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

Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 322 posts

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#111

Post by liability »

fragmede wrote: post #68
shajznnckfke wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so how is this cheaper than high-speed rail in a tunnel? It seems to me that hyperloop is high speed rail with the addition of a vacuum, which gets you higher speed. The additional requirement of a giant vacuum tube should make the system cost more, not less. Personally, I’m rooting for Elon Musk to figure out how to make tunnels cheaply with the Boring Company, so we can take that tech and use it to build a bunc…

Two of the largest sources of air pollution in the world are cars and airplanes, and Elon Musk has already been working on attacking the issue of car pollution. Imo extrapolating out from the combination of SpaceX and Starlink, subways are an obvious project for the Boring Company, especially once you have higher-speed boring machines. (Current boring machines move at about 10 meters/day.)

I don't get it. Subways run off electrical power since the late 19th century. If your grid power is carbon neutral, so are those subway trains.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#112

Post by jryle70 »

jccooper wrote: post #14
auganov wrote: post #7

Read it as Pipes of Fantasy. Years ago I remember reading about miles long test tracks being built. I haven't been following developments surrounding this at all, but as far as I can tell there are still no serious test tracks, why? The ones that are out there are supposedly too short to get to full speed (or anywhere close to it!). Given the hype surrounding it I have a hard time believing money is the limiting fact…

Elon seems to have moved on to non-vaccuum underground tunnels via The Boring Company, which is actually doing real projects. Though apparently there are still Hyperloop competitions planned. The 2020 one was supposed to be "in a 10km vacuum tunnel with a curve", though that may be stalled by, well, obvious current events. https://tunnelinsider.com/the-2020-hyperloop-competition-wil... No one else seems to have quite…

> Elon seems to have moved on to non-vaccuum underground tunnels via The Boring Company, which is actually doing real projects.

The Boring Company has never planned to build Hyperloop. They are about lowering cost and time of digging tunnels. Musk proposed Hyperloop but he said he'd leave implementation to others, so he hasn't moved on to anything.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#113

Post by sudosysgen »

chroma wrote: post #21
smikhanov wrote: post #6

3.5 years on my prediction holds well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13811365

With any new technology, the likelihood of failure is high but the expected value is positive. As Nat Friedman (CEO of GitHub) said: "Pessimists sound smart. Optimists make money."

The likelihood of failure is 100% when the technology is as ridiculous as the hyperloop. It's just yet more gadgetbahn, except it's transparently worse.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#114

Post by sudosysgen »

disk0 wrote: post #81
AlexandrB wrote: post #9

This is evergreen when talking about Hyperloop: http://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/ The problems with building this have nothing to do with technology but with right-of-way, investment, and politics. If those factors were solved, we'd already have high-speed rail in places where Hyperloop has been proposed. The fact that we don't says that Hyperloop is unlikely to be feasible as well.

first time I heard that term was in donoteat01's video on the loop[0], haven't got around to reading that post till now though (thanks for the reminder) [0] Elon Musk's "Loop" - It's bad, folks https://youtu.be/4dn6ZVpJLxs

donoteat01 is legitimately one of the greatest techno-political YouTubers.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#115

Post by sudosysgen »

Alupis wrote: post #82
ricardobeat wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should take a second look at that. Average wages in China are $12k/year, only a third of the US, but higher in the industrial areas, and in terms of purchasing power it has surpassed every other country long ago since everything is so cheap at scale. They have half a billion people in the middle class.

When you are directly comparing how much something cost to build, such as a mile of track, in USD, Purchase Power doesn't matter, does it? This is what the Parent post was asserting. China builds a mile of track at half the price because they literally pay their people half the price (or less). It doesn't matter that their local Purchase Power might be greater. Taking it a step further, the Parent was comparing a mil…

Well, if at labour prices at half of the US average China can build high speed trains at a fifth of the price that we can build tunnels, there is more to it than that.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#116

Post by jryle70 »

kevingadd wrote: post #31
mav3rick wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won at electric, won at space, won at paypal. Salty comment ? Sounds like a HN comment

Are you asserting the space and electric ventures were not funded by taxpayers?

They weren't, if you meant taxpayers subsidized them. Have you seen the hops Tesla has to jump in order to sell cars to consumers, like in Texas or Michigan?

NASA is indeed SpaceX's most important customer, but taxpayers in fact save lot of money because SpaceX's offerings are much more competitive than those of other providers.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#117

Post by dragonwriter »

shajznnckfke wrote: post #24
ponker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, there’s a fourth factor not listed here, which is government vs. private. A government project will, for political reasons, need to support universal access, and a public transit system will have a hard time telling a person “you smell too bad to get on the bus.” A private company won’t have any such problems and can build only for the rich and middle class. The problem that Hyperloop solves is creating 1…

Why is hyperloop 1/20th the cost? It seems like the expensive parts of high-speed rail (acquiring the land and moving earth to make a long straight path) would also apply.

> Why is hyperloop 1/20th the cost? It

In the case of Musk's original proposal posed against HSR, largely because it had far fewer stations and because it had termini nowhere near the notional urban endpoint destinations, because getting close to them required high-priced right of way.

It basically was a way to get from the distant (in transit time from SF) fringes of the Bay Area to the, IIRC, even more distant (in transit time from LA) fringes of the LA Basin.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#118

Post by privong »

owenversteeg wrote: post #47
AlexandrB wrote: post #9

This is evergreen when talking about Hyperloop: http://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/ The problems with building this have nothing to do with technology but with right-of-way, investment, and politics. If those factors were solved, we'd already have high-speed rail in places where Hyperloop has been proposed. The fact that we don't says that Hyperloop is unlikely to be feasible as well.

That "Gadgetbahn" article is great, but I do have one criticism. From the article: "If the idea is viable and the people behind it are competent, it should have attracted private investment, as there should be a potential to make profit selling the technology. After all, the proposal has been around for 23 years." High speed rail on a large scale is really something that has to come from the government. While there a…

> the TGV is also profitable

Correct me if I’m wrong, but my impression is that this is only true if one excludes the capital costs associated with the railroad (tracks, right of way, and I think also rolling stock). If you factor in the infrastructure construction costs (and reasonable lifetimes for replacing rolling stock), a high speed trail line will never be profitable without significantly higher fare prices than are presently charged.

But that goes to further support your point that high speed rail can only be accomplished with government input.

To be fair, I think that the same argument can be made for the costs of interstate highway systems and passenger air travel.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#119

Post by Ajedi32 »

sudosysgen wrote: post #106
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a number of metrics where it's clearly better. Scheduling and routing. Not waiting 10-30 minutes for the next train depending on time of day. Not stopping anywhere but your destination. No connections or changeovers. Personal space. Privacy, safety. Regardless of how you personally feel about this factor, it matters enough to some people to significantly impact usage. Those factors may or may not be enough…

Our subway system in Montreal runs at a frequency of anywhere from 2 minutes to 7 minutes. There are even faster ones.

That's still 2 to 7 minutes longer than a Loop tunnel. And that also only addresses half of the GP's comment (scheduling).

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#120

Post by yellow_postit »

sudosysgen wrote: post #109
Miraste wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article[0] talks about how locals were shooting at it, although it doesn't mention the berms (talking to the sheriff must not have worked out). I think a hyperloop could avoid this problem by not locating in Louisiana. [0] https://www.225batonrouge.com/article/good-vibrations

What do you do when a terrorist shoots a hyperloop tube causing a pressure wave that will kill everyone inside?

You avoid building it (above ground at least) in the first place
Post reply on HN