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.
Hyperloop
431–440 of 983 posts
Re: Hyperloop
#432"by placing solar panels on top of the tube, the Hyperloop can generate far in excess of the energy needed to operate." He seems to be planning to build this over farmland? Because farmers aren't going to be happy about someone blocking their light. Light is the limiting factor in plant growth. If he's going to block the light to farms he'll have to pay them for the lost crops, and then he might as well just buy the…
If he's going to build it over farmland, whether he uses solar panels or not is irrelevant to the farm. The land would be rented/bought/imminent domained just like normal rail would.
He makes a point that by building on pylons he specifically doesn't need to do any of that.
Re: Hyperloop
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
They approved it at a much lower budget ($9.95 billion). It would be interesting for the voters to get another vote based on the current cost projections.
The $9.95 billion was for the initial bond issuance. The estimate on the ballot was $40 billion versus the current estimate of between $98.5 billion and $118 billion. Edit: correction from dragonwriter, via wikipedia [1]: "The cost of the initial San Francisco-to-Anaheim segment was originally estimated by the CHSRA to be $33 billion (2008) / $35.2 billion (2013), but a revised business plan released in November 2011…
Those numbers still seem absurd to me. $120 billion? France built the entire TGV network, about 2,000 km (1250 miles, ~2x the length of LA-SF, including numerous stations in urban areas) for around $20-30 billion. Maybe the U.S. should borrow some management practices from inefficient socialist "old Europe".
Re: Hyperloop
#434Pretty but absurd. With all that money I rather give a Cessna to 1M people so they can fly anywhere without restriction. Or make special small airports for direct flight between cities. Much less infrastructure. Kudos to Elon, I love they guy and his incredibly visionary mind.
> I rather give a Cessna to 1M people so they can fly anywhere without restriction.
"What could possibly go wrong..."
Re: Hyperloop
#435Let the tech workers test it out on their SF-Silicon Valley commutes first. Maybe Elon's musk will help convince all the millionaire tech NIMBYs that own the peninsula.
Re: Hyperloop
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
$20/trip amortized cost. So, probably a more correct ticket price is $50-$60.
It seems to me that to really force the issue, you'd need to be talking an order of magnitude difference in cost. For $20 r/t, ears would perk up -- even people who aren't making a $1/yr salary could conceivably afford that. But $120?
you speak as though it needs to be run as a charity to be a game changer. I only mention that price point because that is just underneath the cost of flying, and that's how economics works. The operator will likely want to make as much profit as it can, while still sucking customers away from the airports. In the beginning, the operator will likely charge MORE than the airplanes, because the customer will be liable to be ok with a "novelty" premium, and it's in the interest of the operator to amortize the costs as quickly as possible to secure itself against (unforseeable) price competitions or unpredicted costs.
At the price point I suggest, the operator is STILL effectively going to be making 150% margins, so there is a lot of room to lower the cost, but that just isn't going to happen unless there is a competitive pressure to keep lowering the price.
If that's not "social justice" enough for you, then consider that at least the thing is going to be run nearly 100% if not better than 100% renewable.
Re: Hyperloop
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, we have "light shed" on the current "debacle" and neither system gets built. That's a win? HSR was first commerically available in 1964. Yes, it got really expensive waiting 50 years. I imagine it'll be even more expensive in another 20-30. California is going to get even more crowded.
California will get more crowded, but it will continue to be a disaster of urban planning, limiting the utility of HSR. It's mind boggling to me that the California HSR isn't being built from DC to Boston instead.
> It's mind boggling to me that the California HSR isn't being built from DC to Boston instead.
Upgraded high-speed rail in the Northeast corridor (where the US's only existing HSR is located) is being planned. [1] California HSR being built in California doesn't preclude HSR from being built/upgraded in other parts of the US.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_S...
Re: Hyperloop
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Bill gates can reach for his wallet and fund this. He won't even notice it. Someone get me his phone number right this moment.
Bill Gates has more important things to spend his money on than moving rich americans from somewhere in America to somewhere else in America.
Re: Hyperloop
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Turn down the nastiness. It's totally non-obvious that this isn't overshadowed by the weight of the tube. And it does carry a motor with it, just not one that's responsible for initial acceleration or for large air resistances.
Sorry if you perceived that as "nasty".
The motor that it carries with it is about 146 horsepower. That's less than a Kawasaki Ninja street bike.
The General Electric E60 locomotives currently in use on Amtrak crank out 6,250 hp (4,660 kW) and weigh 423,000 lb (192,000 kilograms).
The weight of the tube doesn't really enter into it.
Re: Hyperloop
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that planes have (supposedly) trained staff that can go around and make sure everyone is getting oxygen. These pods are automated and would most likely have no staff on board.
Putting on an oxygen mask is not a difficult operation.
Unless you are otherwise incapacitated due to whatever is causing the emergency in the first place.