Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hyperloop One Reveals 10 Strongest Potential Hyperloop Routes In the World (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the baby-steps dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Hyperloop One wants to build a real, working Hyperloop -- but it'll need strong partners to make it a reality, across both industry and government. That's why, in part, it held a global competition requesting proposals for routes around the world. The winners of that competition have now been announced, and the resulting routes span the U.S., the U.K, Mexico, India and Canada. Hyperloop One has assessed each proposal from hundreds of teams who applied from around the world, examining the potential of each from the perspective of infrastructure, technology, regulatory environment and transportation concerns. As a result, it identified the strongest candidates [with four routes in the U.S., two routes in the U.K., one route in Mexico, two routes in India, and one route in Canada.]

The next step for each of these winning teams will be a validation process conducted with Hyperloop One to do some in-depth analysis on each route, establishing things like ridership forecast and building a fully fleshed out business case for each. Hyperloop One will be hosting workshops in each of the above countries to help with this process, and to meet with stakeholders and help establish necessary partnerships. Overall, Hyperloop One points out that these winning teams represent a combined population of almost 150 million people, with routes that would link up 53 urban centers around the world and span a total distance of 4,121 miles).

142 comments

  1. psotted frist due to HYPEr speed by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Remember folks, if they took away the hype it'd just be a plain old rloop.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. And the big question is .. by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know what a real, working hyper loop actually looks like?
    And if it is actually viable?

    And no I don't mean the student competition to test a device that is totally unlike the original hyper loop concept, and run across a fraction of a fraction of the distance that the concept is supposed extend to.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:And the big question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know what a real, working hyper loop actually looks like?

      Yes, Mr. Musk sketched it on a cocktail napkin! The sketch was mostly a list of expected government subsidies, but included a total. He did the math himself, even after having drank a cocktail.

      And if it is actually viable?.

      No. After the 7 figure dollar amount he sketched a rectangle and wrote "idk vacuum lol" inside it.

    2. Re:And the big question is .. by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      It's an elevated metal pipe, with trains running inside. It's cheaper to build than conventional rail because you don't need to buy the land under it, and faster than conventional light rail because lower air friction. It is cost effective for mid range high density commuter routes = cheaper than flying and faster than the bus.

    3. Re:And the big question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 2

      You can build conventional rail on elevated tracks. That's not an advantage, that's additional construction cost.

    4. Re:And the big question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's cheaper to build than conventional rail because you don't need to buy the land under it

      Wait, what? So I can build a bridge right over the top of your house without having to pay you anything for doing it?

      That sounds ... unlikely.

    5. Re:And the big question is .. by plopez · · Score: 1

      probably like a monorail

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    6. Re:And the big question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you base your logic on assumptions which are false, the conclusions cannot be trusted.

    7. Re: And the big question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but you can build it across a field or forest without making the land underneath useless.

    8. Re:And the big question is .. by stevelinton · · Score: 1

      The difference is that a hyperloop pod is MUCH lighter than a train. The level of engineering required for the track is massively less.

    9. Re:And the big question is .. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      It's an elevated metal pipe, with trains running inside. It's cheaper to build than conventional rail because you don't need to buy the land under it

      I don't know where you live (is that the USA?), but this news is about world applications so it depends on the property laws of the particular nation. The UK was mentioned - here you cannot build a structure over someone's property (other than electric wires) without buying or renting it, rightly so because otherwise the property would become unsalable except at a small fraction of its previous price. Where motorway viaducts are built over urban areas for example, the properties underneath are usually compulsorily bought and demolished.

      Apart from that, expect some very strong opposition from everyone within view of this eyesore, and beyond, even more than with high speed rail. Musk will need to budget for buying Britain wholesale if he wants to play out his pipe dreams here.

    10. Re: And the big question is .. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      No, but you can build it across a field or forest without making the land underneath useless.

      In the UK you will still need to pay someone for it though.

    11. Re:And the big question is .. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      The difference is that a hyperloop pod is MUCH lighter than a train. The level of engineering required for the track is massively less.

      That tube is going to be rather heavy though. But it is not just weight; at the speed the hyperloop goes the curvature (vertical and horizontal) will need to be very slight. High speed rail is alread run at the limit of curvature for its speed without inducing nausea in the passengers, so the faster hyperloop will need to have even less curvature than high speed rail.

      So where a railway might go round a hill, the hyperloop will need to tunnel through it. Going into a valley the train can drop quite quickly, but the Hyperloop will require some spectacularly high viaducts until the tube can be brought very gently down to near ground level.

    12. Re: And the big question is .. by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      You still need land access and the tube cannot hover in the air. Therefore, you need pillars and the ground they are standing on. You need space between both tubes and free space on each side to mitigate potential hazard effects and provide emergency access.

  3. Banglore-Chennai Very nice route by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We used to travel this route very regularly, almost every weekend. No 8 Madras Mail leaving Bangalore City at 10PM, arrives at Madras Central at 5:30 AM. Return by No 7 Bangalore Mail. Same times. 3$ for ticket and 1$ for the sleeper berth. I don't think Hyperloop is going beat that price. Overnight is so convenient once you get a sleeper berth. Would this route be profitable in Hyperloop level investment? Not so sure.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Banglore-Chennai Very nice route by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      Do you lash your sleeping bag to something to avoid falling off after you've nodded off?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re: Banglore-Chennai Very nice route by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the train have WC or are you expected to use the windows?

