10 ms·

How Hyperloop One Went Off the Rails

66 points by acdanger 10y ago

ythl 10y ago
I dunno, after watching thunderf00t's video on hyperloops, I'm pretty convinced that there are fundamental engineering barriers that would have doomed the company anyway. If not internal squabbles and lawsuits, the practical laws of nature would eventually have to be reckoned with (just like with Solar Freakin Roadways)
- schiffern 10y ago
  Thunderf00t's objections are mostly based on misunderstandings of fluid dynamics and the hyperloop design. It's almost impressive -- he's singlehandedly founded a whole raft of hyperloop engineering myths with one "controversial" video. There would be no sonic "shock wave" killing everyone in the tube in the event of a breach. Viscous drag on the tube walls would reduce the flow velocity to highway speed in only a couple km. The wave front spreads out, becoming a gradual pressure rise. The entire tube would be designed for rapid repressurization (under 60 seconds). The cars can easily stop in 15-20 seconds since the passengers are strapped in and possibly in seats facing backward to arrest braking forces. Expansion joints are easily accommodated at the end stations, and the slight leaks from the sliding interfaces are compensated by mechanical pumps (easy to maintain 1/1000th of an atmosphere, damn near impossible to maintain 1/1000000 of an atmosphere for true vac trains given the linear decrease in vacuum pumping mass flow at low pressures and the need for turbomolucular pumps and/or cryopumps at those pressures). There's a great need for pumping near the end stations anyway due to residual air entering around the pod in the airlock. They'll pump down the majority of the pressure of course, but due to the exponential drop in pumping speed over time it makes little sense to make passengers wait a long time and pump it down to the exact same pressure when they can cut it off early and just let the tube pumps make it up. Even on the space station (where air is very expensive) they only pump the airlock down part-way and vent the remaining residual atmosphere so the astronauts (whose time is also expensive) don't have to wait.
  - dougmany 10y ago
    What convinced that it would not work was reading about the temperature pressure differences the on car motor was supposed to handle. It sounds like there needs to be a giant air compressor strapped to the car. Having been in a garage when an air compressor turns on (unpleasant), I really don't want to be in a tiny metal tube with a giant air compressor on all the time. It sounds several times worse then being in an airplane.
    - schiffern 10y ago
      The compressor in your garage is almost certainly a reciprocating compressor (oscillating motion = very loud), while the hyperloop uses an axial compressor (pure rotary motion = much quieter). The same sound absorbing layers and vibration isolation technology that's used on jet planes could also be used if needed.
- Vexs 10y ago
  Just out of curiosity, what are the issues it has?
  - kennell 10y ago
    The video he is refering to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk
    - thringsaround 10y ago
      I know it's a sensitive subject for HN, but I'll go ahead and encourage folks not to watch that video, at least without taking a look at some of the other popular videos on that channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A) and making an informed decision. To be clear, since technical expertise and regressive politics are not necessarily mutually exclusive, I'm not saying that you shouldn't watch it-- just that you might not want to.
      - jshevek 10y ago
        What could be more regressive than ignoring one side of an engineering debate because that speaker doesn't agree with your politics?
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        thringsaround 10y ago
        Snarky reply replaced: I'm sincerely curious if that's really all you're taking away from my comment, including the explicit disclaimer. My advice was to pay closer attention to the material, not to ignore it, so I'm perplexed as to how you managed to get the complete opposite message. This seems exceptionally straightforward to me, so I'll make it as un-political as I can: There are lifetimes of new content available for your consumption every single day. Maybe it's not all worthwhile. Maybe not 1% of it is. It doesn't matter-- you'll never get to see an infinitesimal fraction of it, even just the good, true, accurate stuff. So how do you decide what to pay attention to with your mortal lifespan? Just as a first pass, I like to use filters like "is this notably excellent" or "does this make me want to throw up at all, even just a little". Then if it's not excellent, or if the speaker doesn't agree with my politics, or especially both, I don't feel any remorse whatsoever about skipping it. This isn't about shutting myself off. I think it's very important to expose myself to perspectives that differ from my own, to broaden my own frame of reference. I also think that feces play a critically important role in my metabolism, but that doesn't mean I'm excited to open a box of donuts and discover a frosted turd. And I'll accept exactly 0 concern trolling around my publicly saying, just, hey... look in the box. If it's a turd in there, you don't still have to eat it.
- valarauca1 10y ago
