Missouri Considers Hyperloop Route Between St. Louis and Kansas City (theverge.com)

Missouri officials are forming a public-private partnership to study the feasibility of building a hyperloop route between St. Louis and Kansas City. The study is being supported by Hyperloop One, and conducted by a consortium of groups, including the Missouri Department of Transportation, the St. Louis Regional Chamber, the KC Tech Council, the University of Missouri System, and the Missouri Innovation Center in Columbia. The Verge reports: St. Louis to Kansas City is a 248-mile route that takes around three hours and 40 minutes by car, or about 55 minutes by plane (not including time spent traveling to the airport, security lines, etc.). Hyperloop One claims the trip would just take 31 minutes using its system of aerodynamic pods traveling through nearly airless tubes at speeds of up to 760 mph. Of course, that depends on building hundreds of miles of tubes, either above ground on pylons along a highway like I-70, or through underground tunnels. The Missouri study will explore all these options, as well the amount of state money that would be needed to build it. The study will cost about $1.5 million, and will be paid for using private funds, Missouri officials said.

Comments

Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[scdeimos]

St. Louis to Kansas City is a 248-mile route that takes around three hours and 40 minutes by car, or about 55 minutes by plane (not including time spent traveling to the airport, security lines, etc.). Hyperloop One claims the trip would just take 31 minutes using its system of aerodynamic pods traveling through nearly airless tubes at speeds of up to 760 mph.

I do believe you're kidding yourself if you think TSA will allow very expensive Hyperloops to operate without forcing security checkpoints and security screening on everyone using them.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[viperidaenz]

You can't hijack a hyperloop and crash it in to a building.
While the cost of damage would be very high, the risk to life isn't really any different than a bus or train full of people. How hard would it be to derail a passenger train with an IED on the tracks? You only need enough explosive to cut through a single rail.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Obfuscant]

While the cost of damage would be very high, the risk to life isn't really any different than a bus or train full of people.

Perhaps you missed that TSA is involved with trains. Hyperloop, due to its huge pricetag and high tech, will be a prime target. While you can't hijack a car, you can certainly make it disintegrate in a spectacular way.

It will not be TSA that pushes for their control of security checkpoints for Hyperloop terminals, it will be people, once the first hyperloop train is destroyed by anyone who can have a political agenda attached to them. Even if not. There are already calls for tighter security in HOTELS because of the Las Vegas shooting. How COULD anyone get so many guns into a hotel room? (Carry them in. Next question?) Doesn't this show a need for gun control? (He was using AK-47s if what I heard is correct, one of the guns that is already heavily controlled, so no. Next question?)

How hard would it be to derail a passenger train with an IED on the tracks?

Passenger trains are low-tech commonplace things. The first (and second and probably third) public Hyperloop will be the opposite.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[gweihir]

Indeed. Expect at least 1 hour of additional wait time. On the other hand, in most of Europe, you can just get on a high-speed train as soon as you have a ticket, no security check whatsoever, because trains are very hard to derail from the inside.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[gweihir]

And what do you think happens when somebody blows up a very fast capsule in a "nearly airless" very long tube?

Incidentally, an IED does nothing to train-rails. You vastly underestimate how tough they are. You need to cut a length out of the rails and that can (and has been in the past) be detected by standard monitoring systems after the first cut. It takes a while to do each of both cuts while sparks fly everywhere. This is just way too hard to do without getting caught and you need special equipment (can be traced) for it to not take forever.

Re: Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[scdeimos]

If you're one of those weirdos that like to put a dollar value on peoples' lives then obviously the cost in human life would be relatively low in a Hyperloop car versus a train. For the rest of us the costs come in repairing the tunnel damage, re-certifying the tunnel for use again, plus the monetary costs in lost ticket sales and secondary impacts while the tunnel is offline.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[CanadianMacFan]

The TSA wouldn't care about a hyperloop being expensive and supposedly a high target. The TSA would see it as a chance to expand their power and influence. It would be a chance for the head of the department to be in charge of more people and have a larger budget. There would be fights inside the TSA about where to place hyperloops because those people would want the improved status.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[uvajed_ekil]

You can't hijack a hyperloop and crash it in to a building. While the cost of damage would be very high, the risk to life isn't really any different than a bus or train full of people.