    3. Re:Banglore-Chennai Very nice route by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      People from the West might not find that sleeper berth all that comfortable. For someone who grew up in India, they are fine, even without air conditioning. Yeah, really, I think now, after 30 years in USA I too might not be able to sleep in it. But there are billions of people who would find that berth comfortable enough.

      I always chained the small overnighter to some convenient seat post or something. Not some super strong chain or Yale/Chubb locks. Simple chain and a Godrej Navtal 5 lever lock, not even the 7 level forget the 9 lever. Just a tiny bit harder to steal that the suitcases of my fellow passengers ;-)

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    4. Re: Banglore-Chennai Very nice route by Hognoxious · · Score: 0, Troll

      There are designated shitting tracks.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. No SF to LA? by mamono · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised that SF to LA is not there, or Seattle to SF. Perhaps due to land cost? Those are both major business and travel routes servicing large populations.

    1. Re:No SF to LA? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing not only land costs, but contractor overruns (both historical and predicted), regulatory obstacles, etc. ...and that's not even mentioning the whole seismic thing that the region is kind of famous for.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:No SF to LA? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that SF to LA is not there

      California has already made a massive political and financial commitment to building a conventional high speed rail from SF to LA.

    3. Re:No SF to LA? by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Even TFS mentioned that the regulatory environment was a factor.

      Also, SF to LA is in conflict with Gov. Jerry's beloved bullet train.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:No SF to LA? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Modesto to Bakersfield. The rest is still unfunded vapor.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  5. Nice dream by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It'd be nice to be able to cross Canada coast-to-coast in 9 hours, I just don't see this happening.

    If you could link Montreal to Toronto to Winnipeg to Regina to Calgary to Vancouver, that'd probably be pretty sweet. But while the prairies are nice and flat, Ontario's extremely variable in elevation, with a LOT of rock just under the surface, and it's not like the terrain to the west of Calgary is anywhere near flat.

    There would be a massive amount of tunnelling through rock required, and I just don't see the demand for speed covering the infrastructure expense when we have standard rail for freight and flight for people in a hurry.

    I love the Hyperloop concept, but I tend to look at suggested implementations as if I'm watching the Simpsons "Marge vs. the Monorail".

    1. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monorail! Monorail! Monorail!

    2. Re:Nice dream by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Hyperloop doesn't make a lot of sense for such long-distance travel, because at a certain point the infrastructure costs far outweigh the benefits. But for Montreal to Toronto, or Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto? That could potentially be done at a relatively reasonable cost, with high traffic, and the competing flight is short enough that at least half the trip time is spent on airport-related things rather than the actual travel.

      Keep in mind that the original hyperloop concept that Hyperloop One is working from isn't really intended to do much tunneling, instead using elevated pylons.

      In any event, getting from Montreal to Toronto by air currently takes several hours in total and costs perhaps $200. To be able to pop over to Toronto via a half-hour hyperloop trip with no limited schedule and security theatre to add delay, and at a more reasonable cost? That would be huge, suddenly you could say something like "Let's go to that concert tonight in Toronto" (or any other event/venue) as if it were in the same city, wheras today the 10-12 hour round trip time by ground transportation makes that difficult.

    3. Re:Nice dream by sconeu · · Score: 2

      My guess is that, regardless of what Elon wants, all hyperloops will have the security theatre.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be able to pop over to Toronto via a half-hour hyperloop trip with no limited schedule and security theatre to add delay

      Why on earth would you think there would be no security? You don't think a high profile maglev travelling at a few hundred miles per hour isn't going to be a terrorist target? If you think that, you're horribly naive. At those speeds, if these things are even moderately elevated (and they'd pretty much have to be), exploding the track is going to spray high speed debris all over the place.

      This isn't going to become the cheap and convenient transportation of the future. You can bet that this company wants it to be a cash cow of epic proportions.

      Everything about this positively screams someone trying to ram through a sketchy business plan at someone else's expense as fast as possible before people realize they're being taken for a ride; this is a company trying to get people to help it build it's moneymaker.

      The problem is they don't have a plan, experience, technology, the basic engineering, or pretty much anything you'd need to do this for real. This smacks of being a song and dance number, not a viable project which is anywhere near ready for this level of hype.

      This looks like something any sane government needs to be distancing themselves from lest they find themselves on the hook for some idiots business plan. This company literally has nothing to offer, because they've never made one and have no experience in, well, anything really.

    5. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're missing out one of the best options, Vancouver BC to Portland OR. This is one of the few Amtrak routes that actually makes money (Amtrak Cascades), and the WA govt is looking into (actually spending money on figuring it out) how to speed up the existing rail link between Vancouver, Seattle, Tacoma and Portland.

    6. Re:Nice dream by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      It's impossible to hijack a hyperloop to crash it into a skyscraper. Because it's a very low density form of transit, it's much less appealing to a terrorist than a conventional train too.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    7. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes and yet the DHS is increasingly trying to horn in on train traffic and bus service. Mostly because they don't want anybody to be able to travel by public conveyance without having their rights violated with the illegal searches.

    8. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the terrorists get on the train? If they want to destroy the train, it's much, much easier to just screw up the tracks at the proper time. Having a terrorist board a train to mess with it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Even without DHS there's no reason for them to do it.