  Maybe it's just me but I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who replaces vowels with letters. But strawman/direct attacks aside. In my experience when one engineer is disagreeing with a team of engineers, they're wrong or the team a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem they're working to solve.
  - throw1291121 10y ago
    What about the guy who warned about the space shuttle's O-rings? And that is an example from a conservative environment. Now take startups that just want VC money with no intention of producing a product, a team of engineers that likes their salaries and you'll get a fake consensus very easily.
    - Bjartr 10y ago
      That was one engineer disagreeing with a team of managers.
  - jshevek 10y ago
    > I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who ... Even if those engineers clearly have a financial incentive to make biased claims?
    - valarauca1 10y ago
      I mean if we toss around incentived claims then you can't trust literally anyone in a capitalist society. Since they can be incentived to lie to you, and you have to do due diligence to prove they aren't before trusting them. This defense is the home of conspiracy theorists and crazy people. If you are really concerned with this why are you posting on a forum literally owned by a SV Billionaire? Buts let's pretend you are rational. How does a master in chemistry grant you knowledge of mechanical, structural, and fluid engineering. If you say they're both Math/STEM fields, then why aren't chemistry professors, and comsologist certified electricians? It's related by the same logic.
- jshevek 10y ago
  Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I don't recall Thunderf00t's video suggesting that the hyperloop was truly as absurd as, say, the idea of using solar roadways to melt snow off the road. I thought that his main message was that people are over-selling the feasibility of the hyperloop and playing down the incredible engineering challenges and dangers.
sgberlin 10y ago
Title should be changed to 'Hyperloop One', there are actually multiple Hyperloop startups.
skrause 10y ago
To me all the Hyperloop startups have just been a scam to take big chunks of money from investors who believe in any Musk hype. None of them can still really explain how to overcome the big technical hurdles and I don't believe the cost estimates for a minute.
- continuations 10y ago
  The technical hurdles are enormous but they are nothing compared to the economic hurdles. Just look at the planned LA-SF high speed rails. It suffered delays and cost overruns over and over again. The latest figure of $68B most likely will not be enough[1]. And that is a garden-variety high speed rail that has been proven all over the world for decades. Hyperloop is completely unproven and requires construction of end-to-end airtight tubes. If a few hundred miles of vanilla high speed rail costs $70B and counting, how much would hyperloop cost? $500B? $1T? It'll never work economically. [1] http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-cost-final-20151025-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-c...
  - khuey 10y ago
    Hyperloop boosters also seem to ignore that it will require the same sorts of right-of-way acquisition as high speed rail, which is an enormous component of both the cost and political difficulty of building HSR.
    - jshevek 10y ago
      Some hyperloop proponents insist that right-of-way acquisition will be so much easier that that of a train, because the tube is elevated and might be engineered to have a small footprint of pylons. I think it remains to be seen whether it can actually be built in this manner. Regardless, there may be still be noise concerns and the problem of creating an unsightly above ground structure. Plus, the very idea of having one close by might be frightening for many.
    - greglindahl 10y ago
      The original Hyperloop paper addresses this issue; HSR can't run down the middle of I5 for most of its length. I have no idea what the costs will be, but if you're going to attack Hyperloop for getting this wrong, it'd be a good idea to attack what they actually proposed instead of something different.
DiabloD3 10y ago
I'm flagging this submission. Submitter changed title to reflect all Hyperloop projects instead of just one specific one, and also the article is written like garbage and doesn't actually get to the fucking point. Edit: Mod has changed title to reflect Hyperloop One.
tomphoolery 10y ago
There's no way that dude's name is actually "Brogan BamBrogan"...
- rrdharan 10y ago
  http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-bambrogan-got-the-greatest-name-ever-2016-5 http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-bambr...
- maxerickson 10y ago
  What's in a name? We aren't so far away from the days when your actual name was simply whatever you called yourself.
- pdq 10y ago
  From the article: "Until 2014, his name had been Kevin Brogan, but he legally changed it to merge names with his wife, Bambi."
- jandrese 10y ago
  His parents didn't give it to him, but he had it legally changed to that when he got married. Seems like the kind of thing a fun guy would do.
atemerev 10y ago
We already have a safer and less expensive mode of transportation: air travel. Same speed, cheaper, exists today, no need to build tracks :)
- cryptoz 10y ago
