7 ms·

The focus from people on bathrooms is puzzling to me. I've been on buses, without facilities, that go for hours without stopping. This is a 35 minute ride with

by orofino 13y ago

The focus from people on bathrooms is puzzling to me. I've been on buses, without facilities, that go for hours without stopping. This is a 35 minute ride with restricted movement, if you greatly fear being able to hold it for that long, there are other, less efficient methods of transport to accommodate you.

kailuowang 13y ago
On a bus you have the chance to get off every 5-10 minutes, that's a big difference. There will be thousands of passengers on that day. Just imagine if you have to do this trip 10 times a day every day for 100 days, will you still take risk? Update (since I've been downvoted): All these buses analogy isn't exactly the same case because they still have the option to stop somewhere, which give the passengers the assurance that if they really can't hold it's not the end of the world. Taking that into consideration, I think it could solve most people's bathroom concern by adding bathroom stops to the loop, in the case of semi-emergency, ideally a pod should be able to make a stop upon request within 5-10 minutes without disrupting other pods. Some financial incentive might be needed for encouraging people to hold longer but I do see legal risks in that approach.
- christoph 13y ago
  That depends where in the world you are. I've been on many long distance buses in Asia that might not stop for 4 or 5 hours.
- axelf 13y ago
  I have taken a 40min commuter bus everyday for nearly 2 years and I never had to get off early to use the bathroom.
- orofino 13y ago
  You're thinking city buses. I'm thinking long-haul busses (like greyhound in the US). Greyhound buses likely have facilities, what I'm actually talking about are the buses used a core parts of the transportation infrastructure all over South America. Many of these also have facilities but I've been on many where the bathroom isn't functioning or just plain isn't there. You can easily travel for 30 minutes to an hour without stopping. We're largely (70%) talking about commuters here, they're taking this twice a day, most days out of the year. Again, I'm not sure why for 90%+ of people that this would be an issue.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    Headline: Musk reveals Hyperloop. Americans too fat and incontinent to use.
  - kailuowang 13y ago
    All these buses analogy isn't exactly the same because they still have the option to stop somewhere, which give the passengers the assurance that if they can't hold it's not the end of the world. Taking that into consideration, I think it could solve most people's bathroom concern by adding bathroom stops to the loop, in the case of semi-emergency, ideally a pod should be able to make a stop upon request within 5-10 minutes without disrupting other pods. Some financial incentive might be needed for encouraging people to hold longer but I do see legal risks in that approach.
    - orofino 13y ago
      Financial incentive? You're traveling at 700mph through a partially evacuated, elevated tube in order to get to work. That isn't incentive enough?
    - vadman 13y ago
      Not really. Take the Staten Island express bus for example. Between SI and Manhattan, there is about 35 min on the Verrazano Bridge and Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, without any opportunity to get off (BQE does not even have shoulders for the most part). That's on a good day with decent traffic. In bad traffic and bad weather, that could be an hour or even more without any opportunity to get off. EDIT: a clarification for non-New Yorkers -- people take these daily to get to work, if they work in Manhattan. The alternative is SI railroad-ferry-subway, which allows more bathroom safety but takes quite a bit longer.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    Interestingly, my DC Metrorail trip to home or work takes between 45-60 minutes one-way... and there are no facilities on the train itself, and very few stations have any public-accessible facilities. "Holding it" has honestly never been an issue, you either go before you leave, or sack up and wait until you get home. Worst case is probably that you get sick en route and well... that alone wouldn't wreck Hyperloop.
marze 13y ago
Yeah. Adult diapers! Problem solved.
- tarblog 13y ago
  "methods of transportation"
spikels 13y ago
If not using the bathroom for an hour is an issue you should see a doctor. Not only are there good treatments to alleviate this, but it may be an indication of a serious medical problem. Get it fixed then enjoy life including perhaps the Hyperloop.
- conanbatt 13y ago
  I agree with the sentiment, but its part of the disadvantages of this transport. You cant travel with babies or little kids in them, and you certainly cant do it sick. However its not such a big flaw, specially to warrant 63billion to alleviate.
  - meric 13y ago
    Nappies.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    I would gleefully slap another $50-100 onto every plane ticket I ever bought to ensure that there was nobody anywhere on the plane under the age of 16. I can't be the only one...
    - simonebrunozzi 13y ago
      Only 50-100? I would go as far as 200! :)
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        Well, I probably would too, but depending on the airline, that is nearing first class levels. Of course on many/most planes "first class" does not get you isolation from children... (certainly not for that low a price) but at least you get unlimited liquor and legroom. I'd be willing to pay more for a flight without children but I would want some unlimited liquor once I go over 200 or so. On this note, what would be the booze situation on hyperloops? There isn't an aisle on those things as far as I can tell, which means no stewardesses... Maybe per-seat minibars could be installed on them? Strictly speaking it wouldn't be necessary for 30 minute rides, but I see no reason this idea shouldn't be scaled up past 30 minute trips (Musk points out that supersonic airliners are better at longer distances, but since we don't have those either I'd settle for a 30+ minute hyperloop. Both a hyperloop and a return of Concord/Tu-144 would be great of course.)
hackula1 13y ago
I would point people towards the Stadium Pal, described by David Sedaris. Essentially, it is a urine bag strapped to your leg attached to an external catheter. I am not sure if it works for women, but I am sure Musk could figure that out.
- orofino 13y ago
  Similar, though less invasive, solutions exist for 'emergencies' on private planes and such. They come with support for both male and female genitalia.
Niten 13y ago
Well it's not just a matter of bathrooms. Even on a commuter bus or plane, if someone has a medical emergency and needs to get off right now, the bus will pull over or the plane will land. In this design you'd have to just sit there, helpless, until the vehicle reaches its destination. Heck, even if you're a doctor in the next seat you wouldn't be able to get up and help your fellow passenger.
- bwaldrep 13y ago
  They discuss this in the paper. In the event of a medical emergency the pod will proceed to the destination as normal, and paramedics can be waiting at the end. In the absolute worst case you are looking at ~30 minutes before you can get to medical attention. That's not obviously worse than the time it would take a plane to descend from cruising altitude to the nearest airport, land, and taxi to a gate.
  - kerneis 13y ago
    Except you can get first aid assistance in a plane (they ask if a doctor is here, and they have a number of drugs on board). Keeping the person alive until paramedics arrive is key to handling emergency situations, and I don't see how you do it with the Hyperloop.
- LockeWatts 13y ago
  Landing a plane will guaranteed take more than 35 minutes. With the hyperloop, it's simpler and more efficient to just have EMTs called and on station when the car arrives.
  - neurotech1 13y ago
    Actually, an airliner can usually descend and land within 10-15 minutes in an emergency, assuming a suitable runway is close by. There are more smaller airports with 5000 ft runways that don't typically handle 737s or larger. The problem with emergencies at major airports is that between EMTs and fire services inspecting the jet, that runway is out of service for at least 30 minutes. On a normal flight a 737 flies an approach at under 180kts but the approach limit is a lot faster. In a cardiac arrest type situation, the pilot may decide to fly a faster approach into an airport with medical services available. They would still touch down at the normal speed.
teeja 13y ago
It's a very small space, with no apparent facility to handle not just #1 and #2, but severe gastric distress. The other passengers then get to look forward to up to 25 minutes in that closed space. There's no stewardess, no way to stop the vehicle. An "emergency evacuation module" shouldn't take much room.
- jessaustin 13y ago
  The design incorporates very powerful air compressors and water pumps, and generates, transfers, and isolates a great deal of heat. The cabin will be very well-ventilated, because if it weren't then passengers would die of something other than methane poisoning.

