I just watched a video explaining (pitch for investors) the hyper loop and was curious what others thought about it...
I mean it would be cheaper to just build under the interstate which is already done then it would be to build a hyperloop you could also go maglev like japan and be safer with less maintenance
IIRC Hyperloop is the one requiring the track be in a vacuum tube? Think about that for a second, imagine all the pressure that'd be pushing on it from the outside, now imagine what happens when there is the inevitable breach, & the train runs into all the shit that's not supposed to be in it's way (hell, the sound of the air rushing in alone, not to mention the sound of the walls collapsing behind that shockwave, would probably kill everyone in the tunnels). It's a great way to go faster, it's not so hot as a way to survive your journey.
personally, i think HL is taking too long and might just suddenly be abandoned, due to being overtaken by drone tech advancement. while it is true that HL is extremely fast, the infrastructure that needs to be prepared for it is extremely expensive (everything is, when it comes to land usage/property) and complicated as i'm sure you've seen several videos regarding HL. drones or 'flying taxis, on the other hand, seems more feasible for sub-50km travel. it might be slower (compared to HL speed), but the experience definitey will be a lot better. i mean, it is flying. on HL, you're just sitting in a vacuum tube. a couple video from 2 years ago. Spoiler
In my opinion, even though we have the concept down till practicality, the expense is currently infeasible for most countries around the world, and even those that can afford it can't hope to build enough of them to have a decent enough connectivity. There are many smaller technological improvements that need to happen to make the overall cost and quantity of production more affordable. The problem is, by the time we have all these sub-technological improvements down, we will probably have a better model to implement. In short, an idea similar to the Hyperloop will definitely be implemented in the future but it's very doubtful that it will be in the same form that it is in, currently.
Isn't that the situation of every new tech? (If it's actually fully built) Once something becomes more commercialized and common they'll be cheaper.
It's not about being cheap or not. It's about being faster. All companies prefer their goods, cargo transported faster. And many are capable enough to afford it. So yeah, good for them. BTW, what are the maintenance costs for hyperloop? I for one, will be happy enough if someday my Amazon order arrives via drone.
Yeah, it took billions of dollars for them to reach their present situation. Though they still project this transportation to be fully tangible to the public a few years from now. Dunno. But with all these technology it would it would be a hefty sum.
Can't say I have much knowledge in engineering but either way my impression is that it seem like it would be a logistical nightmare and probably better to invest the same money into more traditional transit systems. Although I'll admit part of that impression comes from me simply having a low opinion of Elon Musk.
The hyperloop dreamers are overpromising and underdelivering. The hyperloop is basically just enclosing a maglev train in a vacuum chamber. That makes sense in that it reduces drag on the train for faster speeds while using less energy, but it's rather insane in practice. With the large pressure differential between the pressurized interior of the train cars and the low pressure of the tube, when things go wrong, you'll get explosive decompression. Maglev trains already exist. Underground trains already exist. Just combine the two. Don't bother with the pressurized chamber. You'll have a cheaper buildout for the transportation system, lower upkeep, and no risk of explosive decompression. The only downsides are that an underground maglev system would be a bit slower than the proposed hyperloop and use more energy to keep the train at speed.
Of course, the fact that an underground Maglev wouldn't have to contend with essentially random weather conditions, & that atmospheric conditions in it's tunnels could largely be controlled would mean that the speed penalties might not be as bad as one would predict, since both the trains & the tunnels could be designed to allow for the most efficient air-flow at each stage of the journey (e.g. the tunnels could have different profiles near stations to facilitate deceleration to a stop & acceleration from one). And power requirements might also be even more in favor of the Maglev since there wouldn't be a requirement to create & maintain vacuum chambers.