  Air travel is a huge pollutant and is literally destroying ecosystems and life all across the planet Earth. Either airplanes need to get to 0 greenhouse gas emissions, or we need new types of long-distance and fast transportation. The hyperloop is a great concept because it can significantly reduce the demand for high-polluting air travel. There are other ways too, of course - hyperloop isn't some single savior for everything. But you cannot pitch airplanes as an alternative. They are not.
  - atemerev 10y ago
    Even if you were right (air travel is insignificant pollutant contributor compared to, say, cars), you can't sell it on the open market. If air travel is more convenient and cheaper, you can't compete with cleaner technology unless it delivers value somewhere else.
  - SapphireSun 10y ago
    Huge yes, but still only about 1-4% of total emissions. It's good to make inroads there, but I'm more worried about cars, power plants, etc. I think the biggest argument to make in favor of the hyperloop is ease of use, speed, and price. After all, maybe we'll have battery powered airplanes some day or maybe we'll just use gliders for shorter distances though maybe that wouldn't be as great for a reliable transport.
    - atemerev 10y ago
      Security checks will be the same, speed is lower, price is higher. No added value except novelty factor. I would rather hoped for suborbital passenger transportation. 10x improvement: delivered (and engineering-wise, about as hard as Hyperloop). People are meant to fly, not stay tethered to the Earth forever.
NickM 10y ago
There's one thing that keeps bothering me about all the Hyperloop competitions and startups: everyone seems to be using maglev. This does not match up with the original Hyperloop proposal, which used an air compressor to suck up oncoming air and blow it out the bottom, creating a fluid bearing. Maglev trains have been proposed before; there's nothing particular new or novel about the idea. One of the bigger problems with maglev is that the tracks are very expensive. One of the exciting things about the Hyperloop concept was that the tracks should be much cheaper, since all you need is a steel tube. Is it really right to call it a Hyperloop if it eschews the original concept in favor of building a maglev train in an evacuated tube? Feels like they're taking a totally different idea and just using the Hyperloop name to generate hype.
- jandrese 10y ago
  I'm not sure how a gigantic many mile long pressure vessel is supposed to be cheaper than maglev rail... In my opinion the Hyperloop is an insane idea and these companies are suspect. It seems more likely that they're the 2010s version of the Moller Aircar, something to keep "almost there" for decades while you milk investor money.
  - continuations 10y ago
    The ultimate investor milking machine would be "fusion-powered flying car moving inside a hyperloop." It's almost there and it'll be truly revolutionary!
    - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
      "fusion-powered self-driving flying car moving inside a hyperloop."
      - Udik 10y ago
        This sounds very xkcd.
- nickff 10y ago
grillvogel 10y ago
i still have not been able to understand why a hyperloop is needed instead of just using pre existing high speed rail technology like shinkansen
- johnloeber 10y ago
  That's especially the case when you consider that the proposed track across CA is really a fairly short track on which the Hyperloop would not save a great deal of time in aggregate: the Hyperloop has a passenger capacity of about 10% of high-speed rail. It's obvious that given the economic/technical costs the Hyperloop imposes, it's way more marginally efficient to build a Shinkansen or TGV-like system. The Hyperloop might be worth pursuing it it were 10% of the price of HSR, but that's just not anywhere near the case, as other commenters have duly pointed out.
- klodolph 10y ago
  The Shinkansen was extremely expensive to build, comparable to the hyperloop. The lines cost JPY 400 billion in 1963 currency and the whole thing basically led to the regionalization and privatization of JNR. Hyperloop supporters claim that the Hyperloop is more economically feasible than traditional high-speed rail like the Shinkansen. This is, of course, based on estimates which can only be trusted somewhat. However, those estimates are by no means ridiculous. The original Hyperloop proposal is interesting reading, you might want to take a glance at it. It covers the economics, including issues like land use rights, which are a major component in any high-speed transport system which must necessarily have a course with limited curvature. The location is also a big issue. Consider the profitability of Japan's Shinkansen in light of the high population density and the ease in which you can serve 25 million people with a single 250 mile train line--other Shinkansen lines are not as profitable to run. To be clear, I'm relating the arguments in favor. I'm also fairly skeptical.
throwaway_VjXo7 10y ago
Throwaway account. I'm really disappointed to see Hyperloop One come crashing down, but I'm not surprised by it. Those who have worked closely with him have learned that Shervin Pishevar is absolutely toxic. There's not much else I can say without violating HN's civility rules, but this seems to be an open secret in SV. Some people love him, some just tolerate him, but many say they will never work with him again.
Sideloader 10y ago
I don't think this project will amount to much; it almost certainly will not become part of a widely used mass transit system. It was always a tech geek vanity project at best, even before the serious trouble started.