No, you can't crash a hyperloop car into a skyscraper, but if you blow one up you might take down the whole, expensive loop, requiring millions of dollars of repairs. The concerns may not be as great for above ground sections, but any tunnel portions will be especially vulnerable to destruction. One incident would scare a lot of people away from the technology, because how easy do you think it will be to mount a rescue operation if a tunnel collapses? Catastrophic failures in a hyperloop system will be virtually guaranteed to be just that, catastrophic, and deadly.

Security and entrance screening will necessarily be tight, likely similar to what we see today at airports. Anything so new and strange would be an obvious target of interest.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[mspohr]

Just patch the hole and start it up again.
Hyperloop capsules only hold 10 or 20 people... fewer than a city bus. Not a very attractive target.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Immerman]

You get a bit of a shockwave traveling down the tube? Maybe you manage to punch a hole in the tube and get and not-that-hard to manage air inrush event. Basically the tube would need some maintenance, and might ring like a gong, but it probably wouldn't make for much of a media spectacle.

As for trains - you don't need to sever the tracks, you just need to disrupt the foundation enough so that they're far enough from parallel to derail the train.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Immerman]

It's not going to be any easier to destroy much Hyperloop than it would rail. You're probably imagining a movie-style chain reaction implosion - but there's no way for that to happen outside of Hollywood, the physics are all wrong.

Re: Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[MachineShedFred]

When did anyone put a cost per human life? How many high speed rail attacks have there been in Europe, China, Japan? Zero. Why? A train derailment doesn't get you anywhere you can't get otherwise, and it's a lot of fucking work in comparison to renting the equivalent of a U-haul truck and driving it over a bunch of people in a busy plaza. Lots of train tunnels in Europe that go under the Alps on existing high speed rail lines - how come they aren't blowing up and collapsing all the time from all the terrorists?

If you haven't noticed, most terrorists are not Bond villains - they're remarkably resourceful at turning everyday tools into incredibly crude weapons in unbelievably cheap ways and claiming credit for brutal attacks on the innocent. Why fuck around with explosives and training and all that when you can just get a knife and start stabbing people in the train station instead? Or grab some guy off the street and cut his head off on the Internet with your black flag in the background?

The sophistication of attacks would have to reverse course in a hurry in order to do anything you are talking about.

Re: Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Anonymous Coward]

TSA is not going to miss the chance of getting that sweet hyperloop monies and expanding its reach.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Citizen of Earth]

There's no point in security among the passengers when any terrorist can punch a hole anywhere along the 248-mile tube and kill everyone in the tube with a 15-psi overpressure shock wave moving at the speed of sound. Well, I suppose an errant driver could do this, too, by crashing into the tube.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[DrXym]

I don't see how they can claim no queues when all the experience of public transportation suggests that at peak times there sure as hell will be queues at one point or another.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Immerman]

Surely it does. It almost certainly won't kill you, but it's not going to be pleasant. But destroying a single car is no worse than destroying a bus in terms of lives lost. And not nearly as potentially bad as a shooter in a crowded theater. Either way the bomb that does the damage is probably going to be what kills you. Either that or tumbling down the highway in a pile of shrapnel

I don't know about fault zones - but one of the initial plans was for a loop in California, so I assume they have a plan for that.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[gweihir]

If you do it right, the capsule will be pushed to impressively high speeds by the air rushing in and then eventually collide with some end-point....

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Kartu]

People keep asking about guns as if it were canons. You could fit 20 guns int 2-3 large bags, what is the deal?

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Kartu]

With that logic terrorists could easily blow high speed trains passing by at 330km/h.
Note that if done in advance or afterwards it wouldn't be as deadly and would be discovered very quickly.

