Is Hyperloop the future of travel?

Post by fit2rule » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:22 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #53

thrill wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are two different technologies. Budget estimates will involve different tradeoffs with different risk assumptions.

Civil engineers have looked at the Hyperloop proposal and declared themselves unable to determine how Musk proposes to reduce the costs of long runs of overpass, or of tunneling. A simpler way to make the same argument: If Musk can actually build a Hyperloop across California at his proposed cost, he's made revolutionary improvements to civil engineering that will be far more impactful than the Hyperloop itself; the…

Post by kuschku » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #79

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…

> High speed rail, such as Eurostar, would be around 10,000 passengers/hour. How is that remotely true? There is one Eurostar approximately every 30 minutes (looking at the departures from London [0], it seems that there are 32 Eurostar leaving London every day), and I seriously doubt one train can carry 5000 passengers (I would say about 500 passengers), so your approximation is completely off (even taking into acco…

Post by notahacker » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #79

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…

> High speed rail, such as Eurostar, would be around 10,000 passengers/hour. How is that remotely true? There is one Eurostar approximately every 30 minutes (looking at the departures from London [0], it seems that there are 32 Eurostar leaving London every day), and I seriously doubt one train can carry 5000 passengers (I would say about 500 passengers), so your approximation is completely off (even taking into acco…

Post by kuschku » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #8

pieter1976 wrote: post #2

Haven't really fast trains (sometimes maglev) inside evacuated tubes been proposed over and over again. Trying to work out what is new here. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain

Vacuums get much more costly as you get ever lower pressure. Hyperloop is an interesting cost / benefit between fast travel and lower construction and maintenance costs which is why the speeds are relatively low. The vehicle is also closer to an electric aircraft than an electric train. Note the big fan on the front: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop#/media/File:Hyperloo... Another consideration is the faster y…

Post by ubernostrum » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

elchief wrote: post #47

tptacek wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're saying that the HSR project is over budget, you're right, but you're not helping the Hyperloop argument. The point is that if the HSR people can't get something done for $X, it's unlikely that Musk can do something even more ambitious for $X/10.

Like how he's lowering the price of rocketry by 90%? His last bid was 40% less than United Launch