3 ms·

The 2013 Hyperloop paper claims a capacity of 840 pax/hour under some pretty optimistic assumptions. I'm willing to grant them all these assumptions because th

The 2013 Hyperloop paper claims a capacity of 840 pax/hour under some pretty optimistic assumptions. I'm willing to grant them all these assumptions because this number is tiny and pathetic. A highway has a nominal capacity of 1800 vehicles per hour at a 2-second following distance, which works out to a capacity of at least 1800 people/hour and at most, in a dedicated bus lane, something more like 20000 per hour. Railroad capacity is much higher. Even bad railroads like UK National Rail have demonstrated over 200k pax/hour into a single station.

golem14 8y ago
Thanks for the pointer: Here is another one, maybe more recent: https://ggwash.org/view/32078/musks-hyperloop-math-doesnt-add-up https://ggwash.org/view/32078/musks-hyperloop-math-doesnt-ad... Some good points, but I also think that the train system is overhyped here (comparing a single hyperloop v1.0 with a single terminal with a whole train station isn't as useful as it could be.) [Aside: Also, knowing the knots Palo Alto and other cites tie themselves in to deal with the high speed lane up to San Francisco, I'm not sure that HSR there will ever be successful, no matter how much $$$ and time is spent. Drives me nuts] I also don't know how to compare highway costs - dunno what it would cost to increase one lane between SF and LA, plus adding a lane doesn't increase capacity linearly AFAIK.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  The problem with CAHSR is that they decided to go whole hog on brand new high speed rail pretty early, and that they specified the top speed and expected travel times as a matter of law. Realistically speaking, it's a lot more cost-effective to bring the slowest sections up to good enough speeds for medium-high speed rail. Each 10MPH increase in max speeds lead to diminishing returns.
stale2002 8y ago
Using highway numbers is the wrong comparison. Hyperloop does not compete with highways. To get a better comparison, how many people fly from SF to LA every hour? That's the use case. 1 flight per hour sounds about right as a ball park estimate. A hyper loop beats that in capacity, and would likely be FASTER (due to not having to go through airport security).
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  A cursory look at Google Flights shows a lot more than hourly flights from SFO-LAX. That's also not including flights to other area airports like Oakland, San Jose, Ontario, John Wayne, Burbank, etc.

golem14 8y ago

Thanks for the pointer: Here is another one, maybe more recent: https://ggwash.org/view/32078/musks-hyperloop-math-doesnt-add-up https://ggwash.org/view/32078/musks-hyperloop-math-doesnt-ad... Some good points, but I also think that the train system is overhyped here (comparing a single hyperloop v1.0 with a single terminal with a whole train station isn't as useful as it could be.) [Aside: Also, knowing the knots Palo Alto and other cites tie themselves in to deal with the high speed lane up to San Francisco, I'm not sure that HSR there will ever be successful, no matter how much $$$ and time is spent. Drives me nuts] I also don't know how to compare highway costs - dunno what it would cost to increase one lane between SF and LA, plus adding a lane doesn't increase capacity linearly AFAIK.

bobthepanda 8y ago
The problem with CAHSR is that they decided to go whole hog on brand new high speed rail pretty early, and that they specified the top speed and expected travel times as a matter of law. Realistically speaking, it's a lot more cost-effective to bring the slowest sections up to good enough speeds for medium-high speed rail. Each 10MPH increase in max speeds lead to diminishing returns.

stale2002 8y ago

Using highway numbers is the wrong comparison. Hyperloop does not compete with highways. To get a better comparison, how many people fly from SF to LA every hour? That's the use case. 1 flight per hour sounds about right as a ball park estimate. A hyper loop beats that in capacity, and would likely be FASTER (due to not having to go through airport security).

bobthepanda 8y ago
A cursory look at Google Flights shows a lot more than hourly flights from SFO-LAX. That's also not including flights to other area airports like Oakland, San Jose, Ontario, John Wayne, Burbank, etc.