Basically as with railway.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[viperidaenz]

If a tunnel collapses, it's probably about as hard to mount a rescue operation as a tunnel collapse in a subway system.

I just don't see the value in screening passengers when there is a larger attack surface sitting on the ground. You don't need to be a psycho suicide bomber to attack from the outside either, like a passenger would be.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Obfuscant]

The TSA wouldn't care about a hyperloop being expensive and supposedly a high target. The TSA would see it as a chance to expand their power and influence.

For whatever reason the TSA has, it won't necessarily be them who demands the introduction of security checkpoints at Hyperloop terminals. That's what I was saying.

There would be fights inside the TSA about where to place hyperloops

I don't think I've ever heard of a fight within TSA over the placement of an airport, so I doubt they'd have much influence over the placement of Hyperloop terminals.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[slashrio]

You can't hijack an airplane and fly it into a building any more either.

Yes you can.
You only need a vice-president who organizes an exercise and orders the air force to stand down on the day of 'the event'.
Happened before, can be done again.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Obfuscant]

With that logic terrorists could easily blow high speed trains passing by at 330km/h.

"High speed trains" differ from "low speed trains" in one primary aspect: how fast they go. They are still trains, they are still commonplace objects (other than the speed). When you look at one at the station you cannot tell if the train will be high speed or low, and even trains that are streamlined and designed to be high speed may be limited to slow speeds due to the track.

Basically as with railway.

Destroying a high-tech, new, multi-billion dollar Hyperloop would have much more psychological impact, and thus more attraction to a terrorist. They are, after all, not always seeking the easiest targets, but those that will have an impact.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Obfuscant]

Just patch the hole and start it up again.

A very simplistic view of what damage would be done.

Hyperloop capsules only hold 10 or 20 people... fewer than a city bus. Not a very attractive target.

And how many people will the next capsule to depart from the station be holding, if the news that the capsule ahead of theirs was blown up by a terrorist? Will those 20 people think "gosh, how terrible, but it won't happen to me..."? Or will they say "I don't really need to travel today, not by Hyperloop"? And the people following them, and then the next capsule ... and as the news propagates to other Hyperloop terminals and passengers ...

The effect a terrorist seeks is not just how many people will be killed, but how many people will be impacted. They still put bombs on city buses in the Middle East even if that kills only a few people. The final effect they want is not just to kill those specific people, but to make people afraid to ride the bus. The bombs outside police stations in Iraq are not meant just to kill a few people outside police stations, but to make people fear going to a police station.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[DrXym]

No, but somebody armed with a bomb could blow the shit out of everyone in a pod and potentially cause billions of dollars of economic damage.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[mspohr]

People didn't stop flying because terrorists blew up airplanes.
Terrorists won't even try to blow up the Hyperloop. There are much easier, better targets.
Get your shorts all twisted up worrying about something else.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[CanadianMacFan]

It would be a fight within the TSA over where in the organization the new people would fit in and who made the rules for the publics "safety".

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Immerman]

I believe even the shockwave propagates at only the speed of sound, which isn't that far above the car's normal cruising speed. At least on the straightaways... going top speed through a winding section could be quite exciting, at best.

As I've mentioned elsewhere though, you can easily (mostly) avoid "pneumatic tube" effects by simply opening all the emergency hatches along a length of tube - within seconds the whole tube could be at roughly ambient pressure, neutralizing any "pneumatic tube" acceleration, and leaving air resistance to rapidly slow the cars. It's an incredibly reliable and fairly cheap to install safety feature.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[viperidaenz]

You could do the same thing on a bus. There's more people on a bus than a hyperloop pod, and if it's done in the middle of rush hour in the middle of the CBD in a large city, it's going to shut down the entire city.

A hyperloop isn't going to be the only way to get from A to B. If it's not working, people will drive, fly, train or bus instead. The only ones losing money will be insurance companies. The airlines and bus/train companies will get a nice profit boost. The hyperloop company will get a whole lot of business doing the repairs.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Obfuscant]

People didn't stop flying because terrorists blew up airplanes.

