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

Hyperloop

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 983 posts

Re: Hyperloop

#311

Post by purplelobster »

adventureartist wrote: post #218
lmg643 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting point that big government provoked the advancement of the hyperloop idea - counterintuitive idea, and clearly yes. but any idea like this will need government cooperation. The real test of big government will be how they respond to the hyperloop. magic response: "of course we may be wrong, we'll look into this immediately." and then they decide to build it. likely answer: praise, perhaps even an evaluatio…

I wouldn't be so fast to make that declaration. Elon Musk, Tesla, and SpaceX are pretty influential players right now, and I don't think anyone reading this white paper are anything less than wide eyed at the possibility that the future of travel is written right here and we could build it, for cheaper than the current slow expensive system. Influential people and money people and politicians are all going to read th…

I hope you're right, but in reality most people haven't even heard of Elon Musk. I've had to explain to many highly educated people what he has done, what SpaceX is, what Tesla is etc. While he's been rather successful so far, he's not in the clear when it comes to either of his companies right now, he's not exactly at the Gates level of success yet. I'm rooting for him though, he has the potential to be one of the most influential people in a long time if things go well.

Re: Hyperloop

#312

Post by Turing_Machine »

goodcanadian wrote: post #270
cma wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elevate rail as easily? We're talking a lot more weight being carried by the pillars in that case. Plus you don't get the same natural banking off the walls he talks about, which is relevant at these speeds. While rail could bank, you better be going at the right speed when doing so, too slow and you just fall laterally off the tracks.

Can you elevate rail as easily? The short answer is, "yes." I've ridden on it. The slightly longer answer (as another commenter has pointed out) is that it depends on the weight of the train versus the weight of the hyperloop. I see no fundamental reason to assume that the hyperloop is lighter than the train. It could be so, but then, we could make smaller and lighter trains, too (light rail). Plus you don't get the…

"I see no fundamental reason to assume that the hyperloop is lighter than the train."

Did you actually read the PDF?

It doesn't carry its motor with it. That's a pretty big reason. Nor does it need the heavy-duty (and heavy!) trucks of a standard rail car.

Re: Hyperloop

#313

Post by dragonwriter »

spikels wrote: post #262
dragonwriter wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the California high speed rail project is completed (or even makes progress) it will likely stifle any similar projects for decades. Building railroads (road networks, etc.) over non-trivial spans of land is practically impossible without active government support. Even if California doesn't build HSR, private efforts without government involvement would be pretty much impossible.

Agreed ANY project will require government support. I just don't see many governments supporting competing projects. So if CA HSR gets built competing projects, such as Hyperloop, are unlikely to get the required government support. Make sense?

> I just don't see many governments supporting competing projects. So if CA HSR gets built competing projects, such as Hyperloop, are unlikely to get the required government support.

Given how long it takes to build large scale infrastructure, and given that Hyperloop is still at a primitive stage as technology (the fact that the paper just released calls, as a next step, for reduced-scale testing to demonstrate the physics, whereas HSR is a widely-used, well-established technology with multiple vendors), its more of a long-term successor to HSR than a concurrent competitor.

OTOH, its true that HSR being built would reduce the problems that provide the incentives to build Hyperloop.

Re: Hyperloop

#314

Post by capkutay »

I wonder if that $70 billion price tag is partly tied to the "I created x many jobs in my time as a politician" rhetoric. I'm just assuming high cost means a higher number of people being paid.

Re: Hyperloop

#315

Post by Anechoic »

digikata wrote: post #284
Anechoic wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe that an experimental tube is going to be somehow magically cheaper and easier to route and build than train tracks. Do you really think the special interests that are making HSR so difficult and expensive would say, "Oh, do whatever you like with your tube."? These are extremely important issues that advocates seem to be glossing over. Putting the guideway on pylons doesn't magically eliminate land is…

> When a train exceeds the shear wave speed, ground-borne vibration waves "build up" in a manner similar to the shock wave created in air when a plane exceeds the speed of sound... Putting the railway or tubes on pylons would give you an opportunity to dampen or otherwise transform those vibrations wouldn't they?

Putting the railway or tubes on pylons would give you an opportunity to dampen or otherwise transform those vibrations wouldn't they?

Maybe, maybe not. Guideway supports (pylons) are typically founded into the bedrock which does reduce vibration somewhat, but the vertical motion of the pylon moving against the soil will still generate shear waves.

