3 ms·

There was a snippet in the video of a purpose built passenger transport vehicle that could fill in the role of public transit: https://youtu.be/u5V_VzRrSBI?t=47

There was a snippet in the video of a purpose built passenger transport vehicle that could fill in the role of public transit: https://youtu.be/u5V_VzRrSBI?t=47 https://youtu.be/u5V_VzRrSBI?t=47

Robotbeat 9y ago
Exactly this. There's absolutely no reason you couldn't use the system for public transit. Just need pods with an enclosure as shown in the video. It'd be way cheaper than sending your whole car. Whether the car pod or the transit pod make the most sense is largely irrelevant at this phase. The system can (and seems to be planned to?) use both at the same time. So if a bunch of people want to pay to use this for their cars, then it can be used with cars. If people want to use this as a more responsive subway, then it can be used that way as well. They just configure the little pods one way or another, 98% of the system (tunnels, elevators, track, vast majority of the pod, etc) remains the same either way. I actually kind of suspect that enclosed pods will be used for both, since otherwise you have to worry about debris flying off of cars (like those dumb little flags, dirt, and drinks accidentally left on the roof) and hitting pods behind. Personally, my favorite mode of transport in a city is bikes mixed with public transit. This system seems to work well with both. But the point of a pod-based system like this is that you can let the market decide which exact mix makes the most sense. If people are willing to pay to transport their whole car, then why not let them? Or why not have just passenger pods? The system is designed to be expandable to arbitrary numbers of pods and tracks, so there needn't be any reason you couldn't do both.
- so33 9y ago
  With all due respect, there already is a flexible platform where people can send whatever they want; it's called a road. The problem is that single-occupancy vehicles take up lots of road space and degrade bus service. Today, when buses get their own lane, service reliability increases for the buses. What you could say is that the current system of roads benefits single-occupancy vehicles and that this, as a private solution, would force people to pay the true costs. But quite frankly there will likely be subsidies for this, especially because Elon Musk seems to view this as a way to reduce car travel times for himself, which leaves us with the same problem as we had before.
  - Robotbeat 9y ago
    Of course. Roads are great. But they have drawbacks: 1) two dimensional, meaning you have to deconflict intersections with stop signs, stop lights, low-speed traffic circles, or huge cloverleafs. Also means that adding more road capacity directly eats into land use. This drives density down, increasing travel times overall. It also is a huge barrier to foot traffic, bicycles (for high speed roads), and wildlife. 2) Weather. Inclement weather limits when you can drive on roads and how fast as well as reducing safety dramatically and reduces capacity. 3) Speeds. Can't safely go 125mph on a road unless you have a LOT of space to accelerate. Even on the autobahn, this is pretty dangerous. Tunnels are 3D and do not take up space from other things, deconflicting the tension between single-occupancy vehicles and buses (and other modes of public transport). And small tunnels (gas, water main, electrical and telecomm conduit, storm sewer, and sanitary sewer) are already ubiquitous, going under basically everyone's property and in multiple levels. This is especially so in large cities, when the size of those existing tunnels can approach what Musk envisions. If you could somehow dramatically lower the cost of tunneling (and tunneling in particular, not trench-and-covering, which disturbs the surface), then you could do transport much more efficiently. New York City shows what a great subway system is like and how tunneling enables efficient transport in spite of huge densities. But it's 100 years old, and for whatever reason (labor costs, safety, etc) we simply could not afford to build another system like it nowadays.

There was a snippet in the video of a purpose built passenger transport vehicle that could fill in the role of public transit: https://youtu.be/u5V_VzRrSBI?t=47 https://youtu.be/u5V_VzRrSBI?t=47

Robotbeat 9y ago

Exactly this. There's absolutely no reason you couldn't use the system for public transit. Just need pods with an enclosure as shown in the video. It'd be way cheaper than sending your whole car. Whether the car pod or the transit pod make the most sense is largely irrelevant at this phase. The system can (and seems to be planned to?) use both at the same time. So if a bunch of people want to pay to use this for their cars, then it can be used with cars. If people want to use this as a more responsive subway, then it can be used that way as well. They just configure the little pods one way or another, 98% of the system (tunnels, elevators, track, vast majority of the pod, etc) remains the same either way. I actually kind of suspect that enclosed pods will be used for both, since otherwise you have to worry about debris flying off of cars (like those dumb little flags, dirt, and drinks accidentally left on the roof) and hitting pods behind. Personally, my favorite mode of transport in a city is bikes mixed with public transit. This system seems to work well with both. But the point of a pod-based system like this is that you can let the market decide which exact mix makes the most sense. If people are willing to pay to transport their whole car, then why not let them? Or why not have just passenger pods? The system is designed to be expandable to arbitrary numbers of pods and tracks, so there needn't be any reason you couldn't do both.

so33 9y ago
With all due respect, there already is a flexible platform where people can send whatever they want; it's called a road. The problem is that single-occupancy vehicles take up lots of road space and degrade bus service. Today, when buses get their own lane, service reliability increases for the buses. What you could say is that the current system of roads benefits single-occupancy vehicles and that this, as a private solution, would force people to pay the true costs. But quite frankly there will likely be subsidies for this, especially because Elon Musk seems to view this as a way to reduce car travel times for himself, which leaves us with the same problem as we had before.
- Robotbeat 9y ago
  Of course. Roads are great. But they have drawbacks: 1) two dimensional, meaning you have to deconflict intersections with stop signs, stop lights, low-speed traffic circles, or huge cloverleafs. Also means that adding more road capacity directly eats into land use. This drives density down, increasing travel times overall. It also is a huge barrier to foot traffic, bicycles (for high speed roads), and wildlife. 2) Weather. Inclement weather limits when you can drive on roads and how fast as well as reducing safety dramatically and reduces capacity. 3) Speeds. Can't safely go 125mph on a road unless you have a LOT of space to accelerate. Even on the autobahn, this is pretty dangerous. Tunnels are 3D and do not take up space from other things, deconflicting the tension between single-occupancy vehicles and buses (and other modes of public transport). And small tunnels (gas, water main, electrical and telecomm conduit, storm sewer, and sanitary sewer) are already ubiquitous, going under basically everyone's property and in multiple levels. This is especially so in large cities, when the size of those existing tunnels can approach what Musk envisions. If you could somehow dramatically lower the cost of tunneling (and tunneling in particular, not trench-and-covering, which disturbs the surface), then you could do transport much more efficiently. New York City shows what a great subway system is like and how tunneling enables efficient transport in spite of huge densities. But it's 100 years old, and for whatever reason (labor costs, safety, etc) we simply could not afford to build another system like it nowadays.