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

Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 517 posts

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#371

Post by nkoren »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #261
nkoren wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's getting very close, if one is considering domestic rockets. The standard-bearers were the Delta IV and Atlas V, which price out at around $17,000/kg - $20,000/kg to LEO, respectively. The Falcon 9 comes in at about $2,800/kg to LEO. Comparisons with non-domestic rockets are complicated by state subsidies and differentials in labor costs. But the Falcon 9 is approaching the 10X mark even before reusability has be…

Where are you pulling those numbers from? On ULA's website [1] they say you can launch an Atlas V for less than half the $/kg you listed [1] I went to rocketbuilder.com and both LEO configurations I tried were around $8,000/kg (and I didn't count the 20% deduction for "ULA added value" since the numbers there are debatable)

ULA has abruptly gotten way more competitive in their pricing. A few years ago they were not. Their "Best deal" for the Atlas V was a 36-rocket "bulk buy" priced the lowest-tier Atlas V 401 at $164M/launch[1]. That does 9,797kg to LEO[2], or $16,740/kg.

The GAO cites $164M/launch as the price for the cheapest Delta V[3] (is there some kind of threshold at $165M?), which when the Falcon 9 was introduced could put 8,500kg to LEO[4], or $19,294/kg. (It has since been uprated and gotten slightly cheaper).

Must've screwed up my calculations earlier, because those aren't tallying. Anyhow, as you can see, SpaceX is already around 7x cheaper compared to where ULA was, and should cross the 10x threshold shortly. Nice to see ULA responding to competitive pressure, however!

1: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324172526/http://www.ulalau...

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

3: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-609

4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV#Delta_IV_Small

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#372

Post by bufordsharkley »

mseebach wrote: post #236
pstuart wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On land gifted to them by the government.

Given the key function railroads had in opening up the west, I think you'll struggle to argue that that was even close to a bad deal. Indeed, that, if anything, is exactly the kind of investments that a government should be making.

If in the mid-19th century these were gifted to the railroad companies as 99 year leases, the value to the companies wouldn't have been very different, but we wouldn't be in thrall to them today.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#373

Post by dnautics »

jychang wrote: post #339
dnautics wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nongovernment investments tend to be more sustainable, because they are driven by observed demand, instead of cronyism or politics. This was one of the few railways to survive the great railway crash, it's still operated today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Northern_Railway_(U.S.)

> This was one of the few railways to survive the great railway crash The government well made its money back before the great railway crash. Let's say the Internet suffers a crash in a few decades. Few would argue that any previous investment into the Internet was not worth it.

you're cherry picking an example that succeeded. Let's say DARPA's investment in ESP doesn't turn out in a few decades. Few would argue that any previous investment into ESP was not worth it. (disclaimer: I'm being paid on a stupid darpa grant now)

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#374

Post by Frondo »

dkersten wrote: post #360
Frondo wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a great idea and I can't wait to see more high speed rail built all across the country. We've already criss-crossed uncountable acres of historic, sentimental (what?? really??) land with roads, both local the state/federal highway system. HSR would be so much better use of land than roads, for moving a lot of people quickly and comfortably. Not at all redundant with Amtrak. Happily, the California project is fun…

On top of that, my experience of (southern) Californian roads is that they are muuuuuch wider and take up much more space than the coaster/amtrak train tracks take up, so roads have been much more damaging to historic sentimental land than rail is or would be.

What really irks me with that particular sentiment (the land is historic/already in use) is how the federal highway system absolutely decimated communities of color in a lot of major cities.

They'd put a highway right through where the black folk live, and who cares? Well, all the people in that neighborhood care, but they're poor minorities--they have no political power, no ability to push back.

If you want to start talking about land being taken from people, don't fucking start with farmers in rural California and HSR, start with the inner city neighborhoods the highway system destroyed.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#375

Post by jcranmer »

kbenson wrote: post #252
microcolonel wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would be a good idea to make sure the California "high speed" rail program is never funded. It is a terrible idea. As it stands, it would be as slow as conventional rail, redundant with AmTrak, and the most expensive rail line ever built. It would be absolutely devastating for the government's relationship with at least tens of thousands of land owners, hundreds of thousands of home owners, who would see d…

> I think it would be a good idea to make sure the California "high speed" rail program is never funded. Never funded? It's already under construction[1]. Although it's likely pre-pre-pre-construction, as they grade items and fix obstacles for the actual railway construction, which I doubt will happen within a decade, if ever. 1: https://www.buildhsr.com/interactive_map/

> Although it's likely pre-pre-pre-construction

They're building the bridges right now, that's not exactly pre-pre-pre-construction.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#376

Post by jcranmer »

pstuart wrote: post #205
daemin wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that because the freight companies are the ones that actually built, own, and operate the tracks? If Amtrak or another passenger company owned the tracks, their trains would get priority.

