[ssiguy2]

You mean like his ridiculous "car subway"?

Yes absolutely, we need ideas like car subways. Will it work? Probably not. Do I think it's a good idea? Absolutely not in fact I think it's absurd. Being absurd however is OK. Revolutionary technologies always come from revolutionary thinkers not the boardrooms. A underground highway seems stupid to me but probably no less so than an underground train did 150 years ago.

Musk reinforces the idea that we must be willing to talk about technologies that are completely out of the mainstream. Whether they are viable or nutcase applications doesn't matter, they are still good because they add to the conversation.

 

[kEiThZ]

they are still good because they add to the conversation.

Not everything added to the conversation is automatically good. If it undoes years of sound policy work or financing efforts. You end up in a cycle where you're constantly chasing the next big thing that promises to solve all your problems magically, and in the bargain never actually build anything.

Hyperloop is doing exactly this to several HSR projects globally. As savvy politicians jump on a promise to fund a cheaper and faster transportation system in the future over getting on with building HSR today. I half-expect Wynne and Trudeau to jump on the Hyperloop bandwagon any minute.

Guys like Musk offer great value when they mainstream mature technologies. And the electric car really was that. But they don't do us any favours when they offer up tech that's at best decades away and promise it will be magic bullet solutions, and end up detracting actual progress while resources are dedicated to chase their billionaire tech fantasies.

 

[aquateam]

Absolutely not (and you should still watch the video I posted). He has made any discussions over badly needed HSR projects impossible because everyone rather believes a billionaire (with significant business interests staked against rail) that "conventional rail is a thing of the past and in 5 years everyone will travel in Hyperloops" than engineers and scientists (who dare to point out boring things like that the laws of physics cannot be re-written by "completely rethinking intercity transportation"). Just wait until the Hyperloop-Hype erodes public support for the Ontario Liberals' HSR project...^^

The problems with the hyperloop are financial/logistical, not physics-based. Just like with the Liberal's HSR proposal.

 

[Urban Sky]

The problems with the hyperloop are financial/logistical, not physics-based. Just like with the Liberal's HSR proposal.

You wouldn't write that if you had watched the video. Constructing (and maintaining and above all: constantly inserting vehicles into and removing from) a vacuum which is several orders of magnitudes larger than the largest vacuum ever built is as much a physics-based problem as it get's (on top of the financial-logistical problems you mentioned, of course)...

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

You wouldn't write that if you had watched the video. Constructing (and maintaining and above all: constantly inserting vehicles into and removing from) a vacuum which is several orders of magnitudes larger than the largest vacuum ever built is as much a physics-based problem as it get's (on top of the financial-logistical problems you mentioned, of course)...

The technical challenges are not insurmountable (and I wouldn't bet against Elon for making things happen given his track record - though we all know his timelines tend to be rather "fluid", to be charitable), but like @kEiThZ said - the price of holding out for the Holy Grail is you never get anything done.

AoD

 

[kEiThZ]

The problems with the hyperloop are financial/logistical, not physics-based. Just like with the Liberal's HSR proposal.

That's a rather simplistic take. The engineering determines those financial and logistical issues. And Musk has made some massive technical assumptions which would never fly in a real project looking for regulator sign-off. No expansion joints, elevated service through areas prone to earthquakes, no segmentation in the tube to maintain vacuum pressure in case of a rupture in the tube downstream. These are not minor details. These are issues that will kill scores. These are issues that regulators won't sign off on. And these are issues that cost billions to mitigate.

The Liberals HSR proposal is at worst optimistic on ridership. Nothing in that proposal is so dangerous that regulators won't allow humans anywhere near it.

 

[Tulse]

Guys like Musk offer great value when they mainstream mature technologies. And the electric car really was that. But they don't do us any favours when they offer up tech that's at best decades away and promise it will be magic bullet solutions, and end up detracting actual progress while resources are dedicated to chase their billionaire tech fantasies.

To be fair to Musk, reusable rockets were hardly a mature technology when he started SpaceX.

That said, I do think that Hyperloop is a bit insane. The cost to construct and maintain a Hyperloop line will likely be vastly more than for a high-speed railway, and I'm not clear that the actual throughput (passengers served per hour) will be any larger. Like supersonic air travel, it seems mostly to benefit those whose time is extremely valuable, which simply isn't the majority of the travelling public. If Hyperloops ever do get built, my bet is that travel on them will be priced at a huge premium.

 

[drum118]

This from NYC to Washington

Elon Musk: I have 'verbal' approval for underground Hyperloop through Baltimore

 

[Tuck]

I like how Musk can say just a tiny bit more than absolutely nothing and get everyone to freak out.

