10 ms·

Something I wrote a while ago.... w/ back of the napkin calculations....... Why I wouldn’t invest a money into Hyperloop - Stabilizing a single fault line ris

Something I wrote a while ago.... w/ back of the napkin calculations....... Why I wouldn’t invest a money into Hyperloop - Stabilizing a single fault line risk pylon is more than $250K. - How many million are needed for vacuum pumps to evacuate 100+ million cubic feet of of pipe to 100 Pa? - Hot air discharge needs to go somewhere. For every 1 bar pressure, you need ~200 to ~400 cubic meters of volume which is larger - This seems very much like one of those Andy Grove Fallacies. - The hyperloop is a mega engineering project on the ground. Nobody on their team is a civil engineer. Looking at their team objectively, there seems to be a mismatch of competency. - At its core, the science i good, the cost-economics do not work. Das ist nicht gute.

Analemma_ 9y ago
When Musk first said that an LA<->SF Hyperloop could be built for 1/8th the cost of the equivalent HSR, I chuckled and then waited for the punchline, which still hasn’t arrived. It’s a cool idea and I do want to see more prototypes and feasibility studies, but people need to get off the hype train (no pun intended) and be realistic about the cost.
- Chathamization 9y ago
  > When Musk first said that an LA<->SF Hyperloop could be built for 1/8th the cost of the equivalent HSR, I chuckled and then waited for the punchline, which still hasn’t arrived. Yeah, and that proposal was for something with much lower throughput, that didn't have stops along the way, and didn't even reach the same areas (they saved money by stopping outside both cities, which the rail line wouldn't do). It also assumed that the tubes could just be placed along the highway meridians (a lot of the money it was supposed to save was from this).
- warent 9y ago
  To be fair, if Elon worked in the project for 40 - 80 hours a week, he probably could get a team to accomplish it at 1/8th the cost or lower. Consider he did this with rockets, getting them to under 1/10th the cost
  - ballooney 9y ago
    He hasn’t done that with rockets. He wants to eventually, but he hasn’t yet. Let’s not let hype cloud facts.
    - nkoren 9y ago
      He's getting very close, if one is considering domestic rockets. The standard-bearers were the Delta IV and Atlas V, which price out at around $17,000/kg - $20,000/kg to LEO, respectively. The Falcon 9 comes in at about $2,800/kg to LEO. Comparisons with non-domestic rockets are complicated by state subsidies and differentials in labor costs. But the Falcon 9 is approaching the 10X mark even before reusability has been priced in. Both the Falcon Heavy (in a few months) and the (eventual) reusable pricing should overshoot the 10X mark substantially.
      - Rebelgecko 9y ago
        Where are you pulling those numbers from? On ULA's website [1] they say you can launch an Atlas V for less than half the $/kg you listed [1] I went to rocketbuilder.com and both LEO configurations I tried were around $8,000/kg (and I didn't count the 20% deduction for "ULA added value" since the numbers there are debatable)
        nkoren 9y ago
        ULA has abruptly gotten way more competitive in their pricing. A few years ago they were not. Their "Best deal" for the Atlas V was a 36-rocket "bulk buy" priced the lowest-tier Atlas V 401 at $164M/launch[1]. That does 9,797kg to LEO[2], or $16,740/kg. The GAO cites $164M/launch as the price for the cheapest Delta V[3] (is there some kind of threshold at $165M?), which when the Falcon 9 was introduced could put 8,500kg to LEO[4], or $19,294/kg. (It has since been uprated and gotten slightly cheaper). Must've screwed up my calculations earlier, because those aren't tallying. Anyhow, as you can see, SpaceX is already around 7x cheaper compared to where ULA was, and should cross the 10x threshold shortly. Nice to see ULA responding to competitive pressure, however! 1: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324172526/http://www.ulalaunch.com/faqs-launch-costs.aspx https://web.archive.org/web/20160324172526/http://www.ulalau... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V 3: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-609 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-609 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV#Delta_IV_Small https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV#Delta_IV_Small
- martinald 9y ago
  Is this not an attempt to just derail CAHSR, or HSR in general? Nearly every anti-HSR comment is now 'we should build hyperloop instead!'.
  - Pxtl 9y ago
    That's impressively cynical, but Musk obviously stands to gain a lot if people keep California using roads. California wants to go green and he sells the best technology for green road-based transportation.
    - imron 9y ago
      To be fair, he also stands a lot to gain if Hyperloop becomes a reality.
      - zardo 9y ago
        How does that work? He had an idea and promoted it. No one's going to be paying him royalties for it.
        imron 9y ago
