10 ms·
Sadly, none of the stuff I've seen on Hyperloop addresses the civil engineering problems brought up by Alon Levy and others (https://pedestrianobservations.word
by apsec112 11y ago
Sadly, none of the stuff I've seen on Hyperloop addresses the civil engineering problems brought up by Alon Levy and others (https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/loopy-ideas-are-fine-if-youre-an-entrepreneur/ https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/loop...). In short:
- The Hyperloop paper doesn't mention how trains would cross San Francisco Bay, or include a cost estimate for doing so. A new bridge? A new tunnel? Both would add greatly to the $6 billion cost estimate.
- That $6 billion estimate also assumes that elevated concrete pylons can be built for much cheaper than any other project, with no mention of how.
- The proposed track doesn't go to downtown LA; it ends at Sylmar, which is still ~25 miles from downtown and even further from most of the LA area. A 30 minute ride becomes much less exciting when it takes another hour or more to reach your real destination.
- With the proposed 30-second headway, the system's capacity is only about 25% of a high-speed rail line, and 30 seconds still violates the crap out of typical safety standards (you can't run trains too close together without risking a collision if you can't brake quickly enough).
- There are no intermediate stations; this is obviously a problem for the Central Valley, but it makes life inconvenient for plenty of other people too. Eg. someone in San Jose (pop. ~1 million, greater than SF's) would need to spend an extra hour or more getting to San Francisco vs. a station in San Jose itself.
- dragonwriter 11y agoActually the paper answers the question of how it would cross the bay--it wouldn't. The proposed "San Francisco" terminus is in the East Bay (IIRC, pretty far east, as well). A significant part of the cost savings of the route proposed as an alternative to the HSR route cones from, unlike HSR, not actually going anywhere near the urban centers on either the SF or LA end.
- jfb 11y agoHayward, I think. This is an interesting definition of "reality", and hyperloop is a deeply unserious Elon Musk Gedankenexperiment that's only given column inches because of the deeply unserious nature of what passes for journalism among the lickspittle shoeshine boys of Silicon Valley wannabes.
- dragonwriter 11y agoWell, its probably not surprising that a startup ecosystem that is all about selling longshots attracts around is peripheries, journalistic and otherwise, people who are prone to accept longshots as much more probable than they are.
- apendleton 11y agoElon Musk seems to have a particular version of a progressive vision of the future that accomplishes environmental sustainability without requiring people to make any real lifestyle changes. After all, his solution to the environmental unfriendliness of cars is more environmentally friendly cars (Tesla), not other modes of transport that are more efficient per passenger. So, the cynical take: of course he's going to back a high-speed transportation option that still assumes cars and driving everywhere, rather than one that potentially obviates the need for them by taking people directly from high-density center to high-density center.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoI'm not sure how 'an extra hour' is critical when driving takes many hours. Its still an order of magnitude faster, right? It takes 'an extra hour' at the airline terminal and I put up with that for every flight.
- apsec112 11y agoThe comparison is to conventional high-speed rail, which has a travel time of 2 hours 40 minutes downtown-to-downtown.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoWell that's entirely theoretical too, since that also doesn't exist. It would also have many gotchas and inefficiencies on either end. So lets compare hyperloop with what you CAN do, which is fly or drive.
- gutnor 11y agoWell, as a European, that's actually interesting to compare it to high speed train. Outside the US, high speed train is not only something we can do, it is something already done.
- vasilipupkin 11y agoI am curious to see whether the net benefits have been positive. My understanding even in Europe most of the links are unprofitable. Sure, there are positive externalities that may not be factored into the accounting profits, but there is also opportunity cost of the money. Are there good studies on this ?
- simias 11y agoI know that in France the high speed lines connecting areas with high population density like Paris-Marseille or Paris-Lyon are among the most profitable for the SCNF. But of course that's a complex issue, some say that the local service degraded as more resources were diverted to the TGV lines. I can't really imagine that having the center of Marseille 3 hours away from the center of Paris can be a net negative overall. It beats the plane every time, that's for sure.
- JulianMorrison 11y agoGo fast enough, and jump?