3 ms·

> If at least the hyperloop project manages to get off the ground (pun sort of intended) that would still be a nice contribution to human progress. I don’t agr

> If at least the hyperloop project manages to get off the ground (pun sort of intended) that would still be a nice contribution to human progress. I don’t agree. We already have maglev, is hyperloop going to be cheaper to build/operate? If not, why would the marginal speed increase prompt governments to invest in this kind of infrastructure vs. traditional rail or maglev? The problem is not that hyperloop won’t work, it’s that it is another gadgetbahn[1] that doesn’t make economic sense in a political climate where infrastructure investment is verboten. [1] http://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/ http://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/

Robotbeat 7y ago
Hyperloop is supposed to be significantly cheaper to build and operate due to reduced diameter, reduced impact on environment from noise (really fast maglev and high speed rail can be an acoustics problem, particularly near tunnel orifices), and increased efficiency particularly at the high end (energy consumption per kilometer at high speeds is proportional to speed squared, and as you approach transonic speeds, it gets worse, so pumping almost all the air out can help dramatically... neglecting air friction, and depending on the exact technology, maglev itself is can actually be MORE efficient per ton-mile at high speeds than low). Hyperloop's infrastructure cost is hopefully being solved by The Boring Company (although if they make more than incremental progress in tunneling efficiency, all sorts of tunnel projects in the US--which has particularly bad tunnel infrastructure costs--should improve). Also, if Hyperloop succeeds, it might help loosen the political restraints. Personally, I think The Boring Company is more likely to be successful than Hyperloop itself. There's a lot of really hairy engineering required for super high speeds. BUT the Hyperloop student competition's 10km track could push the state of the art in rail speed, and that may have interesting consequences.

Robotbeat 7y ago

Hyperloop is supposed to be significantly cheaper to build and operate due to reduced diameter, reduced impact on environment from noise (really fast maglev and high speed rail can be an acoustics problem, particularly near tunnel orifices), and increased efficiency particularly at the high end (energy consumption per kilometer at high speeds is proportional to speed squared, and as you approach transonic speeds, it gets worse, so pumping almost all the air out can help dramatically... neglecting air friction, and depending on the exact technology, maglev itself is can actually be MORE efficient per ton-mile at high speeds than low). Hyperloop's infrastructure cost is hopefully being solved by The Boring Company (although if they make more than incremental progress in tunneling efficiency, all sorts of tunnel projects in the US--which has particularly bad tunnel infrastructure costs--should improve). Also, if Hyperloop succeeds, it might help loosen the political restraints. Personally, I think The Boring Company is more likely to be successful than Hyperloop itself. There's a lot of really hairy engineering required for super high speeds. BUT the Hyperloop student competition's 10km track could push the state of the art in rail speed, and that may have interesting consequences.