    9. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have this awesome idea that bypasses all the problems of the hyperloop. You see, instead of building miles of miles of tubes, we put people in one tube and throw it into the sky! Granted, it's not a vacuum, but high up enough, it's fairly light, almost a void. If I did my calculations correctly, thermal expansion won't be a problem and as hard as it is to believe, during transit it's pretty much invulnerable to even the biggest of earthquakes!

      It could be shot out of a cannon but past documentaries make me believe it will just end up poking out an eye of the moon, so I suggest turbines to apply steady thrust, kind of like the ones they have in oil pipelines to move that mass in the pipe. But outside the pipe. They'll mount them on these perpendicular surfboard stuctures, because that's what the thing has to do, surf on the air. Well, the air that is up there anyway, what little there is.

      It might have to be powered by petroleum sadly, instead of mounted solar panels, but the good news is small model prototypes show tremendous potential to be powered by rubberbands, which are fuel agnostic, aside the initial petroleum in manufacturing.

      The only hitch is the process between when it is on the ground and in the sky, I call shoot up and down boy. We might have to attack wheels to these things and then people might confuse them with cars or trains. Not sure how I'd counter that aside, but if we make them retractable and attempt to have skyscraper passes, people might get the excitement and explosions of a Michael Bay Transformers movie.

      If only this mode of transport could be made a reality, possibly even subsidize regional skysurfing bus lines and regional down boy parking spots as hubs between travel.

    10. Re:Nice dream by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Because it's a very low density form of transit, it's much less appealing to a terrorist than a conventional train too.

      But think of the publicity it would get !

    11. Re:Nice dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah kind of like the Union Pacific and Central Pacific Railroads. No one had ever done it before. No one had engineering knowledge in building railroads across anything like the Rocky Mountains. Most of the engineers were ex-Army who had fought in the civil war.
      Oh, and it was massively subsidized by the government.
      Yep something that's never been done before.

  6. that Dallas-Houston route might get some gov $ by turkeydance · · Score: 2

    since Houston has to rebuild.

    1. Re:that Dallas-Houston route might get some gov $ by tri44id · · Score: 1

      Piggybacking on the right of way being assembled for the Houston to Dallas bullet train would be a sneaky way to bypass the many NIMBY, eminent domain, and "not my taxes" issues that any such project will encounter. Staying underground for the entire route would also reduce those issues, but there would still need to be above-ground power, vacuum pumping, and emergency exit sites at regular intervals along it.

      --
      Taxation without representation is tyranny! Statehood for DC, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands & Pacific Territories!
    2. Re:that Dallas-Houston route might get some gov $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People have been trying to get bullet train service between since the 1980s. Airline lobbies always defeat it. Had the airlines not prevented it, today you would be able to travel Houston to Dallas in about an hour for roughly $20.

  7. Romany by hackwrench · · Score: 0

    For people who have Romany in their genes.

    1. Re:Romany by mamono · · Score: 0

      People called Romany you go the house?

  8. Washington D.C. to Mar-a-Lago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Duh.

    1. Re:Washington D.C. to Mar-a-Lago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This route, is going to be the very best route.

  9. All Marketing by quanminoan · · Score: 2

    I love the concept of the hyperloop, and think it could be made to work, but it just appears this company is a joke largely focused on PR and capital investment than actually focusing on engineering. Even clicking on their website you find Steve Jobs type quotes "come with me if you want to change the world" and so on.

    Just recently they showed a video of the "first" vacuum hyperloop. Ridiculous countdowns, systems checks with different teams like they were launching a rocket, etc. The test was a *linear motor* and absolutely nothing new. I would have expected much more; in fact the SpaceX contest student teams seemed to be further along! It makes me embarrassed just watching those kinds of videos.

    So really no surprise Musk recently announced his intention to give it a go himself.

    1. Re:All Marketing by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm sure it's been done before more times than I could comfortably count, but I think Mars One sets the modern precedent for doing it on a global scale with a veneer of credibility and the help of the media.

      Find a shiny idea that people are enthusiastic about, promise to let them in on it, then milk them for processing fees and sell them merchandise. If you don't understand the concept of morals, I suppose it's a living.

    2. Re:All Marketing by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      What kind of motor except for an linear motor would you useÃY

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:All Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just recently they showed a video of the "first" vacuum hyperloop. Ridiculous countdowns, systems checks with different teams like they were launching a rocket, etc. The test was a *linear motor* and absolutely nothing new. I would have expected much more; in fact the SpaceX contest student teams seemed to be further along! It makes me embarrassed just watching those kinds of videos.

      Look, are you going to invest or not? Because if not, who cares what you think, bozo!

    4. Re: All Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a flawed concept, but everybody bought in because Musk was the one who tabled the idea. This headline should read "Hyperloop One reveals need for more investment funding", because the only train I see here is the hype train aiming to separate investors from their dollars.

    5. Re:All Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You missed the point. a linear motor test isn't a 'big thing'. It's the basics.

      A full size working model was made seven decades ago.

      It's like some startup car company doing tests of this new invention called 'The wheel'.

    6. Re:All Marketing by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      ... it just appears this company is a joke largely focused on PR and capital investment than actually focusing on engineering ..... systems checks with different teams like they were launching a rocket, etc.

      That's the point. Musk is a showman, a self-publicising narcissist who is addicted to other people's admiration. You are meant to go "Wow!!!!"

