5 ms·

I just don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail. Probably cheaper to deploy, but the capacity will always be low and speed slow. I'm not one for

I just don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail. Probably cheaper to deploy, but the capacity will always be low and speed slow. I'm not one for an "either or" generally, but I really have a hard time seeing the benefit of blimps beyond "this is neat and kinda fun".

VyseofArcadia 2y ago
Intra-continental I don't think anything beats high-speed rail. Inter-continental I don't think high speed rail is viable, unless you have a transatlantic locomotive in your pocket that you aren't telling anyone about.
- cogman10 2y ago
  I don't think this is an issue. It's a 1% problem. Most of the population of the world lives on 2 contiguous land masses. Flights to bridge the masses is fine but would represent a small fraction of the transport needed. Rail doesn't have to solve all problems. It's a good solution to most problems. But back to the blimp proposals, I can't see how a blimp would be a better option vs a boat. (Traditional flight is probably better than either).
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel Imagine a hexagonal grid of these between continents, with aqua-farms, data-centers, resorts, casinos, floating cities/solar/wind sprinkled in between. Err... Aqua-Loop? Maybe 'grow' them 'in-situ' like corals, funghi, sponges, seaweed, algae, bamboo, whatever, by means of genetic manipulation. edit: Not to forget, conduits for HVDC, ZBLAN, and all sorts of pipelinable stuff for the global super smart grid. FUCK YEAH! edding: Icebergs, yes, yes, Gridguards no less!
Avicebron 2y ago
"I don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail" is pretty much my follow up to almost any proposal for transportation improvements in the states, which critically are never rail, what wild is almost everyone I've ever spoken with agree and yet..crickets
- ReptileMan 2y ago
  High speed rail is slow. NY to LA, Miami to Seattle will take forever. And a tunnels under the Rockies will be quite the challenge.
- cogman10 2y ago
  That's because the only way to make rail work in the US is via a federal government implementation. New rail will be very expensive to install and politicians are afraid of saying "we may need taxes to cover this".
gwbas1c 2y ago
> I just don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail. How can you build a railroad across an ocean?
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel
  - gwbas1c 2y ago
    That does not appear practical to replace intercontinental flights. One of the reasons why air travel is practical, and rail isn't, is because you don't need to build any infrastructure between airports. The other reason is because you can adjust flights between airports without needing to adjust infrastructure.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
      That would depend on several things. For one, how dense that grid would be. For another, what would be built into/next to/adjacent to the nodes/hubs and spokes of that grid, making building such a grid of floating, submerged tunnels worthwile in the first place. Hen<->Egg, bootstrapping, yadda yarr yarr... edding: Also imagine something like really long freight trains, a mile or so, double stacked, only running at something like 200 mph. And compare the capacity with any freight plane in use, vs. the speed of container ships. Also the possibility for pipelines right next to it. Conduits for energy and data. On and on and on... edding: In case you havn't noticed, linking myself, elsethreads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43131224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43131224
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
- cogman10 2y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130680

VyseofArcadia 2y ago

Intra-continental I don't think anything beats high-speed rail. Inter-continental I don't think high speed rail is viable, unless you have a transatlantic locomotive in your pocket that you aren't telling anyone about.

cogman10 2y ago
I don't think this is an issue. It's a 1% problem. Most of the population of the world lives on 2 contiguous land masses. Flights to bridge the masses is fine but would represent a small fraction of the transport needed. Rail doesn't have to solve all problems. It's a good solution to most problems. But back to the blimp proposals, I can't see how a blimp would be a better option vs a boat. (Traditional flight is probably better than either).
LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel Imagine a hexagonal grid of these between continents, with aqua-farms, data-centers, resorts, casinos, floating cities/solar/wind sprinkled in between. Err... Aqua-Loop? Maybe 'grow' them 'in-situ' like corals, funghi, sponges, seaweed, algae, bamboo, whatever, by means of genetic manipulation. edit: Not to forget, conduits for HVDC, ZBLAN, and all sorts of pipelinable stuff for the global super smart grid. FUCK YEAH! edding: Icebergs, yes, yes, Gridguards no less!

Avicebron 2y ago

"I don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail" is pretty much my follow up to almost any proposal for transportation improvements in the states, which critically are never rail, what wild is almost everyone I've ever spoken with agree and yet..crickets

ReptileMan 2y ago
High speed rail is slow. NY to LA, Miami to Seattle will take forever. And a tunnels under the Rockies will be quite the challenge.
cogman10 2y ago
That's because the only way to make rail work in the US is via a federal government implementation. New rail will be very expensive to install and politicians are afraid of saying "we may need taxes to cover this".

gwbas1c 2y ago

> I just don't see how it's a better idea than high-speed rail. How can you build a railroad across an ocean?

LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel
- gwbas1c 2y ago
  That does not appear practical to replace intercontinental flights. One of the reasons why air travel is practical, and rail isn't, is because you don't need to build any infrastructure between airports. The other reason is because you can adjust flights between airports without needing to adjust infrastructure.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
    That would depend on several things. For one, how dense that grid would be. For another, what would be built into/next to/adjacent to the nodes/hubs and spokes of that grid, making building such a grid of floating, submerged tunnels worthwile in the first place. Hen<->Egg, bootstrapping, yadda yarr yarr... edding: Also imagine something like really long freight trains, a mile or so, double stacked, only running at something like 200 mph. And compare the capacity with any freight plane in use, vs. the speed of container ships. Also the possibility for pipelines right next to it. Conduits for energy and data. On and on and on... edding: In case you havn't noticed, linking myself, elsethreads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43131224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43131224
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
cogman10 2y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130680