        He's also building one, so he has a vested interest in the technology being successful: https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/04/elon-musk-reportedly-planning-to-build-his-own-hyperloop-for-tunnel-system/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/04/elon-musk-reportedly-plann...
    - yahna 9y ago
      heh. Reminds me of when an actual AI expert pointed out that by making dire predictions about smart AI, that we are nowhere near having, keeps eyes off the autopilot system and the issues with that.
    - kbenson 9y ago
      I'm not sure it really affects his electronic car business one way or the other. Firstly, he isn't necessarily selling Tesla's to people for commuting between SF and LA, that's well outside his range, and as fast as the supercharging is, it loses out to regular gasoline refilling. Secondly, I'm not sure the amount of people potentially served by the hyperloop is more than a blip in the sales charts for even a regular car company (as deciding factors for car purchasing decisions, it seems relatively low to me).
- hbosch 9y ago
  Okay, we'll bookmark this for the future. Amtrak estimated a HSR/"bullet train" from D.C. to Boston would cost ~$151 billion. Since LA to SF will only be two stops, and we can assume Amtrak estimated at least 4 (Philly and NYC) let's bring the number down closer to $100 billion to make it even. Do we think the Hyperloop costs are more or less than that? 1/8 of a theoretical $100b is $12.5b -- is $12.5billion for Hyperloop unreasonable? I have no opinion on cost personally, and I don't know economics, but this $151 billion from D.C. to Boston was floated by the established US player in rail infrastructure. Anything less than that number is fantastic, right?
  - dx034 9y ago
    You cannot compare D.C to Boston with SF to LAX. The east coast has much denser population so that you need more tunnels. LAX to SF HSR would not cost $151bn. Start and end are expensive but the part in the middle is "relatively" cheap.
    - hbosch 9y ago
      Right, for comparison's sake I chopped off $51 billion bucks from the Northeast Corridor projection in the interest of balancing out the two. Just because I felt like doing some more Google-fu, I found an article in the LA Times[0] that says a California HSR/bullet-train project is going to overshoot it's original budget (and deadline) of $68 billion. There's a lot of info out there about this project, and it's potential overruns, but let's forget all that and just stick to the original planned cost: $68 billion, so, about half of the cost of Amtrak's northeastern bullet. Let's use that number for our comparison. If we are going to hold Elon to his "we can do it for 1/8th the cost" blurb, then we are giving him like $8.5 billion to use for his SF/LA Hyperloop. Still, that doesn't sound unreasonable, right? He'll get a good deal on tunnel boring with his other company, and fuselage manufacturing can be handled by SpaceX. When it comes to financing, I don't think it's a major issue compared to other infrastructure works out there. Like I said, though, I'm just going off the top of my head. I don't know finance or economics or vacuums or magnets. There's a new LIRR train being dug in NYC called East Side Access. This is a commuter rail line, and is going to cost ~$10 billion or so[1]. Logistically these aren't the same, obviously, but if adding to the LIRR is worth ~$10b then surely the Hyperloop experiment is as well, right? EDIT: Also, just for disclosure, I don't live in California and I'd probably never end up using the Hyperloop myself so I'm neither for nor against it versus any HSR. I just want to entertain the idea that cost shouldn't be the main focus of discussion IMO. ___ 0. 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... 1. http://web.mta.info/capital/esa_alt.html http://web.mta.info/capital/esa_alt.html
- Pxtl 9y ago
  I'm not saying the hyperloop is a good or bad idea, but any suggestion that it would be cheaper than the equivalent HSR seems utterly insane. How could it possibly be cheaper? You have the same ROW requirements, exponentially more expensive track, and the overhead of the fact that it's brand new technology. The fact that the vehicle itself might be cheaper than an HSR train after the tech scales up is almost an afterthought next to those costs.
  - reacweb 9y ago
    The track should be cheaper because hyperloop has (almost) no impact on existing infrastructures. Expropriation costs for train are huge.
    - Pxtl 9y ago
      How could the Hyperloop not require the same expropriations? A giant tube isn't any smaller than a train track. Is it the fact that it's elevated? Rail can be elevated. Yes, rail is heavy, but so are giant evacuated steel tubes.
      - zip1234 9y ago
        Run it down the center of the freeway? Having stations for trains in the middle of freeways isn't great for pedestrians, but might be fine for long distance transport such as hyperloop.
        Pxtl 9y ago
        HSR is supposed to be log distance transport. It's I meant to solve the exact same problems as Hyperloop, but by powerful engines and streamlined railcars instead of evacuated tubes. Again, why not put HSR tracks in the same place you'd put a Hyperloop track? Put the station in the same place. The tubes aren't smaller or lighter.