    7. Re:All Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, if you want an example of a self-publicising narcissist who is addicted to other people's admiration, you need to look in Washington DC, not California. Elon Musk is way too willing to tell people they're fucking idiots for that label to stick. I mean, he's no angel, and has plenty of flaws, but that isn't really one of them.

  10. Relevance? by pipingguy · · Score: 0

    "One points out that these winning teams represent a combined population of almost 150 million people, with routes that would link up 53 urban centers around the world and span a total distance of 4,121 miles)."

    Why is this relevant, other than to make some kind of impressive-to-stupid-science-journalist statement?

    And shouldn't the word 'winning' be in scarequotes?

    1. Re:Relevance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "One points out that these winning teams represent a combined population of almost 150 million people, with routes that would link up 53 urban centers around the world and span a total distance of 4,121 miles)."

      Why is this relevant, other than to make some kind of impressive-to-stupid-science-journalist statement?

      Because, obviously, if you could get each of those 150 million people to buy a $1 hyperloop ticket, that would be, like, a lot of money!

    2. Re:Relevance? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      "One points out that these winning teams represent a combined population of almost 150 million people" Why is this relevant, other than to make some kind of impressive-to-stupid-science-journalist statement?

      It isn't relevant. There is no way they were representing me as they claim.

      If they were, then I am making this post representing a combined population of the almost 7.5 billion people on Earth.

  11. So much bullshit ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the next step for each of these winning teams will be a validation process conducted with Hyperloop One to do some in-depth analysis on each route, establishing things like ridership forecast and building a fully fleshed out business case for each. Hyperloop One will be hosting workshops in each of the above countries to help with this process, and to meet with stakeholders and help establish necessary partnerships.

    They don't have working technology, they don't have any money, they don't have any approvals ... and yet they're actively looking for partnerships and business cases?

    This sounds like some bullshit con artists to me.

    And, once again, people with far to little real world anything are being given far too much attention and credibility.

    And just who do they think is paying for this? Oh, right, let's fleece the public, of course.

    1. Re:So much bullshit ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      They should at least have an app. What the fuck is it, amateur hour?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  12. And the BIGGER question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

    What's the point? For each of the proposed US routes, you can already buy round-trip airline tickets for about $120. Is hyperloop faster? No. Is hyperloop cheaper? Probably not.

    1. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is hyperloop cheaper to build? Probably not...

      Is Hyperloop cheaper long term? That still up for debate... The subway is super cheap, but was expensive to build too.

    2. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      Faster: depending on security check time, check in time before start and position of the endpoints in the cities: most likely.
      Cheaper: most definitely.

      Much cheaper, probably not. As in the USA the company running a hyper loop would like to price it close as possible but just below the competition.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      BTW: you should have checked the routes ;D
      A plane is most definitely not even half as fast as a hyperloop cabin.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In theory it will be *much* faster. Flying requires at least 1 hour extra and the start for luggage/security and 30-45 minutes at the end to get to baggage claim and luggage.

      This *should* be more like hopping on a train, where you can turn up a few minutes before departure. Hopefully there will be a stream of carriages a few minutes apart, meaning people arrive in small bursts and we don't get such a huge line at the rental counter. Also the chairs look more comfortable.

      Of course, the reality will like:
      - TSA jumps in and everyone gets a cavity search beforehand
      - Homeland security requests fingerprints and facial recognition before boarding/
      - Accountants see profit potential, and seats are made more like a tiny travelling coffin than a lounge recliner.

    5. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      The fastest tested hyperloop is 220 mph. And commercial transportation rarely operates at the maximum tested speed.

    6. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by magarity · · Score: 1

      For each of the proposed US routes, you can already buy round-trip airline tickets for about $120

      No, you can't. From the very first one:

      https://www.travelocity.com/Fl...

      "We've searched more than 400 airlines that we sell, and couldn't find any flights from Cheyenne (CYS) to Pueblo (PUB) on Mon, Oct 23"

    7. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      The fastest tested faux-hyperloop is 220 mph over a very short track. And commercial transportation rarely operates at the maximum tested speed.

      FTFY

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    8. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is Hyperloop cheaper long term? That still up for debate...

      No. Not even close.
      600 mile route is 1200 miles of tube. 1 each way.
      IF you could do 300 foot sections of tube that would be about 24,000 bolted together seals. Shorter sections equate to many more seals.

      If you put one expansion joint every 2000 feet, you would need about 3,500 of those. Each needing to move about 12" do to temperature expansion (Steel, low temp 40f high 110f).

      If you can make the main joints last for 25 years on average before replacement (Not likely considering vacuum and shit.) would would be replacing 80 of them a month. Expansion joints lasting 10 years on average I think would be good. There you would be replacing about 30 of them a month.

      That is 110 places a month that need to get replaced. If you never have them go bad out of sequence it is possible I guess if you start at one end and go down doing replacements methodically and were able to isolate from the rest of the system, pressurize, remove and install 20 normal sections and 8 expansion joints, re do the vacuum and open to the rest of the system once a week, every week and get it done between 11 PM and 6 AM so as to not kill service too badly ... If you could do great, get the best maintenance, the seals and expansion joints work wonders and last for LONG times. If you could do all that.


      It would still be a clusterfuck.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    9. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by AlanObject · · Score: 1

      IF you could do 300 foot sections of tube ...