I don't know what planet you live on, but here on Earth, yes, indeed, people did stop flying because of 9/11. Not all of them, but a large number -- significant enough that it had a major impact on airline service levels.

Terrorists won't even try to blow up the Hyperloop.

They'd be a great target. Why wouldn't they? The first Hyperloop system will get a lot of press, and blowing it up would get a lot more.

There are much easier, better targets.

Terrorists don't look just for easy targets. They look for targets with an impact on the most people, or to make a statement.

Get your shorts all twisted up worrying about something else.

Get a clue on reality and understand that someone can point out that a certain thing will be a target without having their "shorts all twisted up", or needing your insults to correct that situation.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Agripa]

It will not be TSA that pushes for their control of security checkpoints for Hyperloop terminals, it will be people, once the first hyperloop train is destroyed by anyone who can have a political agenda attached to them.

It will be the airlines if they perceive Hyperloop as a threat and the rent seekers in government when they see another way to loot.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[gweihir]

You forget that the air rushing in has mass and hence momentum.

Re:Whaddya mean there'll be no lines?

[Immerman]

I do not. If the air rushing in only goes a few hundred meters before it reaches air coming in from the other direction, then it doesn't have a lot of time to build up momentum. That's the point, along with providing an "escape valve" for pressure spikes when moving air columns hit an obstruction. And perhaps serving as emergency/maintenance hatches as well.

Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

Why would anyone want to go from St Louis to Kansas City, or vice versa? And if there is some reason that you actually need to make that trip, why would you want to do it in such a hurry?

I'm not trying to make a joke here. I really need to know.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess is it has something to do with Kansas City being the biggest city in Missouri, but St Louis being the capital. Lots of travel between the two, and nothing important in between.

Re:Serious question

[HornWumpus]

Reading between the lines. Someone got a grant, their employer has a publicist (good old Mizzou), 'theVerge' has no bullshit filter.

Bottom line, someone and his/her grad students will be living it up for the next few years. I-70 is a busy highway. They will conclude that it makes no sense if not part of a bigger system, getting it half right.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Jefferson City is the Capital, St Louis is the biggest city. And Columbia (Mizzou) is in the middle

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Great, except Jefferson City is the capital....

KC and STL are the two largest cities in MO though.

Hyperloop is a terrible idea. Just increase the speed limit on I-70 to 120 mph. Problem solved. A lot of people already think that's the limit anyways.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't they just by a motel in each city and a permanent hooker retail business? It has to cost less than commuting hookers.

Re:Serious question

[ntsucks]

KC BBQ

Re:Serious question

[reboot246]

Yeah, you'd think they'd all be wanting to get the hell out of MO, not traveling within the state.

That is a joke; get over it.

Re:Serious question

[14erCleaner]

They're big cities, and there's a lot of business transacted between them. Everything doesn't happen on the coasts, you know.

Re:Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

In fact most of my domestic travel as of late has been b/w St Louis & KC, and b/w St Louis & Chicago which is another route that could also benefit greatly from the hyperloop.

Oh, I can see Chicago - St Louis. People want to come up to Wrigley Field to see the Cards play the Cubs and Chicagoans travel to St Louis to buy meth and guns.

Re:Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

They're big cities, and there's a lot of business transacted between them. Everything doesn't happen on the coasts, you know.

There's already a train that will take you from KC to St Louis, or vice versa, for about 30 bucks.

Note: I used to live in Rolla, MO, and have traveled to KC and STL on many occasions. I just don't see the need for a Hyperloop. It's not like they're going to carry freight.

Re: Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

The AMTRAK train from STL to KC and back (only $30) is plenty fast. Nobody in Missouri needs to get anywhere faster than that.

As someone who once lived in Rolla, I assure you that there's no reason to be in such a hurry.

Re:Serious question

[rfengr]

Papppy’s is good, but Jack Stack is better.

Re:Serious question

[uvajed_ekil]

Why would anyone want to go from St Louis to Kansas City, or vice versa? And if there is some reason that you actually need to make that trip, why would you want to do it in such a hurry?