      - pstuart 9y ago
        I think he's planning on making lots of tunnels. https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-test-tunnel/ https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-test-tunnel/
- pavs 9y ago
  I don't think Musk want hyperloop to be built above the ground. This is just my own personal opinion, not sure if that's how it's going to work, but in one of his interview (TED? I think), he mentioned one of the reasons for his Boring company, was it would be relatively cheaper to build hyperloop - because the atmospheric pressure will be lower underground - and since you don't have to worry about building large infrastructure for only one purpose (hyperloop) - the cost will be much much cheaper. Because under ground tunnels can be build for both hyperloop and roads for cars and it scale better than above ground. I don't think above ground is economically and technically feasible, there are just too many unanswered issue that almost no one has answer to. Not to mention it will be very very expensive and time consuming.
  - grw_ 9y ago
    Why would atmospheric pressure be lower underground?
  - opencl 9y ago
    Tunnel boring is orders of magnitude more expensive than railway construction, at typically ~a few hundred million dollars per mile vs ~a few million dollars per mile. I know Musk has plans to magically make tunnel boring significantly cheaper but you need two orders of magnitude cost reduction to make the tunnel digging not cost more than an entire above ground railway. Cost references: https://tunneltalk.com/TunnelTECH-Apr2015-Arup-large-diameter-soft-ground-bored-tunnel-review.php https://tunneltalk.com/TunnelTECH-Apr2015-Arup-large-diamete... https://www.compassinternational.net/railroad-engineering-construction-cost-benchmarks/ https://www.compassinternational.net/railroad-engineering-co...
- kbenson 9y ago
  Maybe you're looking in the wrong place for the punchline. Perhaps it will be delivered in the final bill for the HSR...
- colordrops 9y ago
  Everyone has been chuckling about electric cars and private rockets until recently, and that was by experts in the respective fields. Chuckle all you want.
  - mikekchar 9y ago
    Go here and scroll down to "Select historical production vehicles" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicl... I grew up in the 70s and saw production electric vehicles that are not on this list. People have been chuckling for a long time and for good reason. It's not that electric vehicles won't eventually be successful -- they must. It's that the time from, "Hey, an electric vehicle would be a good idea" to "Hey, we've figured out all the engineering challenges to make this viable" is longer than the lifetime of most of the companies that entered the fray. Look at the list of vehicles from before 1990. That's the "getting to the market first" list. All gone. Then look at the list from 1990 to 2010. How many of those will be major players in the electric vehicle market? My point is that I'm relatively old for someone on HN and there have been production electric vehicles since well before I was born. They only started to be viable in the last few years -- and even then, we probably need a few more breakthroughs in battery technology before the market settles out. Long distance, super fast trains in tunnels? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen I saw the tunnel the other day. I was surprised that practically the whole damn length of the maglev tracks will be in a tunnel, but it makes total sense. That's been under construction for 10 years. They are optimistically expecting to make a profit in 2026 when "costs stabilise". Will long distance, high speed trains in low pressure tunnels be successful? I have no doubt. Will Hyperloop One be successful? Umm... frozen balls of ice remaining intact in a very hot place probably have a better chance, but I won't say they will definitely fail. If they can secure something like a trillion dollars and invest it wisely over the next 30-40 years, then their chances will improve significantly.
    - colordrops 9y ago
      Let me be clear. I was talking about criticism of Musk specifically. Pretty much EVERYONE in the aerospace industry thought he was nuts, and yet SpaceX made it to orbit. Even a couple months before their first stage landing others were saying it was impossible.
corpMaverick 9y ago
Assuming your are correct and Branson knows it because he hired good engineering advisers. Why would Branson get involved ? - It is a cool project he wants to be part of and he is willing to pay to see. (I would probably do that) - The benefit is not to reach the goal but all the technology that will be invented trying to reach the goal.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > Why would Branson get involved ? Branson is notorious for burning other peoples’ money. Look at Virgin Galactic: it’s New Mexicans’ [1] and Floridians’ [2] tax money plus some duped Emiratis [3]. (They also pre-sold tickets [4].) [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/04/space-travel-virgingalactic-haunts-new-mexico-town https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/04/space-travel... [2] http://www.airnewstimes.co.uk/space-florida-promises-virgin-galactic-payloads-12869-news.html http://www.airnewstimes.co.uk/space-florida-promises-virgin-... [3] https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/uaes-aabar-takes-stake-in-virgin-galactic/ https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/uaes-aabar-takes-sta... [4] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/
