Live data from Hacker News

Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

economist.com

221–230 of 322 posts

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s think it out (as in: add your thoughts). If it’s for goods, you don’t need a human size pod. You can scale pods to a size that represents goods that make sense to transport quickly. Obviously you want benefits that come from standardisation, like containers give you. Fully automated transport between all major cities for anything less than a metre diameter? I think that looks like the future. Mail, Amazon, fres…

There are two huge problems here: First, very little freight is latency sensitive. The vast majority of cargo is cost sensitive, which is why most bulk goods coming from abroad arrive via cargo ship rather than airplane. There are a ton of companies that’ll accept days or weeks of delay to reduce overall cost; so a loop must compete with rail freight and semi trucks on cost. Theoretically a cargo hyper loop network c…

I never mentioned bulk goods. I mentioned items that are time sensitive. Most e-commerce is latency sensitive. I recently started getting groceries on an hour delivery. It’s a game changer. Amazon could probably power a network like that by itself. What would a 2 hour Amazon delivery to most cities do? What markets does it enable access to? How do you compete with that?

It’s too easy to think of why something won’t work. Rather think “is there a customer and a product for which latency is important but is unfulfilled by current infrastructure”. Don’t use my examples, make your own. Saying “no” to that question is to bet against human desires and ingenuity.

Freshest (anything) from 200km away within 2 hours. Will top restaurants pay for that? Latest widget from a warehouse 500km away in 2 hours. Allows Amazon to compete with local stores. Allows medical supplies to get there in a surge. I’m sure you can think of something.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#222
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should learn the basics about a topic before trying to argue about it. The Boring company fund raiser is not based any promises about Hyperloop.

> Elon Musk's plan to connect major cities with Hyperloop tunnels is raising the interest of investors. Boring Co. It's pretty clear that Hyperloop is part of the scam.

Yeah he scams himself because he is the primary investor facepalm

The sales pitch was clearly the Boring technology and the oppertunity for loop system. That is why they needed to raise captial.

Hyperloop was basically not mentioned in any of the presentation beyond a 'at some point something like Hyperloop might be interesting'.

And non of this even remotly shows that it is a scam.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#223
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wires than that. Most people live on the border of the cities and the nothing. Suburbs are practically designed to make mass transit expensive and slow.

This is why I don't get why gondola lifts are not more popular for both people and cargo. Maybe in cities the wind is an issue.

They used to be quite popular for cargo (IIUC trucks displaced them) and apparently they are becoming used again: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/01/aerial-ropeways-auto...

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#224

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…

If it's about the land then how come we can build freeways? Those essentially have the same problem

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#225

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.

I am disagreeing with the article. Of course, when designing/selling new train systems, a lot of showmanship and gadgetery are involved, but there are real shortcomings with current train systems which cause people to develop new technologies.

First of all: trains are great, there are many places where they perform admirably. Many cities have a great subway network, countries like France, Japan, Taiwan and now China have great high speed reail networks. So if there are transportation problems to solve, it should be a no-brainer to consider traditional train systems first.

However, there are shortcomings wiht traditional train systems, these new systems try to address. One big limitation for trains is, where to put the tracks. Inside cities, going underground usually is the only solution. With traditional rail, this is extremely expensive and also a slow process. In Munich, not log ago the digging for a new underground train line started - it is expected to take a whole decade and going to be quite expensive (which has delayed the project by another decade, as people were discussing costs). Outside of cities, rail is possible, but still faces problems to get the necessary ground. Noise is a further problems with trains. Finally, most traditional train systems are not operated autonomusly, so costs are too high for high frequencies and often enough there are just not enough drivers available.

These shortcomings create a lot of creativity to address them. The Boring companie tries to lower tunnel costs by making them less in diameter. Other systems try carts which run on or hang from stilts, reducing the space needed or allowing the train installations to go on top of existing roads.

Maglevs are still a huge topic. On the one side, they do allow higher speeds, as rails get mechanically challenging above 300kph. The only challenge for maglev is air resistance, there is no risk of derailing. Also, at any speed, maglevs are less noisy than rails, they can accelerate faster than rail and most importanly, go up much higher inclines. Maglev is therefore not only interesting for long-distance transportation, but also inside city regions, especially due to the lower noise and also because of autonomous operations. A good example is this maglev system: https://transportsystemboegl.com/ It is designed for city regions, fully autonomous and not just some technology concept, but ready-to-buy. It has been developed by a major construction company. That means, they won't just sell you some fancy technology, they are going to build the whole infrastructure for you ready to use. This is one of the two companies responsible for the quick building process at the Tesla Giga Berlin factory. They are basically factory producing the parts for industrial buildings and just assembling them on-site. (Ironically Volkswagen is also building a new factory for electric cars in Bremen, Germany at the moment and it looks exactly like what Tesla is building, as they ordered the factory from the same company)

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#226

Did you know that LIGO designers had to add earthen berms to protect their vacuum pipes from bullets? Not to mention the throughput issues, the energy budget, the cost of construction, the right-of-way issues... Let's be frank: Hyperloop is dumb, and people who are spending money on it are too. You have better things to do with your time than analyzing it or defending it, and so do I.

As dumb as the hyperloop projects may be, I think it's dwarfed by all the other money spending elsewhere. We can just look at it from afar and enjoy the mythbuster-XL show

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. That’s why The Boring Company is focusing on reducing the costs of tunneling dramatically. And they started by just using existing technology. With that (and without the cost inflation that many corrupted projects experience), they were able to achieve about $10 per mile of tunnel. A lane of highway per direction is $1m to $8m depending on if it’s rural or urban. They’ve developed a new machine, Prufroc…

Of course, if they can reduce the cost of digging, they’re also reducing the cost of the hyperloop’s biggest logical competitor; the subway.

The Boring company has nothing to do with the Hyperloop concept. The Boring company is about creating cheap tunnels quickly. Current tunneling technology is severely limited by its price. It is really open-ended, which transport system is going to be used inside these tunnels. Hyperloop might be one option, but currently, Elon is not pushing into that direction. Currently, they are using Tesla cars. For higher capacities, special vehicles for those tunnels could be constructed - using the basic Tesla technology, but looking more like normal trains.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#228
post #54

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…

It uses a much smaller tunnel.

But that's offset by it managing much lower peak passenger throughput, so you need more tunnels...

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regular property tax works fine. Montreal recaptures the increase as values rise through transfer taxes and ocassional reassesments.

Transfer taxes are avoided by the wealthy. See London and NYC. An LLC purchased property. From that point the LLC is bought/sold/merged and the assets never change ownership

Maybe that ought to be fixed as well.

Re: Hyperloop: Pipes of Fancy

#230
Off-topic: whenever I see a post here with much more comments then up-votes I suspect a train wreck of a comment section. Looking through it confirms my suspicion. I wonder how many unique commenters are here, and whether unique commenters to overall comments ratio is also a good indicator of quality.

From my perspective the best links have not more then around 350 up-votes (often less then 200) and less then third of that comments.

Post reply on HN