3 ms·
This is such a joke. I remember when it was first described, I predicted that it would do nothing but derail legitimate rail projects, and that's exactly what's
by johnwalkr 6y ago
This is such a joke. I remember when it was first described, I predicted that it would do nothing but derail legitimate rail projects, and that's exactly what's happened in California city councils. People have been sold the idea of taking their car on the train like a ferry, for $5 instead of proper public transit, and it will never happen.
Vacuum equipment is notoriously difficult to maintain, especially sealing of moving parts. It was proposed to be cheap in part because you "just" make let the tube thermally expand and contract at the stations, rather than at regular intervals like rail. Based on the distances proposed, at California temperatures, you'd need roughly +/-20m of expansion capability, at each station. And you need this at the point where you are sealing things, and starting/stopping cars, having people move in and out (well, not many people because the capacity is a joke), and cleaning up vomit. To the safety standards for transportation. Plus all the same problems a normal train has, like getting right-of-way. Good luck with that.
One of the points in the proposal was "assuming 2.5G is an acceptable acceleration..." 2.5-3G is typical of a roller coaster, although the more intense one go to 5G or so.
Should have never made if off the napkin.