- buckminster 9y ago
  Branson's business model is selling the right to use the Virgin brand to other companies. The article doesn't say he made an investment. It is rather more likely that they paid him.
  - puranjay 9y ago
    So basically Trump with more class?
    - neuronexmachina 9y ago
      ...and fewer bankruptcies.
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
loceng 9y ago
People often, rightfully so, confuse the misappropriated name of Hyperloop One with Elon's Hyperloop idea, his of which I believe does have sound economics and certainly its pro list outweighs Hyperloop One's technology.
- andruby 9y ago
  Could you point out the differences in both technological and economical approaches?
  - loceng 9y ago
    I'll try to remember to reply to this after the weekend, if not and you're still interested shoot me an email matt@engn.com
jfoster 9y ago
I don't think it's right to use figures that can change to disprove an Elon Musk concept. If you did that back in the day, you would say there's no way Tesla could work because the cost of batteries is prohibitive and the supply too limited.
- AOsborn 9y ago
  This is the real insight.
- pokemongoaway 9y ago
  Yes, but we could see that batteries needed to get X better in order for us to achieve Y results in the future. But how much better do vacuum chamber technologies have to get before you can make the biggest one ever built, that also has a high-speed capsule traveling through it, that is also impervious to armor piercing bullets? Furthermore, imagine if every airplane had to fly the exactly same path, and if any failure on that path prevented (at the very least) all subsequent planes from traveling that path. And finally, how are security lines going to get shorter if the stakes will be at least as high as airplanes?
  - jfoster 9y ago
    I don't know the answers to these questions, but what I do know is: 1. Elon Musk has thought about them more than we have. 2. If his initial concept turns out to be incorrect in some way, he will change it until it is workable.
  - greedo 9y ago
    Are airliners impervious to armor piercing bullets? As I understand it, a small bullet penetrating the loop will cause a minor release, not a catastrophic event. It's not correct to hold the Hyperloop idea to standards that we don't apply to other forms of travel.
- jcranmer 9y ago
  There's a very pertinent historical reference point: Ferdinand de Lesseps. He built the Suez Canal from 1859 to 1869, a task which was considered by many to be impossible or at least impracticable [1]. After achieving resounding success, he then turned to Panama to try building the Panama Canal. In this venture, he turned out to have several very wrong ideas (it's not feasible to build a sea-level canal in Panama), and the French effort failed so hard it actually brought down the French government [2]. He was successful in the first venture but for different reasons than initially assumed (namely, the Suez Canal isn't all that challenging from an engineering perspective; it's just capital-intensive), and his failure in the second venture comes from misunderstanding the problems. [1] There had been canals in the past that traveled from the Red Sea to the Nile delta, but these invariably silted up rather quickly (the Nile was sediment-heavy, and wind-blown sand is quite common in the region). Thus there was historical evidence favoring the idea that the dredging maintenance fees would exceed the revenue from passing ships. [2] Of course, this was the Third Republic, which is notorious for having provided series of weak, unstable governments replete with scandals that prompt new governments. Ironically, the Third Republic was the longest-lasting form of government France has had since the Ancien Régime.
flgr 9y ago
> Das ist nicht gute. Should be "Das ist nicht gut".
stevep98 9y ago
An initial pipeline could be built with a lower target speed. This would postpone some of the potential challenges with regard to heat dissipation, and also route selection. For example, you wouldn't have to worry so much about tunneling under a mountain to ameliorate the G-forces if you are traveling more slowly. Once you prove out the route (which could still be competitive with any existing train service), you incrementally build tunnels and modify the route to improve your target speed. (As for heat discharge, Im pretty sure that was addressed in EM's original paper - dumping the excess heat into an on-board water tank which is exchanged at the end of the ride, or are you referring to something else?)