This is why a demonstration project would be useful.

Re: Hyperloop

#316

Post by thrownaway2424 »

spikels wrote: post #245
threeseed wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please clarify why the high speed rail is likely to be a debacle ? It seems pretty clear that California needs it and generally HSR is a pretty sensible infrastructure investment.

As currently envisioned CA HSR is likely to be more expensive and slower than current air travel. This is before the virtually certain cost overruns. To be competitively priced it would require large subsidies but still would be no faster than alternatives. That said like you I would love to see a superior alternative to the current situation but CA HSR is probably not it. Edit: added some references http://www.mercu…

Well, no. You just made that up. HSR is intended to meet a future need for transportation. The equivalent air transportation infrastructure to meet the same need is believed to cost at least $500bn, according to the environmental impact report. That's making the generous assumptions that this level of air travel is even possible without serious air traffic congestion problems, and the aviation fuel costs do not rise faster than general inflation.

The main cost of CAHSR will be the opportunity cost of not having built it.

Re: Hyperloop

#317

Post by abruzzi »

lmg643 wrote: post #180
aresant wrote: post #32

"In the case of the Hyperloop, Musk started focusing on public transportation after he grew disenchanted with the plans for California’s high-speed rail system." And who says that big government stifles entrepreneurial innovation? If ALL Musk does with the Hyperloop announcement is shed more light on the potential debacle that is to be our $70b+ high-speed rail in California, we owe him a debt of gratitude. PS - Dire…

Interesting point that big government provoked the advancement of the hyperloop idea - counterintuitive idea, and clearly yes. but any idea like this will need government cooperation. The real test of big government will be how they respond to the hyperloop. magic response: "of course we may be wrong, we'll look into this immediately." and then they decide to build it. likely answer: praise, perhaps even an evaluatio…

The problem is that, at least with the CA high speed rail system, the design is all theoretical at the moment. It may be a brilliant idea, but but moving from the core ideas in the document to actual working, build-able products, can be a slow process. And given the state of where CA is on their project, that may not put them on the same window.

Re: Hyperloop

#318

Post by Osmium »

munificent wrote: post #283
Osmium wrote: post #199

Reading the entire PDF is highly recommended; it contains a surprising amount of answers already (including many to comments below). I think, if anything, safety aspects haven't been sufficiently explored in the pdf. I'm quite happy to believe it's safer than other modes of transport, but I wouldn't be too quick to overstate it. Also, if anyone can explain what "Tubes located on pylons would limit access to the criti…

> "Tubes located on pylons would limit access to the critical elements of the system." is meant to mean in §4.5.6 I'd be grateful... You don't have to worry about cows wandering into oncoming vehicles like you do with cars and trains. It's also harder for non-determined people with malicious intent to interfere with operations. A determined attacker can, of course, scale pylons. But you don't have to worry about stuf…

Thanks–I think it was the fact that the pylons could presumably be scaled that was making the sentence difficult to parse (I wasn't sure how they were meant to prevent access). That, and that the pylons themselves are also presumably "critical elements" of the system.

Re: Hyperloop

#319

Post by [deleted] »

axus wrote: post #176
mortenjorck wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not claustrophobic, but this image ever so slightly terrified me: http://i.imgur.com/lGD9bUP.png I have to wonder, would making the capsule the size of a small subway car completely destroy the economics of it?

It's also scary that the passengers would suffocate if the life support system failed.

[deleted]

Re: Hyperloop

#320

Post by thrownaway2424 »

LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #206
aresant wrote: post #32

"In the case of the Hyperloop, Musk started focusing on public transportation after he grew disenchanted with the plans for California’s high-speed rail system." And who says that big government stifles entrepreneurial innovation? If ALL Musk does with the Hyperloop announcement is shed more light on the potential debacle that is to be our $70b+ high-speed rail in California, we owe him a debt of gratitude. PS - Dire…

but why to ask California State for subsidy? Why not to build it using private funds? I'd imagine that if this is economically sound idea there must be potential investors lining up to have their share in the Project? The estimated cost is $7B. Now, Musk just needs to make a few calls to his friends at Google, Amazon, etc. Can't these guys just form a company together just to build it? Maybe I'm naive... or maybe Mus…

For the same reason that Musk needed a huge, free government loan to get Tesla off the ground: without the government, he'd be less rich.
Post reply on HN