      I note the "IF" and I am not questioning your numbers but I got curious. Is there any practical way to transport 300 foot sections from fabrication to site? Or were you supposing each section was fabricated next to its installation site?

      If it were me I would be instead looking at ways of making joining sections really inexpensive while maintaining very high tolerances.

    10. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      Do you have citations to back up those claims? Have there been any hyperloops tested at faster than airline speeds? What's the construction cost and operating cost estimates?

    11. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      It would still be a clusterfuck.

      How did people describe nuclear power in the 20s?

      How did people describe steam power in the 1500s?

    12. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by plopez · · Score: 1

      40f low will not work. It would have to get to at least -20C in places. Even AZ and NM can get cold. I froze my butt off camping outside Tuscon once when it got to -20 C. They were opening shelters for the homeless and I was in a tent.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    13. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something that long would have to be moved via helicopter. I'm not sure about other states, but AFAICT California won't let anything longer than 50' on the roads. I would assume that other states have similar rules.

      They might theoretically be able to get some sort of exemption, but with the number of modules they'd need, that's rather unlikely. At some point, they'd have to use helicopters in order to drop the pieces in place.

      A more reasonable length would probably be 40' as that's something that could be placed on a truck, even though it would still be limited in where it could go.

    14. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I live in Tucson, have for 35 years. -20C did not happen, even in the 2133meter mountains around us. I assume you have a citation for that, record temp, etc.

    15. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
      -Carl Sagan

      Elon isn't a Bozo, but this particular idea is.

    16. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'position of the endpoints'

      At bad times it can take an hour to even get to the airport...

    17. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Kiuas · · Score: 1

      That is 110 places a month that need to get replaced. If you never have them go bad out of sequence it is possible I guess if you start at one end and go down doing replacements methodically and were able to isolate from the rest of the system, pressurize, remove and install 20 normal sections and 8 expansion joints, re do the vacuum and open to the rest of the system once a week, every week and get it done between 11 PM and 6 AM so as to not kill service too badly ... If you could do great, get the best maintenance, the seals and expansion joints work wonders and last for LONG times. If you could do all that.

      It would still be a clusterfuck.

      This is so true.

      The problem with the hyperloop is that it lacks a solid economic foundation. This is the reason why the original Hyperloop Whitepaper makes no mention of maintenance costs whatsoever, and is very very slim on the details of their construction cost estimates. I mean honestly, it's practically impossible to start building anything anywhere unless you have a grasp on the lifetime costs of the system, but Hyperloop knows if they start to release estimates for the costs, it'll kill the project. Factoring in the maintenance required and the fact that their estimated building costs are very likely way too small, it's not going to be a cost-efficient competitor for other forms of travel, even if you get the technology to work which is not a given.

      I've for long wondered why Musk desires to keep it alive for as long as he has, he must be aware of the cost factors, but it maybe that they're hoping to extract some further data from the Hyperloop tests that could be useful for their future endeavors, or it maybe just a marketing thing.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    18. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by stevelinton · · Score: 1

      A couple of obvious options -- use fibreglass instead of steel and build long slightly curving sections that can deal with expansion by just becoming slightly more, or less, curved. You're thinking too much like railway track.

      We can already build and maintain long oil pipelines without having this problem, so how is hyperloop different?

    19. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to be faster than an airline if the incidental time wasting is reduced..

      The point is that for an airline, you have to arrive early (as your ticket is for a specific departure time), you have to wait for checkin, then wait to pass security. Then at the other end, if you have an luggage, you have to wait for it to be unloaded and put onto a carousel.

      Adding an extra 2 hours on top of

      Compare and contrast with catching a train. You usually don't have to arrive early, as if you miss one train you can catch the next. There's no checkin, and no security. Just checking of a ticket by an automated gate or a ticket inspector. And you keep your baggage with you.

      Hyperloop will be somewhere between the two. Presumably rather closer to the train scenario.

    20. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Of course it's easier to achieve fast speeds over a long track than a short one. So that short test track is not the advantage you're implying.

    21. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      I was going for numbers everywhere that were all overly optimistic to show that it can never happen.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    22. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 0

      Try refuting numbers instead of saying stupid shit because your assumptions were invalid.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    23. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Using all overly optimistic numbers so that even the apologists have nothing to attack.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    24. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      We can already build and maintain long oil pipelines without having this problem, so how is hyperloop different?

      People keep comparing Hyperloop with "cheap" oil and gas pipelines. Forget them. You can put fairly abrupt changes of direction into oil pipelines, including sweeping "Z" bends to accomodate expansion and contour hugging dips and humps to cross valleys and hills. With Hyperloop pods doing 1000 kph (or whatever it is) the tubes will need to be almost straiight.

    25. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Musk's vision has changed on the hyperloop a bit... he stopped talking about raised tubes, and has started talking about tunnels.
      I don't know his actual construction plans, but I suspect it's a concrete tube with some air tight, water tight spray on coating... and that coating is what would need to be replaced every 10-20 years... changing the maintains cycle into a machine that goes down the tube sand blasting the old crap off and spraying new crap on...

      Above ground hyperloops are crazy talk, below ground loops aren't completely insane for short runs.

      But I think the real goal here isn't for earth, I think he knows his martian colony is going to need to get underground for cheap radiation shielding... and a cheap fast tunneling contraction is going to make that easier and faster... and if he can use earth for the funding for such a device all the better.