66 points by acdanger 10y ago

ythl 10y ago

I dunno, after watching thunderf00t's video on hyperloops, I'm pretty convinced that there are fundamental engineering barriers that would have doomed the company anyway. If not internal squabbles and lawsuits, the practical laws of nature would eventually have to be reckoned with (just like with Solar Freakin Roadways)

schiffern 10y ago
Thunderf00t's objections are mostly based on misunderstandings of fluid dynamics and the hyperloop design. It's almost impressive -- he's singlehandedly founded a whole raft of hyperloop engineering myths with one "controversial" video. There would be no sonic "shock wave" killing everyone in the tube in the event of a breach. Viscous drag on the tube walls would reduce the flow velocity to highway speed in only a couple km. The wave front spreads out, becoming a gradual pressure rise. The entire tube would be designed for rapid repressurization (under 60 seconds). The cars can easily stop in 15-20 seconds since the passengers are strapped in and possibly in seats facing backward to arrest braking forces. Expansion joints are easily accommodated at the end stations, and the slight leaks from the sliding interfaces are compensated by mechanical pumps (easy to maintain 1/1000th of an atmosphere, damn near impossible to maintain 1/1000000 of an atmosphere for true vac trains given the linear decrease in vacuum pumping mass flow at low pressures and the need for turbomolucular pumps and/or cryopumps at those pressures). There's a great need for pumping near the end stations anyway due to residual air entering around the pod in the airlock. They'll pump down the majority of the pressure of course, but due to the exponential drop in pumping speed over time it makes little sense to make passengers wait a long time and pump it down to the exact same pressure when they can cut it off early and just let the tube pumps make it up. Even on the space station (where air is very expensive) they only pump the airlock down part-way and vent the remaining residual atmosphere so the astronauts (whose time is also expensive) don't have to wait.
- dougmany 10y ago
  What convinced that it would not work was reading about the temperature pressure differences the on car motor was supposed to handle. It sounds like there needs to be a giant air compressor strapped to the car. Having been in a garage when an air compressor turns on (unpleasant), I really don't want to be in a tiny metal tube with a giant air compressor on all the time. It sounds several times worse then being in an airplane.
  - schiffern 10y ago
    The compressor in your garage is almost certainly a reciprocating compressor (oscillating motion = very loud), while the hyperloop uses an axial compressor (pure rotary motion = much quieter). The same sound absorbing layers and vibration isolation technology that's used on jet planes could also be used if needed.
Vexs 10y ago
Just out of curiosity, what are the issues it has?
- kennell 10y ago
  The video he is refering to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk
  - thringsaround 10y ago
    I know it's a sensitive subject for HN, but I'll go ahead and encourage folks not to watch that video, at least without taking a look at some of the other popular videos on that channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A) and making an informed decision. To be clear, since technical expertise and regressive politics are not necessarily mutually exclusive, I'm not saying that you shouldn't watch it-- just that you might not want to.
    - jshevek 10y ago
      What could be more regressive than ignoring one side of an engineering debate because that speaker doesn't agree with your politics?
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - thringsaround 10y ago
        Snarky reply replaced: I'm sincerely curious if that's really all you're taking away from my comment, including the explicit disclaimer. My advice was to pay closer attention to the material, not to ignore it, so I'm perplexed as to how you managed to get the complete opposite message. This seems exceptionally straightforward to me, so I'll make it as un-political as I can: There are lifetimes of new content available for your consumption every single day. Maybe it's not all worthwhile. Maybe not 1% of it is. It doesn't matter-- you'll never get to see an infinitesimal fraction of it, even just the good, true, accurate stuff. So how do you decide what to pay attention to with your mortal lifespan? Just as a first pass, I like to use filters like "is this notably excellent" or "does this make me want to throw up at all, even just a little". Then if it's not excellent, or if the speaker doesn't agree with my politics, or especially both, I don't feel any remorse whatsoever about skipping it. This isn't about shutting myself off. I think it's very important to expose myself to perspectives that differ from my own, to broaden my own frame of reference. I also think that feces play a critically important role in my metabolism, but that doesn't mean I'm excited to open a box of donuts and discover a frosted turd. And I'll accept exactly 0 concern trolling around my publicly saying, just, hey... look in the box. If it's a turd in there, you don't still have to eat it.
valarauca1 10y ago
Maybe it's just me but I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who replaces vowels with letters. But strawman/direct attacks aside. In my experience when one engineer is disagreeing with a team of engineers, they're wrong or the team a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem they're working to solve.
- throw1291121 10y ago
  What about the guy who warned about the space shuttle's O-rings? And that is an example from a conservative environment. Now take startups that just want VC money with no intention of producing a product, a team of engineers that likes their salaries and you'll get a fake consensus very easily.
  - Bjartr 10y ago
    That was one engineer disagreeing with a team of managers.
- jshevek 10y ago
  > I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who ... Even if those engineers clearly have a financial incentive to make biased claims?
  - valarauca1 10y ago
    I mean if we toss around incentived claims then you can't trust literally anyone in a capitalist society. Since they can be incentived to lie to you, and you have to do due diligence to prove they aren't before trusting them. This defense is the home of conspiracy theorists and crazy people. If you are really concerned with this why are you posting on a forum literally owned by a SV Billionaire? Buts let's pretend you are rational. How does a master in chemistry grant you knowledge of mechanical, structural, and fluid engineering. If you say they're both Math/STEM fields, then why aren't chemistry professors, and comsologist certified electricians? It's related by the same logic.
jshevek 10y ago
Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I don't recall Thunderf00t's video suggesting that the hyperloop was truly as absurd as, say, the idea of using solar roadways to melt snow off the road. I thought that his main message was that people are over-selling the feasibility of the hyperloop and playing down the incredible engineering challenges and dangers.