by orofino 13y ago

kailuowang 13y ago

On a bus you have the chance to get off every 5-10 minutes, that's a big difference. There will be thousands of passengers on that day. Just imagine if you have to do this trip 10 times a day every day for 100 days, will you still take risk? Update (since I've been downvoted): All these buses analogy isn't exactly the same case because they still have the option to stop somewhere, which give the passengers the assurance that if they really can't hold it's not the end of the world. Taking that into consideration, I think it could solve most people's bathroom concern by adding bathroom stops to the loop, in the case of semi-emergency, ideally a pod should be able to make a stop upon request within 5-10 minutes without disrupting other pods. Some financial incentive might be needed for encouraging people to hold longer but I do see legal risks in that approach.

christoph 13y ago
That depends where in the world you are. I've been on many long distance buses in Asia that might not stop for 4 or 5 hours.
axelf 13y ago
I have taken a 40min commuter bus everyday for nearly 2 years and I never had to get off early to use the bathroom.
orofino 13y ago
You're thinking city buses. I'm thinking long-haul busses (like greyhound in the US). Greyhound buses likely have facilities, what I'm actually talking about are the buses used a core parts of the transportation infrastructure all over South America. Many of these also have facilities but I've been on many where the bathroom isn't functioning or just plain isn't there. You can easily travel for 30 minutes to an hour without stopping. We're largely (70%) talking about commuters here, they're taking this twice a day, most days out of the year. Again, I'm not sure why for 90%+ of people that this would be an issue.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  Headline: Musk reveals Hyperloop. Americans too fat and incontinent to use.
- kailuowang 13y ago
  All these buses analogy isn't exactly the same because they still have the option to stop somewhere, which give the passengers the assurance that if they can't hold it's not the end of the world. Taking that into consideration, I think it could solve most people's bathroom concern by adding bathroom stops to the loop, in the case of semi-emergency, ideally a pod should be able to make a stop upon request within 5-10 minutes without disrupting other pods. Some financial incentive might be needed for encouraging people to hold longer but I do see legal risks in that approach.
  - orofino 13y ago
    Financial incentive? You're traveling at 700mph through a partially evacuated, elevated tube in order to get to work. That isn't incentive enough?
  - vadman 13y ago
    Not really. Take the Staten Island express bus for example. Between SI and Manhattan, there is about 35 min on the Verrazano Bridge and Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, without any opportunity to get off (BQE does not even have shoulders for the most part). That's on a good day with decent traffic. In bad traffic and bad weather, that could be an hour or even more without any opportunity to get off. EDIT: a clarification for non-New Yorkers -- people take these daily to get to work, if they work in Manhattan. The alternative is SI railroad-ferry-subway, which allows more bathroom safety but takes quite a bit longer.
- mpyne 13y ago
  Interestingly, my DC Metrorail trip to home or work takes between 45-60 minutes one-way... and there are no facilities on the train itself, and very few stations have any public-accessible facilities. "Holding it" has honestly never been an issue, you either go before you leave, or sack up and wait until you get home. Worst case is probably that you get sick en route and well... that alone wouldn't wreck Hyperloop.