    26. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You've not factored in the cost of the stations yet. And as the comparison was with airlines, we'd better add in the cost of airports, maintenance workers, certification, price of airplanes, and so on. Yes, Hyperloop's infrastructure is expensive, but that's the point - it moves the always-fluctuating running costs into something far more stable. It's also a bit weird comparing a prototype to an established market and declaring it dead, as if we did that all the time we'd still be bashing rocks together running away from the next tribe over.

      As for the engineering issues, that should be something to celebrate! It's not like these are insurmountable problems.

    27. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      And that was working at a fraction of the intended final speed. By your logic we'd never have flight as the first aircraft were incredibly shitty.

    28. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of those problems go away if you put the track underground. There's a reason Musk starting The Boring Company recently...

      There's a ton of smoke and mirrors, but if you peer deep enough you can get a semblance of the end goal...

    29. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by White+Yeti · · Score: 1

      Rather than helicopter, the natural way to deliver Hyperloop tube sections is via airship .

    30. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I can link you the article again, but it is in the story right there!
      First of all: the hyperloop is planned to be faster than airplane. The other answer you got explains you the time waste of flights. And finally: if you head checked the proposed connections, you had realized that they are basically all to short for a plane to make sense.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    31. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      As for the engineering issues, that should be something to celebrate! It's not like these are insurmountable problems.

      As an engineer who has managed projects I do not find any problem insurmountable if enough money is spent and it does not go against the laws of physics. But I also look at cost benefit, looking ahead beyond the trial stage (as Hyperloop is currently at); and having done that I see Hyperloop will be a commercial failure. Both practical coats and political problems are being vastly underestimated and papered over with hype.

    32. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Refute numbers based on current technology?

      But I repeat myself: What do the numbers look like on the materials that haven't been designed or invented yet? How old is air conditioning? Based on 1700 materials and assumptions what did the numbers on AC look like?

      We clearly know AC exists and works. In 200 years they'll probably say the same thing about hyperloop. It just means they need to work on the materials not that it's impossible.

    33. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Well.
      If we want to just imagine shit, then free energy, everything is free and most things easy.

      You could go with the best materials we currently know of that we have no idea how to make on that scale. 20ft diameter carbon nanotubes.
      That could probably work well. They are much lighter and are effected far, far less by temperature changes. If we did that we would not need expansion joints. We would just need to bolt together vacuum sealed sections.

      If it makes you feel better we can keep the impossibly long to transport to site 300 ft long sections and we can just decide that they can go on average 50 years before needing maintenance. That is still 10 to replace every week. Assuming no unforeseen failures.


      Herp derp.

      But yes. If we come up with materials we have not even thought of and everything becomes massively cheap and we are able to get around current regulations we could possibly make it work. Then again we could say the same thing about matter replicators. If I was trying to get California to give me money to set up a hypothetical matter replicator network to help the poor.....

      Well. That is how fucking stupid this idea is.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    34. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      In the end it can not work. To get around all the massive issues with this idea make it prohibitively expensive to build, and more importantly the cost to maintain and operate is far to high to make sense.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    35. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Which problems go away underground? One.

      If you make it deep enough you can design the normal sections to handle the much smaller expansion issues.
      You still need (With incredibly optimistic numbers) 24,000 normal sections. Still need to over the life of the system replace 80 of those a month.

      Now though you have to do it underground.

      The truth is to make this work is possible.
      To afford the build cost is difficult
      To have maintenance costs that keep the project viable is impossible.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    36. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure loads of engineers said that about reusable first stages on rockets, too. Just sayin'.

    37. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by fedos · · Score: 1

      You don't need to spend 30 minutes waiting to bring air pressure down to a vacuum with a train, nor 30 minutes waiting for air pressure to come back up on the other end.

      The margin for catastrophic failure on the Hyperloop will be very low, so security will be closer to what you get at an airport rather than what you get at a train station.

      Have you seen the prototypes for the Hyperloop passenger areas? There's no overhead luggage storage (there isn't even room for overhead storage, so your luggage will have to go into some sort of storage bay, even bags that would be carry-on size with an airplane. So you will have to add time for luggage check-in, luggage loading, luggage unloading, and luggage pick-up.

      So, no, Hyperloop will not be closer to the train scenario than the plane scenario.

    38. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by fedos · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that planes can travel at speeds in excess of 27 mph.

    39. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      By that logic, then maybe something like hyper loop will be viable in 500 years.

    40. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by fedos · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at the proposed connections? The only ones that don't have existing flight between them are Cheyenne/Denver and Denver/Pueblo. There are already existing passenger train routes for these connections. There are direct flights from Cheyenne to Pueblo.

    41. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      By your logic, airlines could be operating at Mach 3 because that's the fastest speed obtained by a aircraft. Just because something could hypothetically travel that fast doesn't mean its practical to do so in commercial applications. Until someone actually builds a hyperloop at a reasonable scale, you have know idea what the practical limits will be.

    42. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      California does allow for oversized loads on its highways with proper permits. I passed many of the wind turbine blades that went into the Alta Wind Energy Center.