Electromagnetic propulsion (EMP) is quite common. Almost all electric cars have them. I think its more feesable to upgrade the existing vehicles on the roads than to build the so called "hyper loops". And Europeans building infrastructure. My impression is still at the age of Stuttgart 21... Let's give the Europeans a break. In China, high-speed rails doesn't make any money, but the do have huge economic impacts. But China already have an existing network of infrastructure. It's pointless to upgrade to a questionable and less reliable system.
isnt emp short for electromagnetic pulse the pulse resulting a nuke exploding in near earth orbit ? also electro magnetic propulsion would be a kind of maglev right ? and i wouldnt really call some simple electric motor as such what about europeans building infrastructure ? what aspect of S21 are you talking/thinking about ? duration? explosion of costs?, protestors ? delay cause by some rare salamanders? general usefullness of the project? or something else ? for incompetence berlin airport might be a better example on the other side im not sure if i would like the rather reckless chinese approach more live in a village they want to turn into a sea? you would be lucky if you financial help wasnt taken completly by some corrupt local politican dictatorships might be faster at building stuff but there are downside too and if you got a problem there you wont have any rights or not get your rights granted worst case you just disappear...
Hyperloops are more than just maglev trains. Most hyperloops also incorporate a vacuum or pneumatic system to reduce drag and further increase the speed of the trains. I think the downsides of such a system outweigh the upsides. For some reason, some people get a serious boner for the technology.
isnt emp short for electromagnetic pulse the pulse resulting a nuke exploding in near earth orbit ? also electro magnetic propulsion would be a kind of maglev right ? and i wouldnt really call some simple electric motor as such what about europeans building infrastructure ? what aspect of S21 are you talking/thinking about ? duration? explosion of costs?, protestors ? delay cause by some rare salamanders? general usefullness of the project? or something else ? for incompetence berlin airport might be a better example on the other side im not sure if i would like the rather reckless chinese approach more live in a village they want to turn into a sea? you would be lucky if you financial help wasnt taken completly by some corrupt local politican dictatorships might be faster at building stuff but there are downside too and if you got a problem there you wont have any rights or not get your rights granted worst case you just disappear... as for the hyperloops it should be a nightmare. first question should be terran or subterran versions subterran would clearly be more expensive and would have problems accessing the tubes in cases of accidents. speaking of accidents you should think about how fatal they would be, a breach and atmo. pressure hits the train at about twice the speed of sound ? hitting an imploded tube ? being stuck and suffocate ? the terran version would come with several issues how fragile are the tubes ? might be a bird impact or some hail being enough to weaken the structure ? how do you protect it from gunfire ? giving it a mantlet of concrete should make the costs skyrocket there is also the thermal differences for tubes of several 100 km lenght the steel would expand or shrink for quite a few meters also if i remember it right they went for segments of 12,5m lenght and each segment is linked to the next by a vacuum seal these seals arent funny to build or maintain and your track would have thousands of them... so you need energy to depressurize the tubes, cooling as well as a way to accelarete and break the trains were rather small so do they get the capacity ? would there be acceptable tikets prices to cover the costs ? i would rather expect to be maglev the way to go if they find some nice high temperature superconductors and i really mean high temp not just the -190° K instead of -240°K they have now
I think it's more feasible if used helium instead of vacuum. Like our HDDs in our computers. Vacuum build up alot of pressure with large containers, and is more likely to leak. I still don't see hyperloops as a possible solution unless there is some breakthrough in superconductors. Maybe at the level of negative 120 degrees. Even so it's doubtful that it will be used. And look at how many commercial operational maglav trains in the world? Just one.
The idea behind the vacuum is to build up a lot of pressure. The pneumatic system creates a pressure differential between the entrance and exit of the hyperloop tube. The pressure differential forces the train forward. It's similar to the pneumatic tubes that are used by banks in the US (and presumably elsewhere in the world). If you add maglev to the mix, it reduces friction with the ground and also aids in further propelling the hyperloop cars forward at a greater rate of speed than either maglev or pneumatics individually. Superconducting magnets could reduce the cost if a superconductor is ever made that works at room temperature. Until then, the cost of using supercooled superconductors would be higher than the energy savings. Currently, maglev trains use powerful electromagnets. There are many maglev trains in operation. There's one in Shanghai, two in Japan, and one in South Korea. My issue with the hyperloop is that the costs of all those different technologies add up, and the upkeep on such a system would be astronomical in both time and money. Just building a maglev train underground would allow for a much cheaper alternative that's just a bit slower and with lower upkeep and maintenance. Also, a passenger on an underground maglev train wouldn't need to worry about explosive decompression.