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

Hyperloop One to shut down

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 490 posts

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#171

Post by trhway »

thfuran wrote: post #152
trhway wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why go underground (expensive 3rd dimension down) when we have the whole 3rd dimension up almost unused? The freight can be trucked by large Zeppelins for example (and electric at that with the most of the energy generated by the solar panels covering the upper surface of the Zeppelin https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38017937 ). The issues are pure engineering ones. These freight Zeppelins can be fully automated,…

A train car carries about a kiloton of cargo. How many zeppelins would that take? Edit: Actually, I can't count. Only a few hundred thousand pounds. That's still probably a bunch of zeppelinworths though.

Hinderburg-like at 100 ton itself can carry about 120 ton payload, ie. payload of 2 train cars.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#172

Post by sidibe »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #140
Seanambers wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk said from the outset that he was not gonna build it, he thought the idea was good and published a whitepaper on it which basically started the conversation. He also talks about a supersonic electrical passenger jet from time to time, but he says he don't have the time to do that either.

Perhaps we should apply a bit more of a critical standard to Elon's various statements: https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/

Argh those pesky regulators stopping Tesla from delivering robotaxis to their customers since 2018

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#173

Post by rewmie »

heads wrote: post #166
yuliyp wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like railroads but worse. What's the advantage? Tunneling is incredibly expensive to do, yet you're proposing it in a situation where it'd need enough coverage so as to ban large freight transport over roads.

I’m not arguing with you here but it would be interesting to know what about tunnelling is fundamentally expensive. Things I can think of: it is slow, so you burn through a lot of wages. To compare with road building the only major road I can think of, built in my lifetime, was the M40. It is 90 miles long and took 4 years to build but I don’t know what the cost was. The channel tunnel is much smaller than a freeway…

[dead]

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#174

Post by mynameisnoone »

alangibson wrote: post #142
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

Why do people keep trying to invent more expensive, less traffic dense railroads. Did they stop teaching arithmetic in school?

Because a controversial centibillionaire didn't do the math on 0 atm tube transportation and proclaimed it to be so. Also, people hate people like Thunderf00t who tear down dumb ideas that people desperately want to believe in because feelings and tribal toxic positivity > logic.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#175

Post by rewmie »

alangibson wrote: post #142
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

Why do people keep trying to invent more expensive, less traffic dense railroads. Did they stop teaching arithmetic in school?

[dead]

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#176

Post by senectus1 »

yuliyp wrote: post #126
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

That sounds like railroads but worse. What's the advantage? Tunneling is incredibly expensive to do, yet you're proposing it in a situation where it'd need enough coverage so as to ban large freight transport over roads.

Its away from weather and extreme temp changes.

Its super common in Australia for railways to shut down due to warping of the rails from heat.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#177

Post by mynameisnoone »

mplewis wrote: post #155
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

You have, once again, described an expensive and bad train.

TODIL cargo ships are slightly cheaper to operate than good trains.

I still haven't seen the math to prove ground effect aircraft are less efficient than cargo ships, but I suppose it's true or it would've been done already.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#178

Post by mynameisnoone »

korse wrote: post #80
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

Contrarian take, but tons of truck traffic on interstate highways makes driving far more fun (as long as there isn't road maintenance or undue stoppage). I'm actually looking forward to future me being able to ride my motorcycle around a freight-train's worth of semi-automated cargo-haulers on interstates that are mostly devoid of vacationing families.

Only in Wyoming where, unlike Texas, truckers have the sense to stay to the right. Also, there is de facto no speed limit there because there are only a handful of WSTs. I suggest avoiding Wyoming Colorado unless you have nose plugs or no sense of smell.

Re: Hyperloop One to shut down

#180

Post by mynameisnoone »

trhway wrote: post #134
thechao wrote: post #12

There is a world where we dig tunnels under federal highways, and stick freight trucks down there. They'd run on a monorail, at 120+ mph. Surface vehicles would be dramatically limited in terms of height, width, and length. Maybe people buses could go down there? In my imagination these tunnels are, like, 200' down. Like mole people.

Why go underground (expensive 3rd dimension down) when we have the whole 3rd dimension up almost unused? The freight can be trucked by large Zeppelins for example (and electric at that with the most of the energy generated by the solar panels covering the upper surface of the Zeppelin https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38017937 ). The issues are pure engineering ones. These freight Zeppelins can be fully automated,…

That cannot operate in wind or inclement weather.
Post reply on HN