I'm not trying to make a joke here. I really need to know.

Every large city in the country, and many small cities and towns, can provide you with most anything you need to live every day of your life. So why not ask why anyone ever travels to a different city, and why they don't normally walk or otherwise take the slowest route possible? Why not travel as quickly as possible? Maybe there are people who do business in both cities, live in one and do business in the other, or have family on the opposite side of the state? You wouldn't even think to ask this question if it involved New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles, so why should KC and STL, while much smaller, be any different?

Re:Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

This will never happen it would destroy too many stills and upset the brother sister mating habits of the hillbillies. The other danger would be that the hyperloop might drown out the constant strumming of Banjo music that the brother sisters mate too.

That's racist.

When I lived in Missouri, I met one of the finest luthiers in the US. He made me a beautiful ukulele. He was the exact opposite of a dumb hillbilly. There are some great people in Missouri.

Re:Serious question

[MachineShedFred]

In the Cincinnati area, there are a few good places depending on where you are and how far you would like to drive.

West side - Walt's BBQ on Colerain Ave.
Fairfield / Colerain Township / Tri-County - Big Art's BBQ
Eastgate / Anderson Township / Newtown - Just Q'in. Extra points for having the growler station across the street
Mount Adams / Downtown - Eli's BBQ. They also have a truck that shows up at various events.

There's a guy that just set up a trailer and 4 smokers at a busy intersection about a half mile from my house - jury is still out on his stuff.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Kansas City is the biggest city with 480,000 people. Saint Louis (population: 310,000) is the center of the biggest metropolitan area.

Re:Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

There's a guy that just set up a trailer and 4 smokers at a busy intersection about a half mile from my house - jury is still out on his stuff.

Gotta support local entrepreneurs. I always give food trucks and trailers extra credit just for existing.

There's this truck, Rojo Taco, in Houston and I still regret not having one more of their taco plates w/ nopales before leaving town. It was on my schedule, but then Hurricane Harvey hit and I don't know what happened to him. I hope he's OK. I can close my eyes and conjure the smell of his food.

Re:Serious question

[Stephenmg]

Right now, it's about a 3-4 hour trip by car. If you have business in the other, which happens all the time, it either means you have a very long day driving back or have to spend money on a hotel. They are really too close to fly economically and with security wait times, probably better off driving. If it gets built and works, this would be a great base to expand off of. Denver is a 9-hour drive west on I-70 from Kansas CIty. Expanding to Dallas via Oklahoma City and Witchita wouldn't be much of a stretch either using the I-35 easments. Chicago and/or Indianapolis could be targets to expand to from St. Louis. Denver, Dallas, and Chicago are in the 3 of the 4 other US routes being considered. Kansas City and St. Louis are connected via I-70 which has a large easement and not a lot of development nearby outside of both metros with the exception of Colombia. So it could be built above ground without many obstacles.

Re:Serious question

[PopeRatzo]

There's a nice Amtrak train that goes from STL to KC. You can get work done, or relax during the ride and be fresh for your "business" in the other city. Costs $30, which is less than the gas to make the drive.

There will never be a Hyperloop from STL to KC. They can't even afford to educate kids in Missouri, how they going to build a Hyperloop?

Re:Serious question

[jgtg32a]

East St. Louis != St. Louis

Re:Serious question

[Joey Vegetables]

East *anyplace* seems in my experience to be questionably safe at best. East Cleveland. East St. Louis. East New York. East L.A. I wonder why that is. (N.B.: I was born in East Cleveland, but a long time ago, well before it reached its current levels of poverty, corruption, and lawlessness.)

Re:Serious question

[Stephenmg]

Amtrak's site says that it's a 5-hour 40-minute trip one way with very limited departure times. STL to KC you'd have under an hour if you are trying to avoid a hotel. KC to STL you'd have about 2 hours. Not much time if you have a meeting that's not near the station. If the technology works, it has the potential to replace most domestic flights. They would build STL/KC if for no other reason then its the best route between the east coast and west coast is along I-70 and adding potential stops in several large metros along the way.

