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

L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#51

Post by imgabe »

blackrock wrote: post #30

This move was very puzzling to me, in light of Trump's trade tactics. Especially, of his accusations that China "steals" American technology. So, given this, why would any new American company, choose to enter into a 51/49 partnership with China? Where China has the majority share, and where the American company must share with their Chinese partner, all the system processes, techniques, and new technology of their p…

It's not like the US is investing in rail technology. If we're not going to build it, China will.

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#52

Post by curtis »

meddlepal wrote: post #24
asdfman123 wrote: post #20

Wait, the US finally comes up with some new cool mass-transit technology and we're not even building it here? Shame.

We can't build any public infrastructure in the US anymore. Too complicated between environmental regs, NIMBYism, and corruption.

> We can't build any public infrastructure in the US anymore.

I know it feels that way, but it's not strictly true. Here in Seattle in the last decade we've built a new floating bridge, multiple miles of underground light rail track, and nearly two miles of deep bore road tunnel.

I think there is a real problem that our new infrastructure is way too expensive and takes way too long to build, but we've demonstrated that we can definitely build new stuff.

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#53

Post by bilbo0s »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #35
kentm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like the eventual plan is to link the airport to a tourist spot and the city is just the first stop on the way through. Might also be cheaper/easier to do in a less populated area.

Are they tunneling? That area is really rocky and mountainous, unless it is going on a viaduct I don’t see how this will work out.

"... I don’t see how this will work out ...."

That's how most Chinese infrastructure projects start. I saw Ningbo in 1992. I look at it today and, yeah, can you say different?

I thought Three Gorges would be impossible, even for the Chinese. A few key innovations later and there it is. (Subtle innovations which, in my defense, a reasonable engineer would never have seen coming.)

If there's one thing they're good at over there, it's building infrastructure. I'll give them that.

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#55

Post by stale2002 »

blackrock wrote: post #30

This move was very puzzling to me, in light of Trump's trade tactics. Especially, of his accusations that China "steals" American technology. So, given this, why would any new American company, choose to enter into a 51/49 partnership with China? Where China has the majority share, and where the American company must share with their Chinese partner, all the system processes, techniques, and new technology of their p…

Why would the american company care about "adding fuel to the fire" or "resentment"?

It is their company. They presumably care about making money. And if someone offers them lots of money, why wouldn't they accept it?

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#56

Post by seanmcdirmid »

bilbo0s wrote: post #53
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they tunneling? That area is really rocky and mountainous, unless it is going on a viaduct I don’t see how this will work out.

"... I don’t see how this will work out ...." That's how most Chinese infrastructure projects start. I saw Ningbo in 1992. I look at it today and, yeah, can you say different? I thought Three Gorges would be impossible, even for the Chinese. A few key innovations later and there it is. (Subtle innovations which, in my defense, a reasonable engineer would never have seen coming.) If there's one thing they're good at o…

The last time I was in ningbo was 2004. Is it really that different today?

Building a dam isn’t that hard? Definitely not impossible if you are willing to displace a few million citizens. But tunneling under granite for 30+ km? Yes, possible, but it won’t be cheap. I don’t think the Chinese would do that, it will definitely be a vacuum enclosed viaduct to match what they did with HSR.

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#57

Post by stale2002 »

ebikelaw wrote: post #15
golem14 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to back up your statement with sources or data ? I see these claims every now and then and never have seen a decent justification. Would be great to have that to have a more informed debate ...

The 2013 Hyperloop paper claims a capacity of 840 pax/hour under some pretty optimistic assumptions. I'm willing to grant them all these assumptions because this number is tiny and pathetic. A highway has a nominal capacity of 1800 vehicles per hour at a 2-second following distance, which works out to a capacity of at least 1800 people/hour and at most, in a dedicated bus lane, something more like 20000 per hour. Rai…

Using highway numbers is the wrong comparison.

Hyperloop does not compete with highways.

To get a better comparison, how many people fly from SF to LA every hour? That's the use case.

1 flight per hour sounds about right as a ball park estimate. A hyper loop beats that in capacity, and would likely be FASTER (due to not having to go through airport security).

Re: L.A. Company Wins China Hyperloop Deal

#59

Post by bobthepanda »

asdfman123 wrote: post #20

Wait, the US finally comes up with some new cool mass-transit technology and we're not even building it here? Shame.

"Cool" and "new" usually ends up meaning "expensive" and "proprietary" later on, especially if it's not standards conforming and tries to reinvent the wheel.

See: BART

Post reply on HN