is there off-grid emergency lighting (e.g. battery-backed)? There would be few things more upsetting than your sled coming to a halt, inside a dark tunnel, and being unabl…

Air isn't really a problem. A person breathes about .5 cubic meters of air per hour, so 100 people trapped for 6 hours will go through 300 cubic meters of air. The diameter of the tunnel being 14', that air supply would take up 68' of tunnel lengthwise. And that's one breath, the air can be breathed many times before the co2 level becomes too high. The air inside the volume of a coffin can last you a few hours. Unles…

"The air inside the volume of a coffin can last you a few hours. Unless you are literally shoulder to shoulder with no other air, your oxygen will last as long as you need."

... unless there is a fire:

"Most drivers rolled up their windows and waited for rescue. The ventilation system in the tunnel drove toxic smoke back down the tunnel faster than anyone could run to safety. These fumes quickly filled the tunnel and caused vehicle engines to stall because of lack of oxygen. This included fire engines which, once affected, had to be abandoned by the firefighters. Many drivers near the blaze who attempted to leave their cars and seek refuge points were quickly overcome."[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mont_Blanc_Tunnel#1999_fire

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#389

Post by Animats »

josephg wrote: post #148
erentz wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is all very odd and everyone is lapping it up. He claims to want to reduce tunneling costs by a factor of 10, but starts by quoting a very high benchmark of $1 billion per mile which is quite easy to beat. Then he reduces diameters to something much smaller than all the expensive mega projects, into the range of something where technology is well established and costs are already 1/10th of his quoted $1 bil…

> But then we should ask why don't we do that anyway? Sure. Why didn't we have electric cars before tesla? Why didn't Boeing or Lockheed Martin make reusable rockets? Alan Kay said something[1] recently that has been bouncing around my head for the past few days. He said that many people think darwinian processes (like the economy) optimize. "One my degrees is in molecular biology, and I can tell you, any biologist w…

Why didn't Boeing or Lockheed Martin make reusable rockets?

Von Braun originally proposed reusable boosters, although he had in mind a parachute system with a water splashdown. A recovery system for the Saturn V was considered, but it would have added time to the schedule, and the "man/moon/decade" goal would have been at risk.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#390

Post by URSpider94 »

jp_sc wrote: post #67
URSpider94 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn't. If it did, buildings in NYC would be falling down left and right. Heck, I hear they even put them under entire bodies of water! Yes, tunnels can flood, if they are below the water table. Good pumps can fix that problem. Again, the Chunnel being Exhibit A - it hasn't flooded, yet.

Isn't most of Manhattan ground solid rock? There are many other places where the ground it's just compressed dirt

Yes, but in those cases the tunnel structure itself ends up taking up load previously carried by the material that's removed. That is why the walls of the tunnel are shored up with reinforced concrete rings, which provide mechanical support AND keep out water. That's why we have tunnels that are bored only a few tens of feet in the mud under deep bodies of water, and yet don't collapse or flood.
Post reply on HN