Re:Serious question

[michael_wojcik]

On a slightly serious note, I drive between Michigan and New Mexico several times a year, and now for family reasons nearly always take the Kansas route. (We used to avoid Kansas because five or six hours on I-70 through western Kansas and eastern Colorado is sheer torture.)

The Missouri leg is actually one of the best parts, before you get to the better parts of Colorado. Of course I don't take I-70 in Missouri, because that too is agonizing - almost nothing but traffic and billboards. There are some good places to eat, but the scenery is much less pretty than it is around the Ozarks. St Louis traffic is bad, and while KC is better, there are still some annoying stretches.

So I go north and take US-36 through Missouri, which is quite pleasant. It's mostly rural and much less heavily traveled, and far fewer billboards. It's a leg I look forward to, particularly after the five or six hundred hours on interstates in frickin' Illinois. (Illinois has two modes: Chicago, which has features but ghastly traffic; and everything else, which alternates between nothing and packs of obnoxious drivers.)

Similarly, when going through western Kansas, I now get off I-70 onto US-40 when it splits off, then go through rural Kansas and Colorado. The fewer miles of interstate, the better.

Forget the Missouri hyperloop. What we need is are hyperloops across Illinois and Kansas. Chunnel-style ones that ferry cars.

Series of Tubes

[darkain]

Transportation is merely just a series of tubes!

Missouri

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet, like other states, they consider lots of things, all the time.

I considered eating a half-gallon of Haagen-Dasz last night, but I didn't in the end.

There is no story here until the hyperloop is built and accepting passengers.

I can help with that.

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> is hyperloop feasible?

No. Now where's my $1m for the study?

Re:I can help with that.

[Tokolosh]

The monorail of our time.

A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[gweihir]

And with far less time to get onto the vehicle and out again probably in the same more realistic time (about 1h). And it could be done with reliable, established technology that you can buy on the market instead of some fantasy-construct that may or may not ever work well or safely.
 

Re:A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[Moldiver]

Yeah a nice Shinkansen would beat this route in the same time as an airplane but without the annoying checkins.

Re:A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[gweihir]

Indeed. Or ICE, TGV, CRH, Sapsan, etc. This is market with a lot of established known-to-work options. If you want something really flashy going at 500km/h but still being essentially a train from a passenger POV, get a Transrapid. Although that has some rather bad limitations compared to trains.

The US is _very_ late to this game. Magically thinking that the "Hyperloop" hyper-hype will make up for that is just plain stupid. Be rational and select one from the established options and then (if you insist) learn to do it for yourself over the next 30 years or so via collaborations and investments.

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[LynnwoodRooster]

Well now, let's be honest... They are building it right now and it will stop in Bakersfield because no onehas a clue how to get through the mountains to Los Angeles. Every route, every option has failed. But hey - this is California! We don't let a little thing like an insurmountable obstacle stop us from blowing $100 billion! We have people who have to get from Oildale to Fresno NOW!

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[gweihir]

Well, maybe buy some knowledge of how to do this? Available, e.g., in Europe and Asia. Of course, if you have people with no clue plan railway lines, that will fail.

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[amiga3D]

Look who's doing it.

Re:A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[inking]

It’s pretty easy to surveillance train lines to avoid sabotage.

Re:A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[houghi]

Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail.

Lameness filter encountered.

Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[LynnwoodRooster]

How many will commute from Fresno to Oildale? How many commute from LA to SF? Why even start to build a line if you don't know how to connect the largest metropolitan area in the nation to the second largest metropolitan area in the State?