marze 13y ago

Yeah. Adult diapers! Problem solved.

tarblog 13y ago
"methods of transportation"

spikels 13y ago

If not using the bathroom for an hour is an issue you should see a doctor. Not only are there good treatments to alleviate this, but it may be an indication of a serious medical problem. Get it fixed then enjoy life including perhaps the Hyperloop.

conanbatt 13y ago
I agree with the sentiment, but its part of the disadvantages of this transport. You cant travel with babies or little kids in them, and you certainly cant do it sick. However its not such a big flaw, specially to warrant 63billion to alleviate.
- meric 13y ago
  Nappies.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  I would gleefully slap another $50-100 onto every plane ticket I ever bought to ensure that there was nobody anywhere on the plane under the age of 16. I can't be the only one...
  - simonebrunozzi 13y ago
    Only 50-100? I would go as far as 200! :)
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Well, I probably would too, but depending on the airline, that is nearing first class levels. Of course on many/most planes "first class" does not get you isolation from children... (certainly not for that low a price) but at least you get unlimited liquor and legroom. I'd be willing to pay more for a flight without children but I would want some unlimited liquor once I go over 200 or so. On this note, what would be the booze situation on hyperloops? There isn't an aisle on those things as far as I can tell, which means no stewardesses... Maybe per-seat minibars could be installed on them? Strictly speaking it wouldn't be necessary for 30 minute rides, but I see no reason this idea shouldn't be scaled up past 30 minute trips (Musk points out that supersonic airliners are better at longer distances, but since we don't have those either I'd settle for a 30+ minute hyperloop. Both a hyperloop and a return of Concord/Tu-144 would be great of course.)

hackula1 13y ago

I would point people towards the Stadium Pal, described by David Sedaris. Essentially, it is a urine bag strapped to your leg attached to an external catheter. I am not sure if it works for women, but I am sure Musk could figure that out.

orofino 13y ago
Similar, though less invasive, solutions exist for 'emergencies' on private planes and such. They come with support for both male and female genitalia.

Niten 13y ago

Well it's not just a matter of bathrooms. Even on a commuter bus or plane, if someone has a medical emergency and needs to get off right now, the bus will pull over or the plane will land. In this design you'd have to just sit there, helpless, until the vehicle reaches its destination. Heck, even if you're a doctor in the next seat you wouldn't be able to get up and help your fellow passenger.

bwaldrep 13y ago
They discuss this in the paper. In the event of a medical emergency the pod will proceed to the destination as normal, and paramedics can be waiting at the end. In the absolute worst case you are looking at ~30 minutes before you can get to medical attention. That's not obviously worse than the time it would take a plane to descend from cruising altitude to the nearest airport, land, and taxi to a gate.
- kerneis 13y ago
  Except you can get first aid assistance in a plane (they ask if a doctor is here, and they have a number of drugs on board). Keeping the person alive until paramedics arrive is key to handling emergency situations, and I don't see how you do it with the Hyperloop.
LockeWatts 13y ago
Landing a plane will guaranteed take more than 35 minutes. With the hyperloop, it's simpler and more efficient to just have EMTs called and on station when the car arrives.
- neurotech1 13y ago
  Actually, an airliner can usually descend and land within 10-15 minutes in an emergency, assuming a suitable runway is close by. There are more smaller airports with 5000 ft runways that don't typically handle 737s or larger. The problem with emergencies at major airports is that between EMTs and fire services inspecting the jet, that runway is out of service for at least 30 minutes. On a normal flight a 737 flies an approach at under 180kts but the approach limit is a lot faster. In a cardiac arrest type situation, the pilot may decide to fly a faster approach into an airport with medical services available. They would still touch down at the normal speed.

teeja 13y ago

It's a very small space, with no apparent facility to handle not just #1 and #2, but severe gastric distress. The other passengers then get to look forward to up to 25 minutes in that closed space. There's no stewardess, no way to stop the vehicle. An "emergency evacuation module" shouldn't take much room.

jessaustin 13y ago
The design incorporates very powerful air compressors and water pumps, and generates, transfers, and isolates a great deal of heat. The cabin will be very well-ventilated, because if it weren't then passengers would die of something other than methane poisoning.