Approval? From whom? Approval for a 250 mile tunnel between two major cities is not given verbally, thats not how things work. And for a technology that remains entirely conceptual and unproven, no less. Can he build tunnels before he knows how big he needs to build them, and what support infrastructure is needed? Can he build one before he knows what kind of alignment the hyperloop needs? Somehow I don't think so. Keep in mind this is also more than double the length of the longest tunnel in the world.

I'm not sure how things work in the states, but I'm not sure a project like that can be undertaken like that. You'll be digging under land you don't own - the government can do that, can a private corporation? Especially when an alignment has not been published nor decided on. Never mind the environmental approvals that somehow I doubt have been done. Does the public get no say in this (maybe not, since its a private venture...?)? How does he plan on funding this? Whats his timeline, and whats the basis for that timeline, given that the technology remains unproven? And no, don't tell me he's going to build a 250 test track, I don't believe you.

My problem with Musk is that he can at times feel very click-baity; he likes talking big and riling people up yet theres absolutely nothing here other than his extremely vague word. From what it sounds like, he doesn't have political approval, he has political support, which is completely different.

As always on HyperLoop, I hope to be proven wrong, but I remain a firm skeptic.

 

[kEiThZ]

LOL. Underground only makes this thing more expensive. And the geotechnical issues a nightmare. One slight tremor and you'll have a rupture bringing dust moving at high subsonic speeds, while vehicles are effectively moving at supersonic speeds (given the vaccuum pressure).

People really don't understand the physics and the risks involved with this. But Musk does. Which is why he hasn't actually put a single penny of his own money into any of these ideas. Unlike Tesla, Space X and SolarCity which were dealing with mature technologies.

 

[kEiThZ]

To be fair to Musk, reusable rockets were hardly a mature technology when he started SpaceX.

Re-usable rockets were a mature technology when he started. NASA has been using them on the Space Shuttle for a while. What was not really mature was landing a rocket vertically. But if you understand basic control systems, it's far less of a problem than it seems (while still challenging....the standing pendulum is often used to teach controls in third year....same idea).

The real issue was doing all this cost-effectively. There wasn't much of a business case for the longest time to develop re-usable launch vehicles. Musk took the leap anyway and he was able to push through the last bit of development in a cost-effective manner.

Just like his other projects though. He wasn't so much breaking new ground as taking mature technology, improving it a tad and applying it well. I liken him to Steve Jobs who did the exact same thing at Apple. There were mp3 players before the iPod and touchscreen smartphones before the iPhone. Jobs found the missing pieces that were out there that could improve them and the rest is history....

Hyperloop, however, is ridiculously far outside Musk's normal practice. It's why you're not seeing any major engineering firm take it up, despite Musk open sourcing everything. One would think no major rail maker would want to be caught out and would be jumping on. I'd bet money they've done a basic first principles analysis and develop capital, operating and risk models and then laughed the whole thing off.

 

[ssiguy2]

I don't think you guys are understanding the point I'm trying to make. I am not an engineer and have no idea about the financial or physical viability of Hyperloop. Musk's many ideas may all turn out to be undoable but that's OK. My point is that we need people like Musk who are willing to throw the tried and true out the window and propose something truly revolutionary. 19th & 20th century technologies are not going to move us in a 21st & 22nd century world.

It's not about Musk per se but about people willing to go out there are take on the establishments in both technology and businesses. As I stated earlier, great change comes from great thinkers not great boardrooms. As far as "adding to the conversation" I think Musk has truly done that. By having one very visible and well known person talk about alternative technologies makes others with alternative technologies more willing to propose their ideas without public or media ridicule. 99 of those ideas will never see the light of day but you just need that one out of a hundred to cause a revolution.

Higher speed and mass movement planes were not realized by putting on bigger propellers but rather the revolutionary idea of jet propulsion.

 

[kEiThZ]

@ssiguy2

That's all well and good. Just don't ask for public funds for your billionaire fantasy (as many Hyperloop teams are now doing) and don't ask for government projects to be deferred (as Musk did with California's much needed HSR).

 

[Johnny Au]

@ssiguy2

That's all well and good. Just don't ask for public funds for your billionaire fantasy (as many Hyperloop teams are now doing) and don't ask for government projects to be deferred (as Musk did with California's much needed HSR).

There's an extremely good reason why the Chinese government was skeptical of the Straddling Bus, despite there being a working prototype.

 

[cplchanb]

verbal approval=paid dinner handshake with some minor official "promising" to start the process to approve it.
If it was that serious the NY gov and DC are going to make a public announcement. regardless this will be a vanity project that will
only benefit the elite who can afford to pay for a service that projects less than 500pph...