      Each blade is 1 piece (not including mounting.) I calculated the blade length to be about 124ft (38m) based on the diameter of the blade sweep from GE's website.
      Model number being used: http://www.power-technology.com/projects/alta-wind-energy-center-awec-california/
      Diameter from: https://en.wind-turbine-models.com/turbines/655-general-electric-ge-1.5sle

    43. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compare and contrast with catching a train. You usually don't have to arrive early, as if you miss one train you can catch the next. There's no checkin, and no security. Just checking of a ticket by an automated gate or a ticket inspector. And you keep your baggage with you.

      For a local train, yes. It is like taking a city bus. For long distance trains and intercity buses, no. It is not that simple. For example, Megabus requires you to show up 15 minutes before departure time and you don't keep your baggage with you on long distance trains or buses.

    44. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      It was 63 years between the Wright brothers and the SR-71.

      The iPhone was released 61 years after the ENIAC.

      Look at what we have 10 years after the first DARPA project.

    45. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 0

      What you are saying is that you think that given an infinite amount of time that it may become possible and that by making that argument you are inferring that you are a fucking idiot. Ok. Both are true.


      Someday there maybe materials invented that make every problem with this system go away and you are an idiot.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    46. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Two: tairsts can only attack from the inside.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    47. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      How do you get 'infinite amount of time'? Are you ignorant to the rate of progress in the last 100 years?

    48. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      It took 63 years to go from the Wright brothers to the SR-71.

      I think it'll be a few less than 500 years.

    49. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      A hyperloop car will go with something like 1000km/h
      A plane goes with about 850km/h, but not on a flight with only 350 or 400km distance, because for that you don't use a super fast plane but likely a turbo prop.
      On a short flight the plane is spending more time in accent and decent than on the flight itself. So it will likely not even reach its top speed.

      No idea how you come to "27 mph" in that context, missed a zero?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    50. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      My point is that the distances are relatively short. Better suited for a hyperloop than for any plane.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    51. Re: And the BIGGER question is .. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      X-15 did mach 6.5. Space shuttle was even faster, though not at all deep in the atmosphere.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    52. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you guys make pipelines for oil? Weld it, no seals!

    53. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      On that many large welds in an area known for constant small earthquakes, you are asking for a catastrophic failure.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    54. Re:And the BIGGER question is .. by plopez · · Score: 1

      In Dec. '05 I was traveling through southern AZ and stopped to camp out. I was not in Tuscon but maybe 50 miles away. Looking at the records for that time I see that even if I am off a bit, the temp is far colder than what the OP was using to do "back of the envelope" calculations.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  13. "It'll need strong partners to make it a reality" by caseih · · Score: 1

    In other words, they need a lot of money from investors and governments, with few strings attached. And mostly from governments.

    I don't think government investment is bad inherently; I think government contracts with companies making known good technologies is a good thing. For example government contracts with SpaceX.

    I remain highly skeptical, especially when wheeled high speed trains are here right now. I can't possibly imagine that hyperloop would be cheaper than high speed rail to build, nor do I see how it solves any of the problems preventing high speed rail from being built in North America.

  14. Colorado by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Colorado proposal is bullshit. The only city here is Denver. Cheyenne and Pueblo are too small. Hell, Pueblo is only 100,000. Colorado Springs which would be in-between is 4x that, and even THAT is too damn small to make this worth it. The only reason it's being considered is because we have a conveniently located major airport, to hell and gone outside the city with a bunch of surrounding land that no one was allowed to build on. So it'd be cheap. But there's no place to go. Once you land at DEN, you're where you want to be. Other than "in the mountains". Or maybe downtown, which the recent light-rail line extension solves.

    The only people wanting quick access to Cheyenne from Denver, are the people living in Cheyenne... And that's only 96K.

    If it could really make the trip in 10 min, then it would open up commuting from... Cheyenne to Denver... and ease up the crazy housing prices... But that would have more of an impact in, you know, Silicon Valley. Why aren't they even considering building there? Because the land prices are already too crazy expensive to even consider the start-up costs. A tube going from the heart of SV to... Fresno or 100mi out to the middle of if-you-build-it nowhere, then the absolutely retarded prices of living in SV bottoms out. But buying up the land for the first 20 miles makes it nonviable.

    1. Re:Colorado by stwrtpj · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting Fort Collins, which lies between Denver and Cheyenne. A huge amount of daily commuting happens between Denver and Fort Collins along I-25, and some between Cheyenne and Fort Collins. One of the reasons I left my previous job recently was because they were closing the office I worked out of and were going to force me to make that daily commute. Had there been a high-speed train that could take me there, I might be still working at that company.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
    2. Re:Colorado by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      The Colorado proposal is bullshit. The only city here is Denver. Cheyenne and Pueblo are too small. Hell, Pueblo is only 100,000. Colorado Springs which would be in-between is 4x that, and even THAT is too damn small to make this worth it.

      Those places should do fine. The Hyperloop will have a very small carrying capacity. Probably only just enough to carry the millionaires, Musk wannabees and crackpots of those places.

  15. Re:"It'll need strong partners to make it a realit by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think government investment is bad inherently; I think government contracts with companies making known good technologies is a good thing.
    Probably 90% of the rail road systems in Europe, the Telecommunication land lines, the power infrastructure etc. was build by government owned "institutions" before it got privatized and "out sourced" to private companies.
    Heck, the french power grid is still run by the government and is only private "on paper".