On land gifted to them by the government.

The land grants weren't for the land that the railroads ran on. It was for adjacent property that they could develop or sell. And not all the transcontinentals relied on land grants (e.g., Great Northern).

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#377

Post by BRAlNlAC »

kbenson wrote: post #273
nradov wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's barely faster than driving, once you account for the time spent moving between your origin/destination and the train station as well as transferring luggage.

And taking the light rail north of SF to the ferry and then the Embarcadero in SF takes longer than driving when my brother commutes, but he still chooses that method. Perhaps there are factors other than time that go into his calculation. People would take HSR even if it took the same time as driving. They would likely take it if it took an extra 20%, as the time has more utility to them when used for a train ride.…

The difference is that your brother is commuting for the day whereas with HSR half the tickets are for people to arrive in LA without a car.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#378

Post by BRAlNlAC »

doingmything wrote: post #362
kbenson wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And taking the light rail north of SF to the ferry and then the Embarcadero in SF takes longer than driving when my brother commutes, but he still chooses that method. Perhaps there are factors other than time that go into his calculation. People would take HSR even if it took the same time as driving. They would likely take it if it took an extra 20%, as the time has more utility to them when used for a train ride.…

Agreed. Many people underestimate the aversion of a large swath of the population to driving. Driving basically monopolizes your time and focus and exposes you to accidents. I don’t know if I know anyone who would rather drive if they could get to their destination in the same relative time, unless they’d need a car on the other end.

Who doesn't need a car in LA though? LA has terribad public transit, if you are planning on renting a car on the far end you can probably afford to fly too.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#379

Post by KGIII »

aswanson wrote: post #361
KGIII wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, we've all got comments from our past that we wish we'd not made. Our seemingly brilliant insights aren't so brilliant after all. Today's thread about Musk's "Hyperloop" is good fodder to bookmark and look back at in a decade. I have to wonder how many of the posters will admit they were wrong, should this reach fruition? I dug the link out for another person who replied. You may want to take a look? https://tec…

Thanks for that, belly laughing. One common thread of these "brilliant" dismissals, mine included, is that they undervalue how much people don't like going through technical hurdles with products and how much they will pay to avoid them and get on with what they want to do. Also, for ambitious goals like hyperloop, many assume technical challenges are insurmountable.

Yeah, there's at least one comment in there to fit most stereotypes. They range from disbelief to saying the product is no different than other products. There are price complaints to comments that don't seem to even understand - but the commenter was happy to add their opinion.

A few people actually understood and made comments, and some had seen a recent demo. Some speculated about patents and one was happy to point out that they had a whole notebook full of ideas. Some seemed to think the software could do things it couldn't actually do, and certainly not at that stage.

One person even complained that it wouldn't work for him because if his old hardware. Others complained that it didn't meet their needs. Some even seemed unhappy that it wasn't available to run on their obscure OS. Of course, they couldn't use a more popular OS and then virtualized their obscure OS.

Also, there are comments to complain about the site management, people insulting other people, and comments that hadn't a damned thing to do with the subject at hand.

For so few comments, it's like they managed to hit every stereotype. It's absolutely my favorite reference thread and it works for so many conversations. I actually made it a point to finally bookmark it on my tablet as I've been using it more than a laptop lately.

Re: Hyperloop One Becomes ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’

#380

Post by BRAlNlAC »

bufordsharkley wrote: post #372
mseebach wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the key function railroads had in opening up the west, I think you'll struggle to argue that that was even close to a bad deal. Indeed, that, if anything, is exactly the kind of investments that a government should be making.

If in the mid-19th century these were gifted to the railroad companies as 99 year leases, the value to the companies wouldn't have been very different, but we wouldn't be in thrall to them today.

and what if the railroads looked at the 99 year lease offer and said, "no thanks fam"? What if is such a pointless game to play.
Post reply on HN