sgberlin 10y ago

Title should be changed to 'Hyperloop One', there are actually multiple Hyperloop startups.

skrause 10y ago

To me all the Hyperloop startups have just been a scam to take big chunks of money from investors who believe in any Musk hype. None of them can still really explain how to overcome the big technical hurdles and I don't believe the cost estimates for a minute.

continuations 10y ago
The technical hurdles are enormous but they are nothing compared to the economic hurdles. Just look at the planned LA-SF high speed rails. It suffered delays and cost overruns over and over again. The latest figure of $68B most likely will not be enough[1]. And that is a garden-variety high speed rail that has been proven all over the world for decades. Hyperloop is completely unproven and requires construction of end-to-end airtight tubes. If a few hundred miles of vanilla high speed rail costs $70B and counting, how much would hyperloop cost? $500B? $1T? It'll never work economically. [1] http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-cost-final-20151025-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-c...
- khuey 10y ago
  Hyperloop boosters also seem to ignore that it will require the same sorts of right-of-way acquisition as high speed rail, which is an enormous component of both the cost and political difficulty of building HSR.
  - jshevek 10y ago
    Some hyperloop proponents insist that right-of-way acquisition will be so much easier that that of a train, because the tube is elevated and might be engineered to have a small footprint of pylons. I think it remains to be seen whether it can actually be built in this manner. Regardless, there may be still be noise concerns and the problem of creating an unsightly above ground structure. Plus, the very idea of having one close by might be frightening for many.
  - greglindahl 10y ago
    The original Hyperloop paper addresses this issue; HSR can't run down the middle of I5 for most of its length. I have no idea what the costs will be, but if you're going to attack Hyperloop for getting this wrong, it'd be a good idea to attack what they actually proposed instead of something different.

DiabloD3 10y ago

I'm flagging this submission. Submitter changed title to reflect all Hyperloop projects instead of just one specific one, and also the article is written like garbage and doesn't actually get to the fucking point. Edit: Mod has changed title to reflect Hyperloop One.

tomphoolery 10y ago

There's no way that dude's name is actually "Brogan BamBrogan"...

rrdharan 10y ago
http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-bambrogan-got-the-greatest-name-ever-2016-5 http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-bambr...
maxerickson 10y ago
What's in a name? We aren't so far away from the days when your actual name was simply whatever you called yourself.
pdq 10y ago
From the article: "Until 2014, his name had been Kevin Brogan, but he legally changed it to merge names with his wife, Bambi."
jandrese 10y ago
His parents didn't give it to him, but he had it legally changed to that when he got married. Seems like the kind of thing a fun guy would do.