Analemma_ 9y ago

When Musk first said that an LA<->SF Hyperloop could be built for 1/8th the cost of the equivalent HSR, I chuckled and then waited for the punchline, which still hasn’t arrived. It’s a cool idea and I do want to see more prototypes and feasibility studies, but people need to get off the hype train (no pun intended) and be realistic about the cost.

Chathamization 9y ago
> When Musk first said that an LA<->SF Hyperloop could be built for 1/8th the cost of the equivalent HSR, I chuckled and then waited for the punchline, which still hasn’t arrived. Yeah, and that proposal was for something with much lower throughput, that didn't have stops along the way, and didn't even reach the same areas (they saved money by stopping outside both cities, which the rail line wouldn't do). It also assumed that the tubes could just be placed along the highway meridians (a lot of the money it was supposed to save was from this).
warent 9y ago
To be fair, if Elon worked in the project for 40 - 80 hours a week, he probably could get a team to accomplish it at 1/8th the cost or lower. Consider he did this with rockets, getting them to under 1/10th the cost
- ballooney 9y ago
  He hasn’t done that with rockets. He wants to eventually, but he hasn’t yet. Let’s not let hype cloud facts.
  - nkoren 9y ago
    He's getting very close, if one is considering domestic rockets. The standard-bearers were the Delta IV and Atlas V, which price out at around $17,000/kg - $20,000/kg to LEO, respectively. The Falcon 9 comes in at about $2,800/kg to LEO. Comparisons with non-domestic rockets are complicated by state subsidies and differentials in labor costs. But the Falcon 9 is approaching the 10X mark even before reusability has been priced in. Both the Falcon Heavy (in a few months) and the (eventual) reusable pricing should overshoot the 10X mark substantially.
    - Rebelgecko 9y ago
      Where are you pulling those numbers from? On ULA's website [1] they say you can launch an Atlas V for less than half the $/kg you listed [1] I went to rocketbuilder.com and both LEO configurations I tried were around $8,000/kg (and I didn't count the 20% deduction for "ULA added value" since the numbers there are debatable)
      - nkoren 9y ago
        ULA has abruptly gotten way more competitive in their pricing. A few years ago they were not. Their "Best deal" for the Atlas V was a 36-rocket "bulk buy" priced the lowest-tier Atlas V 401 at $164M/launch[1]. That does 9,797kg to LEO[2], or $16,740/kg. The GAO cites $164M/launch as the price for the cheapest Delta V[3] (is there some kind of threshold at $165M?), which when the Falcon 9 was introduced could put 8,500kg to LEO[4], or $19,294/kg. (It has since been uprated and gotten slightly cheaper). Must've screwed up my calculations earlier, because those aren't tallying. Anyhow, as you can see, SpaceX is already around 7x cheaper compared to where ULA was, and should cross the 10x threshold shortly. Nice to see ULA responding to competitive pressure, however! 1: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324172526/http://www.ulalaunch.com/faqs-launch-costs.aspx https://web.archive.org/web/20160324172526/http://www.ulalau... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V 3: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-609 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-609 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV#Delta_IV_Small https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV#Delta_IV_Small
martinald 9y ago
Is this not an attempt to just derail CAHSR, or HSR in general? Nearly every anti-HSR comment is now 'we should build hyperloop instead!'.
- Pxtl 9y ago
  That's impressively cynical, but Musk obviously stands to gain a lot if people keep California using roads. California wants to go green and he sells the best technology for green road-based transportation.
  - imron 9y ago
    To be fair, he also stands a lot to gain if Hyperloop becomes a reality.
    - zardo 9y ago
      How does that work? He had an idea and promoted it. No one's going to be paying him royalties for it.
      - imron 9y ago
        He's also building one, so he has a vested interest in the technology being successful: https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/04/elon-musk-reportedly-planning-to-build-his-own-hyperloop-for-tunnel-system/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/04/elon-musk-reportedly-plann...
  - yahna 9y ago