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  16. Security will be a b..ch by ugen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given the speed of hyperloop transport, and it's reliance on precise positioning in an essentially vacuum tube (and, probably, tight spacing between vehicles) - it would be extremely easy to sabotage one and cause untold destruction and potential loss of life.

    So, it stands to reason, security to screen hyperloop passengers would have to be more stringent than that of airlines. Personally, not looking forward to those cavity searches.

    And yes, "this is why we can't have nice things".

    1. Re:Security will be a b..ch by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Trains have much higher density of people, and you don't even have to buy a ticket or come anywhere near a station or cut open a tube to mess with the tracks.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Security will be a b..ch by Vadim+Makarov · · Score: 4, Informative

      Rail track sabotage is nothing new, and when done properly can lead to significant loss of life and service disruption. We still ride trains.

      --
      17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
    3. Re:Security will be a b..ch by J-1000 · · Score: 2

      it would be extremely easy to sabotage one and cause untold destruction and potential loss of life.

      Yeah, now imagine if it didn't have that protective tube and just zoomed people through the sky! That would be risky.

    4. Re:Security will be a b..ch by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      it would be extremely easy to sabotage one and cause untold destruction and potential loss of life.

      Err you basically just described a train.

    5. Re:Security will be a b..ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it would be extremely easy to sabotage one and cause untold destruction and potential loss of life.

      It should be pretty easy to detect sabotage by just monitoring the pressure. Much easier than rail track sabotage detection. Even if it was easy, it probably would not cause losses of lives as easily as you assume.

    6. Re:Security will be a b..ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > We still ride trains.

      Obviously not an American. We don't.

      Sadly, here in the USA, for the most part we don't still ride trains. Not because we don't want to, but because there are almost none available.

      At least, not inter-city -- some cities do have reasonable local train services. The very few remaining inter-city routes (Amtrak) typically run on schedules that are impractical for most of their potential market. And with seldom more than one or two inter-city trains per day each direction, connections are abysmal. Most of the schedules are dictated by the fact that rails are shared with freight, which gets priority.

      Not passing judgment on why it is this way. I don't like it, but I recognize that at least in part it is because of geography, and in part because of short-sighted public policy. Trains are a little better, but not much, along the coasts (especially the east) where cities are closer together, but they provide almost no practical service to those of us living in the middle of the continent (e.g. Colorado).

      Yeah, I know, WAY off topic. Sorry.

  17. Re:"It'll need strong partners to make it a realit by caseih · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's true. I agree completely. I've seen first hand the results of privatizing government-owned monopoly services like transportation, electricity, gas, etc, and it's not pretty. As citizens we end up paying for things twice. Of course once privatization happens, re-nationalizing isn't pretty either. Then you pay for it all a third time.

  18. Hyperloop or California Bullet Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "build a fully fleshed out business case" for each Hyperloop hopeful site. I have not seen it done for California Bullet Train, Governor Jerry Brown's pet project, with expenditures around $1 billion so far.

  19. Re:Thulsa Doom Speaks! by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Meh. Just another snake cult.

  20. Oh c'mon, people, it's obvious where to build it by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  21. Re:Thulsa Doom Speaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where do I sign up?

  22. If they want lots of customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tijuana to San Diego. Not sure how many would be PAYING customers...

  23. Yeah, no one has ever made a big tube before by Brannon · · Score: 1

    http://www.hydrocarbons-techno...

    1. Re:Yeah, no one has ever made a big tube before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You will find even these tubes will have leaks and what not on the regular. How will a vacuum tube with nothing inside (like black gold) to maintain steady temperature cope?

    2. Re:Yeah, no one has ever made a big tube before by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      And submarines are the same thing as spaceships because they both operate under differential pressure.

  24. wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. this scam is still going on ? Suckers...

  25. Distances are a bit off by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    Gives Glasgow - Liverpool as 339 miles, but driving it is 220 miles
    .

    1. Re:Distances are a bit off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Northern Arc route covers Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow.

    2. Re:Distances are a bit off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      220 miles = 349 kilometers - seems very close to 339 - maybe the typo monsters got in there?

  26. Glasgow-Liverpool? Really? by IRGlover · · Score: 1

    I doubt that more than a few dozen people a day travel specifically between those two places. I really don't see that as economically viable, even if there were fast satellite rail services to Manchester at the Liverpool end and Edinburgh at the Glasgow one. Some of the other ones seem to suffer similar problems (are there really enough people wanting to go between Denver and Pueblo at speed to make that route worthwhile - unless it is to get to NORAD quickly)? I suppose you could have the routes take in some intermediate stops, but then I doubt they would be much quicker than what is already available.

    If these are the 'strongest' routes, then Hyperloop is doomed.

  27. Hyperloop... by bayankaran · · Score: 1

    Hyperloop is the new Segway.

    --
    Tat Tvam Asi
  28. Hyperloop Is Old Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like Elon Musk is now plagarizing old sci-fi movies ... only he is doing it above ground unless you count his attempt to tunnel under Los Angeles.

    Look up the following "made for TV" movies that were produced and/or written by Gene Roddenberry: "Genesis II" and "Planet Earth"

    They date back to ...

    ... wait for it ...

    1972 or 1973 and 1974 respectively.

    I doubt that Gene Roddenberry's estate is going to get any credit for Elon's "great new idea".

    Elon Musk should be ashamed of himself for actively promoting an idea that he has blatantly plagarized.