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

Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–178 of 178 posts

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#171

Post by bubuga »

pi-err wrote: post #67

There's a palpable excitement around Hyperloop and I can't wait to know if this will reshape our world or not. One of the largest problem I can see is not technical. The consensus is that a "standard" Hyperloop track (between 2 cities, 300 to 800km apart) would have a ~1,500 passengers/hour max capacity. High speed rail, such as Eurostar, would be around 10,000 passengers/hour. Even if Hyperloop managed to get built…

> There's a palpable excitement around Hyperloop and I can't wait to know if this will reshape our world or not.

I find it rather doubtful that it will change anything for a number of reasons, including:

- governments don't even care to invest in their existing railway network, and are highly resistant in finding any justification for high-speed networks (not even very-high speed)

- the hyperloop concept is only a concept, it's disastrously expensive, based on untried technology, and highly vulnerable to a disastrous PR campaign. Keep in mind that it took a single accident to ground the whole Concorde fleet, in spite of all its history and having major backers.

- mass transit decision-makers are very conservative and highly risk-adverse. Money is spent only on tried-and-true technology. In the rare cases that it isn't, all hell breaks loose (see BART)

- no one knows what will it cost to maintain it, or its reliability.

- High-speed railway only makes sense in the small window of opportunity sandwiched between cases where air travel and car/roadway travel makes sense. That window of opportunity is located somewhere, IIRC, between travel distances between 200 and 600km. Additionally, for high-speed railway to make sense, it needs to be connected with other mass transit systems through effective multimodal transport hubs. This is very expensive and takes a lot of planning respected throughout centuries of investment in infrastructure and urban planning. The hyperloop concept fails to deliver in any of the requirements while in return bringing nothing to the table.

Let's keep things in perspective: France, Germany, and Japan already have decades of high-speed railway under their belt and are packed with success stories. Yet, the whole world in general, and the US in particular, decided not to follow them in their successful venture. These decisions are made rationally. Why would anyone suddenly invest in a high-risk concept that fails to justify itself?

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#172

Post by bubuga »

nickparker wrote: post #152
pi-err wrote: post #67

There's a palpable excitement around Hyperloop and I can't wait to know if this will reshape our world or not. One of the largest problem I can see is not technical. The consensus is that a "standard" Hyperloop track (between 2 cities, 300 to 800km apart) would have a ~1,500 passengers/hour max capacity. High speed rail, such as Eurostar, would be around 10,000 passengers/hour. Even if Hyperloop managed to get built…

I'm not sure where your consensus is coming from, but it's not what I've seen/heard working on this stuff. Hyperloop One (formerly Hyperloop Tech) said in an info session last Fall that they were targeting launch intervals below 15 seconds. They also want a pod to comfortably carry a single intermodal container - 8'x8'x40'. That space can seat around 40, which works out to 9600 passengers/hr capacity at 15 second int…

> The other angle to consider is that tracks very likely won't be singular. The tubes are light by infrastructure standards, you could pack two for each direction onto a route without dramatically increasing pylon costs.

This observation fails to take into account real-world requirements of building this sort of infrastructure. Pylon costs (queue the starcraft references) are irrelevant. The relevant bit is building all the tunnels, bridges, and earthworks required to get a smooth-enough train route that is able to safely support the track, provide a safe ride at Hyperloop's projected speeds, provide a conformable ride, and do it all in cost-effective an easy to maintain technology.

In high-speed railway, track defects are measured in wavelengths of fractions of a milimeter in amplitude and periods of 6 to 10 to 50 meters. If you increase the speed, either the limit for the wavelength period increases or the amplitude limits need to be further reduced. Setting up a 200-meter track segment with a sub-milimeter tolerance limit isn't cheap.