atemerev 10y ago

We already have a safer and less expensive mode of transportation: air travel. Same speed, cheaper, exists today, no need to build tracks :)

cryptoz 10y ago
Air travel is a huge pollutant and is literally destroying ecosystems and life all across the planet Earth. Either airplanes need to get to 0 greenhouse gas emissions, or we need new types of long-distance and fast transportation. The hyperloop is a great concept because it can significantly reduce the demand for high-polluting air travel. There are other ways too, of course - hyperloop isn't some single savior for everything. But you cannot pitch airplanes as an alternative. They are not.
- atemerev 10y ago
  Even if you were right (air travel is insignificant pollutant contributor compared to, say, cars), you can't sell it on the open market. If air travel is more convenient and cheaper, you can't compete with cleaner technology unless it delivers value somewhere else.
- SapphireSun 10y ago
  Huge yes, but still only about 1-4% of total emissions. It's good to make inroads there, but I'm more worried about cars, power plants, etc. I think the biggest argument to make in favor of the hyperloop is ease of use, speed, and price. After all, maybe we'll have battery powered airplanes some day or maybe we'll just use gliders for shorter distances though maybe that wouldn't be as great for a reliable transport.
  - atemerev 10y ago
    Security checks will be the same, speed is lower, price is higher. No added value except novelty factor. I would rather hoped for suborbital passenger transportation. 10x improvement: delivered (and engineering-wise, about as hard as Hyperloop). People are meant to fly, not stay tethered to the Earth forever.

NickM 10y ago

There's one thing that keeps bothering me about all the Hyperloop competitions and startups: everyone seems to be using maglev. This does not match up with the original Hyperloop proposal, which used an air compressor to suck up oncoming air and blow it out the bottom, creating a fluid bearing. Maglev trains have been proposed before; there's nothing particular new or novel about the idea. One of the bigger problems with maglev is that the tracks are very expensive. One of the exciting things about the Hyperloop concept was that the tracks should be much cheaper, since all you need is a steel tube. Is it really right to call it a Hyperloop if it eschews the original concept in favor of building a maglev train in an evacuated tube? Feels like they're taking a totally different idea and just using the Hyperloop name to generate hype.

jandrese 10y ago
I'm not sure how a gigantic many mile long pressure vessel is supposed to be cheaper than maglev rail... In my opinion the Hyperloop is an insane idea and these companies are suspect. It seems more likely that they're the 2010s version of the Moller Aircar, something to keep "almost there" for decades while you milk investor money.
- continuations 10y ago
  The ultimate investor milking machine would be "fusion-powered flying car moving inside a hyperloop." It's almost there and it'll be truly revolutionary!
  - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
    "fusion-powered self-driving flying car moving inside a hyperloop."
    - Udik 10y ago
      This sounds very xkcd.
nickff 10y ago

grillvogel 10y ago

i still have not been able to understand why a hyperloop is needed instead of just using pre existing high speed rail technology like shinkansen

johnloeber 10y ago
That's especially the case when you consider that the proposed track across CA is really a fairly short track on which the Hyperloop would not save a great deal of time in aggregate: the Hyperloop has a passenger capacity of about 10% of high-speed rail. It's obvious that given the economic/technical costs the Hyperloop imposes, it's way more marginally efficient to build a Shinkansen or TGV-like system. The Hyperloop might be worth pursuing it it were 10% of the price of HSR, but that's just not anywhere near the case, as other commenters have duly pointed out.
klodolph 10y ago
The Shinkansen was extremely expensive to build, comparable to the hyperloop. The lines cost JPY 400 billion in 1963 currency and the whole thing basically led to the regionalization and privatization of JNR. Hyperloop supporters claim that the Hyperloop is more economically feasible than traditional high-speed rail like the Shinkansen. This is, of course, based on estimates which can only be trusted somewhat. However, those estimates are by no means ridiculous. The original Hyperloop proposal is interesting reading, you might want to take a glance at it. It covers the economics, including issues like land use rights, which are a major component in any high-speed transport system which must necessarily have a course with limited curvature. The location is also a big issue. Consider the profitability of Japan's Shinkansen in light of the high population density and the ease in which you can serve 25 million people with a single 250 mile train line--other Shinkansen lines are not as profitable to run. To be clear, I'm relating the arguments in favor. I'm also fairly skeptical.

throwaway_VjXo7 10y ago

Throwaway account. I'm really disappointed to see Hyperloop One come crashing down, but I'm not surprised by it. Those who have worked closely with him have learned that Shervin Pishevar is absolutely toxic. There's not much else I can say without violating HN's civility rules, but this seems to be an open secret in SV. Some people love him, some just tolerate him, but many say they will never work with him again.

Sideloader 10y ago

I don't think this project will amount to much; it almost certainly will not become part of a widely used mass transit system. It was always a tech geek vanity project at best, even before the serious trouble started.