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[Joey Vegetables]

Problem in the former is connecting distant and/or congested points within that area together. NYC at least has the subways and trains. Greater LA is more spread out, has lower population density, has much less intracity/commuter rail than it needs, and may very easily require a several hour trip just to reach the terminal. This diminishes the value of fast intracity travel. You rarely go from terminal to terminal. You go from probably an hour or so away, if you're lucky, to the terminal, then to the other, then from that terminal to your destination, and then back again. The faster you can make the trip between terminals, the more the limiting factor becomes travel to and from them within the two respective metro areas. That in my mind is why the most promising candidates for something like Hyperloop, if/when it ever becomes a real thing, would be between cities that are either (a) relatively uncongested, and/or (b) well-served by existing public transportation networks. IMO, SFO qualifies, though just barely and only because of BART; LA, not so much. Not yet anyway.

Re: A high-speed rail could basically do the same

[LynnwoodRooster]

Good for you! Now, is the NY area dropping $100+ billion on high speed rail? No? Well - California is. With the aforementioned issue... Nice way for the idiots in Sacramento to not only blow our State's budgets further out of the water (excuse me, they balance them always by shifting expenditures/debts to the future), but suck up tens of billions in Federal subsidies and grants - so that NY and others cannot execute high speed rail where it would make sense...

Good for business

[magarity]

The Hyperloop idea sure has been good for business lately... the "conduct a study" business, that is. How do I get in on some of that action?

Re:Good for business

[HornWumpus]

Takes years of asskissing. Politiking a committee, not fucking any committee member's daughters etc. Convince them your dissertation is up to their standards of incomprehensibility and weight (not intellectual 'weight', mass). Read some entrails, dance naked about and jump over bonfires (with large dangerous fireworks glued to your pubic hair). Hop skip and puke contests. etc.

Finally something related to this that makes sense

[avandesande]

Expense and problems dealing with existing infrastructure and approvals are going to be a tiny fraction of what they would be in LA. When the bugs are worked out in Midwest then tackle the more complex project.

Re:Finally something related to this that makes se

[PPH]

Walmart.

Got its start by concentrating in rural towns. Flying under the radar of competition and big city politicians with their grubby little hands out. Could work for Hyperloop as well.

About St. Louis, Two Kansas Cities, Hyperloop

[Bruce Perens]

Those of us who live on the coasts might discount St. Louis and the two Kansas Cities as fly-over country. However, both are relatively big cities. St. Louis has a large university, a regional medical complex that covers 7 or 8 square blocks, working mass transit, and a good deal of industry. Last month when I was there, helicopters never stopped flying in and out of the hospital heliport.

Kansas City is two cities straddling a river and state border: Kansas City Kansas, and Kansas City Missouri. It has more population than Atlanta or Miami.

The hyperloop has a lot of human issues people seem to underestimate. Current designs would be uncomfortable and claustrophobic, and safety of a big thing moving really fast in an evacuated tunnel is problematic. High speed rail, on the other hand, can go really fast without the problems. The assumption that a hyperloop would be less expensive than rail is unfounded and untested. And the hyperloop itself is little tested other than models on a short, linear track outside of SpaceX. The hyperloop may be real someday, but that time has not yet come.

Re:About St. Louis, Two Kansas Cities, Hyperloop

[CanadianMacFan]

Last month when I was there, helicopters never stopped flying in and out of the hospital heliport.

I don't see that as a big selling point. Do they have really bad drivers there or high levels of shootings that require the helicopters to be used so often? I'd want to live in a place where the only time the helicopter goes out is so the pilot can maintain his/her flight hours.

Re:About St. Louis, Two Kansas Cities, Hyperloop

[Altus]

freight isn't in a hurry

Re:About St. Louis, Two Kansas Cities, Hyperloop

[Bruce Perens]

Industrial and farming machines are dangerous, people have heart attacks and strokes, and people have lots of other reasons that they end up in a helicopter to the hospital. I'd assume that the hospital is being fed by a large portion of at least two states, and probably smaller hospitals.

Re:Finally something related to this that makes se

[Obfuscant]

Got its start by concentrating in rural towns.

So Hyperloop's business model should be building billion dollar trains to connect rural towns, just to get a "foothold" in the market? "The 10:15 Hyperloop from Pixley to Hootersville is now boarding on track 5. All aBOARD!" "Conductor, does this hyperloop stop at Petticoat Junction?"