    heh. Reminds me of when an actual AI expert pointed out that by making dire predictions about smart AI, that we are nowhere near having, keeps eyes off the autopilot system and the issues with that.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    I'm not sure it really affects his electronic car business one way or the other. Firstly, he isn't necessarily selling Tesla's to people for commuting between SF and LA, that's well outside his range, and as fast as the supercharging is, it loses out to regular gasoline refilling. Secondly, I'm not sure the amount of people potentially served by the hyperloop is more than a blip in the sales charts for even a regular car company (as deciding factors for car purchasing decisions, it seems relatively low to me).
hbosch 9y ago
Okay, we'll bookmark this for the future. Amtrak estimated a HSR/"bullet train" from D.C. to Boston would cost ~$151 billion. Since LA to SF will only be two stops, and we can assume Amtrak estimated at least 4 (Philly and NYC) let's bring the number down closer to $100 billion to make it even. Do we think the Hyperloop costs are more or less than that? 1/8 of a theoretical $100b is $12.5b -- is $12.5billion for Hyperloop unreasonable? I have no opinion on cost personally, and I don't know economics, but this $151 billion from D.C. to Boston was floated by the established US player in rail infrastructure. Anything less than that number is fantastic, right?
- dx034 9y ago
  You cannot compare D.C to Boston with SF to LAX. The east coast has much denser population so that you need more tunnels. LAX to SF HSR would not cost $151bn. Start and end are expensive but the part in the middle is "relatively" cheap.
  - hbosch 9y ago
    Right, for comparison's sake I chopped off $51 billion bucks from the Northeast Corridor projection in the interest of balancing out the two. Just because I felt like doing some more Google-fu, I found an article in the LA Times[0] that says a California HSR/bullet-train project is going to overshoot it's original budget (and deadline) of $68 billion. There's a lot of info out there about this project, and it's potential overruns, but let's forget all that and just stick to the original planned cost: $68 billion, so, about half of the cost of Amtrak's northeastern bullet. Let's use that number for our comparison. If we are going to hold Elon to his "we can do it for 1/8th the cost" blurb, then we are giving him like $8.5 billion to use for his SF/LA Hyperloop. Still, that doesn't sound unreasonable, right? He'll get a good deal on tunnel boring with his other company, and fuselage manufacturing can be handled by SpaceX. When it comes to financing, I don't think it's a major issue compared to other infrastructure works out there. Like I said, though, I'm just going off the top of my head. I don't know finance or economics or vacuums or magnets. There's a new LIRR train being dug in NYC called East Side Access. This is a commuter rail line, and is going to cost ~$10 billion or so[1]. Logistically these aren't the same, obviously, but if adding to the LIRR is worth ~$10b then surely the Hyperloop experiment is as well, right? EDIT: Also, just for disclosure, I don't live in California and I'd probably never end up using the Hyperloop myself so I'm neither for nor against it versus any HSR. I just want to entertain the idea that cost shouldn't be the main focus of discussion IMO. ___ 0. 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... 1. http://web.mta.info/capital/esa_alt.html http://web.mta.info/capital/esa_alt.html
Pxtl 9y ago
I'm not saying the hyperloop is a good or bad idea, but any suggestion that it would be cheaper than the equivalent HSR seems utterly insane. How could it possibly be cheaper? You have the same ROW requirements, exponentially more expensive track, and the overhead of the fact that it's brand new technology. The fact that the vehicle itself might be cheaper than an HSR train after the tech scales up is almost an afterthought next to those costs.
- reacweb 9y ago
  The track should be cheaper because hyperloop has (almost) no impact on existing infrastructures. Expropriation costs for train are huge.
  - Pxtl 9y ago
    How could the Hyperloop not require the same expropriations? A giant tube isn't any smaller than a train track. Is it the fact that it's elevated? Rail can be elevated. Yes, rail is heavy, but so are giant evacuated steel tubes.
    - zip1234 9y ago
      Run it down the center of the freeway? Having stations for trains in the middle of freeways isn't great for pedestrians, but might be fine for long distance transport such as hyperloop.
      - Pxtl 9y ago