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#173

Post by kuschku »

Grishnakh wrote: post #169
kuschku wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when they can just use their car, get there in about the same time > HSR is not, it's slow Have you ever seen an actual HSR system? We’re talking about 220mph minimum. That’s quite a bit faster than per car. And, due to TSA, it’s faster than an airplane, and without the annoying stuff. And cheaper. Hyperloops only differences over HSR is that it’s 15min faster, is a lot more uncomfortable, a lot more expensive to b…

>Have you ever seen an actual HSR system? >We’re talking about 220mph minimum. That’s quite a bit faster than per car. Sorry, that's complete bullshit. We're not talking about HSR in Japan, China, or Germany here. We're talking about "HSR" in California, USA. The California system will be very, very lucky if it manages to ever hit 200mph in a short stretch. Realistically, it might be about the speed of the Amtrak Ace…

I’ve only seen German and French HSR, but the one in the US can’t be that bad.

Worst case, you just let some Germans build it for you.

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#174

Post by drzaiusapelord »

kgabis wrote: post #125
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe the business plan for passenger planes and trains was also that hazy back then? Except flying is fast, safe, and cheap. Our problem is airport design and airport security. Fix those so we get on a plane in 20 minutes instead of two hours and everyone will be happy.

You also need to get to the airport and from the airport. Airports are usually quite far from city centers.

Well, thats what light rail and cars are for. I mean, how are you getting to this proposed hyperloop station? Same way.

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#175

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #70
betteridge wrote: post #23

No.

While it's mildly interesting that that account name hadn't already been taken for this very purpose, HN doesn't allow novelty accounts, so we've banned this one. If there were an easy way to ban mechanical invocations of Betteridge we'd have done that too, about ten thousand of them ago.

[deleted]

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#176

Post by Grishnakh »

kuschku wrote: post #173
Grishnakh wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Have you ever seen an actual HSR system? >We’re talking about 220mph minimum. That’s quite a bit faster than per car. Sorry, that's complete bullshit. We're not talking about HSR in Japan, China, or Germany here. We're talking about "HSR" in California, USA. The California system will be very, very lucky if it manages to ever hit 200mph in a short stretch. Realistically, it might be about the speed of the Amtrak Ace…

I’ve only seen German and French HSR, but the one in the US can’t be that bad. Worst case, you just let some Germans build it for you.

>I’ve only seen German and French HSR, but the one in the US can’t be that bad.

This is your problem then: you're speaking from ignorance. Yes, it really can be that bad. Acela Express is a total joke compared to foreign HSR, and the one in California isn't even built yet, the cost projections are insane, and the proposed top speed is only 200mph.

>Worst case, you just let some Germans build it for you.

We can't do that. I'm not joking, I mean that literally. We simply cannot do that, and will not do that. Sure, it'd make sense to just let a company that's already an expert do that, but we won't. We'll do it with crappy domestic companies (though perhaps getting the passenger cars made by Bombardier in Canada) at an absolutely astronomical cost, because that's just how things are done in this country now for anything that's government-funded. Just look at the F-35 jet for proof.

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#177

Post by david927 »

tehabe wrote: post #141
dredmorbius wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyperlink turning radius (at top speed) is on the order of 100s of km, due to g-forces. You don't have much routing flexibility. Following the kinks of a 100 kph expressway is likely not feasible. Alternatives are to slow down massively as you approach / traverse urban areas, but this further increases trip time, changes acceleration and energy needs, and reduces the already abysmally low net passenger throughput.

Yeah, I'm still wondering for how long the Hyperloop can keep its high speed before it has to break again. This is already a big issue with high speed trains in Germany, so that some people say, why do we waste money on 300 kph trains which have to break after six minutes anyway. The energy needed to reach this speed is way too high and you don't save a lot of time either. And with Hyperloop it will the same thing. I…

Ah, but the Hyperloop will allow for small, individual cars of maybe 8 people (I'm guessing). This means that you get in the car based on destination and it uses switches so that there are no in-transit stops.

Following the kinks of a 100 kph expressway is likely not feasible.

Again, my understanding was that this was part of the original TDD (SF to LA) and they found that it was, indeed, feasible.

Re: Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

#178

Post by kgabis »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #174
kgabis wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also need to get to the airport and from the airport. Airports are usually quite far from city centers.

Well, thats what light rail and cars are for. I mean, how are you getting to this proposed hyperloop station? Same way.

You could build hyperloop stations in city centers. That's why travelling by train is (often) so convenient. No need for 1h trip to/from the airport.
Post reply on HN