A hint: when you stay at the Shady Rest, don't drink the tap water. I hear that the girls bathe in it.

What did God say when he saw Eve swimming in the river? "I'll never get that smell off those fish." Thank you, try the veal, tip your waitress.

I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Building high-speed rail between St. Louis and Kansas City is considered impractical for some reason, but building a metal tube hundreds of miles long and pumping virtually all the air out of it is considered cheaper and more practical?

Elon, go back to SpaceX where at least you're doing something useful.

I saw a theory

[rsilvergun]

that this is all just a way for Musk to find & train engineers on the cheap. He spent $10 million out of pocket (give or take) and he's got every university and their student body falling all over themselves for it. Even if he didn't plan it that's what's happened.

Re:I saw a theory

[gweihir]

Sounds plausible.

Tesla

[uvajed_ekil]

How bout Tesla's flying electric rocket cars? Those are going to be really fast and all the rage in a couple years. Press release coming later this week.

Elon the Marketeer

[inking]

Hyperloop One claims the trip would just take 31 minutes using its system of aerodynamic pods traveling through nearly airless tubes at speeds of up to 760 mph.

Well, it’s great and all that Hyperloop claims that they can do this without a single system being deployed anywhere in the world. The winner of their design competition—the one that had miniaturized pods move without a payload—didn’t even go a third of this speed. Shouldn’t Musk at least provide a working prototype on a limited scale before you start forming committees? it is little more than a very much hyped-up idea at this point.

The Hyperloop: BUSTED!

[sproketboy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

So would this be called...

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Would it be called the Kansas City Shuttle?

Fuck Musk and his Hyperloop.

[Chas]

These people haven't built even a fully working, usable prototype yet.
And I'm sick of them shilling their snake oil.
"Hyperloop here! Hyperloop there! Hyperloop, Hyperloop EVERYWHERE!"

They may as well be shilling a 100MPG carburetor that magically converts plain water into a combustible fuel source.

Help me with the math here...

[Aaden42]

Current trip: 40 minutes by car. Proposed hyperloop: 31 minutes. Supposed speed "up to 760 mph"

So.... Spend how many millions (billions?) to shave off 9 minutes. Certainly pay more per trip than the car or bus trip would have cost. And for how few milliseconds can you actually get anywhere near that top speed and still have the trip take 31 minutes?

I get that you can't maintain that top speed for the entire trip. Is it an accelerating half / decelerating half kind of thing? That kind of speed would make the trip more like ten minutes assuming any kind of acceleration. Throw in an extra hour for your government mandated bad touch, and what's the point other than a technology demo / tax payer boondoggle?.

Re:Help me with the math here...

[CanHasDIY]

Current trip: 40 minutes by car.

Driving your Veyron down the private boulevard, are you? lol

Re:Help me with the math here...

[The_Systech]

Apparently you missed the Three hours, portion of the statement on how long the trip currently takes :). Words mixed with numbers are always confusing :)

I live an hour west of STL...

[gosand]

and I've only been to KC once or twice. I don't think enough people travel regularly back and forth to justify this. I assume there would be no stops in between (I admittedly don't know much about hyperloop) so I think the application of this is very limited. However, if it would alleviate some traffic on Rt 70, then I am all for it.
Maybe I would go to KC more often if there was a hyperloop, but I honestly think a loop to Chicago would be better.

Could be that this is just a story to pique the interest of Amazon... I know STL said they could have their own runway if they build their next HQ here.

Re:I live an hour west of STL...

[CanHasDIY]

My thought as well - as a life-long Missourian, I can't see any purpose in this boondoggle, other than showing off. A loop from KC to Springfield would be more useful.

Meanwhile, our fine state legislators are discussing ways to increase revenues by creating crimes where none currently exist.

SkyTran would be better than Hyperloop...

[msc.buff]

http://www.skytran.com/

Help! My browser keeps correcting

[eric_harris_76]

Help! My browser keeps correcting "public-private partnership" into "excellent graft opportunity".

That's not right.