        HSR is supposed to be log distance transport. It's I meant to solve the exact same problems as Hyperloop, but by powerful engines and streamlined railcars instead of evacuated tubes. Again, why not put HSR tracks in the same place you'd put a Hyperloop track? Put the station in the same place. The tubes aren't smaller or lighter.
    - pstuart 9y ago
      I think he's planning on making lots of tunnels. https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-test-tunnel/ https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-test-tunnel/
pavs 9y ago
I don't think Musk want hyperloop to be built above the ground. This is just my own personal opinion, not sure if that's how it's going to work, but in one of his interview (TED? I think), he mentioned one of the reasons for his Boring company, was it would be relatively cheaper to build hyperloop - because the atmospheric pressure will be lower underground - and since you don't have to worry about building large infrastructure for only one purpose (hyperloop) - the cost will be much much cheaper. Because under ground tunnels can be build for both hyperloop and roads for cars and it scale better than above ground. I don't think above ground is economically and technically feasible, there are just too many unanswered issue that almost no one has answer to. Not to mention it will be very very expensive and time consuming.
- grw_ 9y ago
  Why would atmospheric pressure be lower underground?
- opencl 9y ago
  Tunnel boring is orders of magnitude more expensive than railway construction, at typically ~a few hundred million dollars per mile vs ~a few million dollars per mile. I know Musk has plans to magically make tunnel boring significantly cheaper but you need two orders of magnitude cost reduction to make the tunnel digging not cost more than an entire above ground railway. Cost references: https://tunneltalk.com/TunnelTECH-Apr2015-Arup-large-diameter-soft-ground-bored-tunnel-review.php https://tunneltalk.com/TunnelTECH-Apr2015-Arup-large-diamete... https://www.compassinternational.net/railroad-engineering-construction-cost-benchmarks/ https://www.compassinternational.net/railroad-engineering-co...
kbenson 9y ago
Maybe you're looking in the wrong place for the punchline. Perhaps it will be delivered in the final bill for the HSR...
colordrops 9y ago
Everyone has been chuckling about electric cars and private rockets until recently, and that was by experts in the respective fields. Chuckle all you want.
- mikekchar 9y ago
  Go here and scroll down to "Select historical production vehicles" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicl... I grew up in the 70s and saw production electric vehicles that are not on this list. People have been chuckling for a long time and for good reason. It's not that electric vehicles won't eventually be successful -- they must. It's that the time from, "Hey, an electric vehicle would be a good idea" to "Hey, we've figured out all the engineering challenges to make this viable" is longer than the lifetime of most of the companies that entered the fray. Look at the list of vehicles from before 1990. That's the "getting to the market first" list. All gone. Then look at the list from 1990 to 2010. How many of those will be major players in the electric vehicle market? My point is that I'm relatively old for someone on HN and there have been production electric vehicles since well before I was born. They only started to be viable in the last few years -- and even then, we probably need a few more breakthroughs in battery technology before the market settles out. Long distance, super fast trains in tunnels? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen I saw the tunnel the other day. I was surprised that practically the whole damn length of the maglev tracks will be in a tunnel, but it makes total sense. That's been under construction for 10 years. They are optimistically expecting to make a profit in 2026 when "costs stabilise". Will long distance, high speed trains in low pressure tunnels be successful? I have no doubt. Will Hyperloop One be successful? Umm... frozen balls of ice remaining intact in a very hot place probably have a better chance, but I won't say they will definitely fail. If they can secure something like a trillion dollars and invest it wisely over the next 30-40 years, then their chances will improve significantly.
  - colordrops 9y ago
    Let me be clear. I was talking about criticism of Musk specifically. Pretty much EVERYONE in the aerospace industry thought he was nuts, and yet SpaceX made it to orbit. Even a couple months before their first stage landing others were saying it was impossible.

corpMaverick 9y ago

Assuming your are correct and Branson knows it because he hired good engineering advisers. Why would Branson get involved ? - It is a cool project he wants to be part of and he is willing to pay to see. (I would probably do that) - The benefit is not to reach the goal but all the technology that will be invented trying to reach the goal.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> Why would Branson get involved ? Branson is notorious for burning other peoples’ money. Look at Virgin Galactic: it’s New Mexicans’ [1] and Floridians’ [2] tax money plus some duped Emiratis [3]. (They also pre-sold tickets [4].) [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/04/space-travel-virgingalactic-haunts-new-mexico-town https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/04/space-travel... [2] http://www.airnewstimes.co.uk/space-florida-promises-virgin-galactic-payloads-12869-news.html http://www.airnewstimes.co.uk/space-florida-promises-virgin-... [3] https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/uaes-aabar-takes-stake-in-virgin-galactic/ https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/uaes-aabar-takes-sta... [4] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/
buckminster 9y ago
Branson's business model is selling the right to use the Virgin brand to other companies. The article doesn't say he made an investment. It is rather more likely that they paid him.
- puranjay 9y ago
  So basically Trump with more class?
  - neuronexmachina 9y ago
    ...and fewer bankruptcies.
    - zimpenfish 9y ago

loceng 9y ago

People often, rightfully so, confuse the misappropriated name of Hyperloop One with Elon's Hyperloop idea, his of which I believe does have sound economics and certainly its pro list outweighs Hyperloop One's technology.

andruby 9y ago
Could you point out the differences in both technological and economical approaches?
- loceng 9y ago
  I'll try to remember to reply to this after the weekend, if not and you're still interested shoot me an email matt@engn.com

jfoster 9y ago

I don't think it's right to use figures that can change to disprove an Elon Musk concept. If you did that back in the day, you would say there's no way Tesla could work because the cost of batteries is prohibitive and the supply too limited.

AOsborn 9y ago
This is the real insight.
pokemongoaway 9y ago
Yes, but we could see that batteries needed to get X better in order for us to achieve Y results in the future. But how much better do vacuum chamber technologies have to get before you can make the biggest one ever built, that also has a high-speed capsule traveling through it, that is also impervious to armor piercing bullets? Furthermore, imagine if every airplane had to fly the exactly same path, and if any failure on that path prevented (at the very least) all subsequent planes from traveling that path. And finally, how are security lines going to get shorter if the stakes will be at least as high as airplanes?
- jfoster 9y ago
  I don't know the answers to these questions, but what I do know is: 1. Elon Musk has thought about them more than we have. 2. If his initial concept turns out to be incorrect in some way, he will change it until it is workable.
- greedo 9y ago
  Are airliners impervious to armor piercing bullets? As I understand it, a small bullet penetrating the loop will cause a minor release, not a catastrophic event. It's not correct to hold the Hyperloop idea to standards that we don't apply to other forms of travel.
jcranmer 9y ago
There's a very pertinent historical reference point: Ferdinand de Lesseps. He built the Suez Canal from 1859 to 1869, a task which was considered by many to be impossible or at least impracticable [1]. After achieving resounding success, he then turned to Panama to try building the Panama Canal. In this venture, he turned out to have several very wrong ideas (it's not feasible to build a sea-level canal in Panama), and the French effort failed so hard it actually brought down the French government [2]. He was successful in the first venture but for different reasons than initially assumed (namely, the Suez Canal isn't all that challenging from an engineering perspective; it's just capital-intensive), and his failure in the second venture comes from misunderstanding the problems. [1] There had been canals in the past that traveled from the Red Sea to the Nile delta, but these invariably silted up rather quickly (the Nile was sediment-heavy, and wind-blown sand is quite common in the region). Thus there was historical evidence favoring the idea that the dredging maintenance fees would exceed the revenue from passing ships. [2] Of course, this was the Third Republic, which is notorious for having provided series of weak, unstable governments replete with scandals that prompt new governments. Ironically, the Third Republic was the longest-lasting form of government France has had since the Ancien Régime.

flgr 9y ago

> Das ist nicht gute. Should be "Das ist nicht gut".

stevep98 9y ago

An initial pipeline could be built with a lower target speed. This would postpone some of the potential challenges with regard to heat dissipation, and also route selection. For example, you wouldn't have to worry so much about tunneling under a mountain to ameliorate the G-forces if you are traveling more slowly. Once you prove out the route (which could still be competitive with any existing train service), you incrementally build tunnels and modify the route to improve your target speed. (As for heat discharge, Im pretty sure that was addressed in EM's original paper - dumping the excess heat into an on-board water tank which is exchanged at the end of the ride, or are you referring to something else?)