Hyperloop - yes or no?

[railsquid]

Sounds a wee bit hand-wavy back-of-the-fag-packet stuff to me, but then I'm no tunnel engineer.

 

There is no practical limit to how many layers of tunnels can be built, so any level of traffic can be addressed.

 

Really?

[jjb1970]

Nothing like raising a thread from the dead, noticed this today:

 

https://maritime-executive.com/article/branson-dp-world-announce-hyperloop-joint-venture#gs.n5zJE8A

[olivegreen]

Nothing like raising a thread from the dead, noticed this today:

 

https://maritime-executive.com/article/branson-dp-world-announce-hyperloop-joint-venture#gs.n5zJE8A

Pie in the sky.  

 

Why, for Heaven's sake, do any goods need to be delivered at that speed? Surely it is the continual flow that matters in responding to demand, not the absolute speed.

 

Reading in that article the quotations of some of the supporters, I realise that I no longer inhabit the same planet as them. Am I getting old?

 

(followed, I hope, by 'oh no, not you!' ... as in the song!)

[159220]

And much closer to home: 

 

https://www.railwaymuseum.org.uk/about-us/press-office/uks-first-hyperloop-pod-completes-historic-line-national-railway-museum

[APOLLO]

Silly idea I think for many reasons already mentioned - especially in our small island(s)

 

It may be feasible in the USA, but flying is the long distance norm over there. No infrastructure needed other than airports (which already exist) and the technology is well proven.

 

Put it another way - you will never get me in one of those (remember dad saying that about flying though !!)

 

Not much can beat the Aluminium wing in the air, or the steel wheel on a steel rail.

 

Back to the drawing board Elon !!

 

Brit15

[smiths park]

http://www.bimplus.co.uk/news/northern-arc-among-winners-hyperloop-one-global-ch/

 

It's more of possibility than people think. 

[admiles]

Nothing like raising a thread from the dead, noticed this today:

 

https://maritime-executive.com/article/branson-dp-world-announce-hyperloop-joint-venture#gs.n5zJE8A

 

Anything that DP World have their sticky fingers embedded in I would avoid like the plague....

[scouser]

Given that a lot of people are complaining about uncumfortable seats, noisy trains and being treated like cattle, all true by the way!

I would think that a very fast commute or any journey at very high speed would be preferable.

Remember people used to say things like, if men were meant to fly they would have wings!

The world we live in today was created by people who tried things, not by people who kept saying it can't be done.

I think the days of the journey are fast being replaced by just getting there.

[Reorte]

The world we live in today was created by people who tried things, not by people who kept saying it can't be done.

Unfortunately.

[letterspider]

Seems to me that if Hyperloop may move objects at Hypersonic speeds,perhaps may be better suited for lanching stuff into space?

[Dan Griffin]

All this talk of hyperloop’s, i think someone should invest in some rescue equipment!

 

http://thunderbirds.wikia.com/wiki/Hyperspeed

[scouser]

Unfortunately.

Unfortunately?

Why? You have just made that post over the Internet using some form of digital device. Created by the can be done folk.

The down side I will admit is weaponry, but the technological advances are not just good but also very necessary.

On railways moving lots of people is made necessary by the large amounts of people who want to move. With growing populations this requirement will not go away.

Finding a different answer to this problem could make somebody a lot of cash!

Paul

[PaulRhB]

Hyperloop needing a sealed tube into LA across the San Andreas fault? The sheer amount of engineering to a precision much higher than rail across huge distances, let alone the power requirements, make it unlikely to be viable to me. It's going to have to be raised up so any foreseeable load can go beneath in key places, including exceptional loads up to houses, or buried and both of those are costly and require special equipment or access points. Unless there is a significant environmental advantage over air travel I really can't see that it wins against it on flexibility to future markets either.

[Glorious NSE]

http://www.bimplus.co.uk/news/northern-arc-among-winners-hyperloop-one-global-ch/

 

It's more of possibility than people think. 

Well it's a drawing anyway...

 

At the moment the concept makes no sense, it's a huge amount of cost, complexity and risk for a minute amount of additional capacity compared to rail.

 

When you start looking at it *beyond* making one pod do one thing at once, and you need it to handle lots of pods, connecting multiple places, all at once, you get problems that look like existing railway problems, headway, stopping distances, capacity, coping with timetables and perturbations to those timetables...

 

Pods of 50 people or so just aren't going to work except on low capacity installations.

 

And low capacity installations are not reasonably going to fund cutting edge tech like this.

 

 

 

[Reorte]

Unfortunately?

Why? You have just made that post over the Internet using some form of digital device. Created by the can be done folk.

The down side I will admit is weaponry, but the technological advances are not just good but also very necessary.

On railways moving lots of people is made necessary by the large amounts of people who want to move. With growing populations this requirement will not go away.

Finding a different answer to this problem could make somebody a lot of cash!

Yes, unfortunately. The world is more and more becoming less of a place I want to live in. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's all 100% bad (or expect anyone to say it's all 100% good), so "You have just made that post over the Internet using some form of digital device" doesn't mean much, and in any case whilst I'm happy to use it if the internet vanished overnight it really wouldn't make life much worse (at least once everything had adjusted away that currently relies on it).

 

I know all the practical arguments given for these things and whilst they're generally not inaccurate arguments I simply find that they do not actually end up making the world a more pleasant place to live in. It's one thing to point out the practical issues, another to expect me to like the world so created, even in cases where I agree something may be necessary.

 

Maybe I'm just a grumpy old fart before my time but I do know what I find makes the world a more pleasant place to live in and what doesn't for me. Others will have different views of what does for themselves of course.

Edited May 1, 2018 by Reorte

[Allegheny1600]

Given that a lot of people are complaining about uncumfortable seats, noisy trains and being treated like cattle, all true by the way!

I would think that a very fast commute or any journey at very high speed would be preferable.

Remember people used to say things like, if men were meant to fly they would have wings!

The world we live in today was created by people who tried things, not by people who kept saying it can't be done.

I think the days of the journey are fast being replaced by just getting there.

I agree!

As the railways that we all love so much were being invented, some folk were very 'anti' and made claims that hens would stop laying, cattle wouldn't give milk and people would disintegrate if they went over 30Mph!

Move forward to more recent times in France and farmers were complaining that grapes would fall off the vine or go sour due to the nearby TGV's operating at near 200Mph!

There will always be change and there will always be resistance to change but one thing is for sure, change will come.

I think there are some fairly valid points both for and against Hyperloop - as it stands today.

However, there are some very innovative and inventive minds out there, who will no doubt see ways around problems, where most of us cant.

For example, a current "pod" carries say, a dozen people? What's to stop multiple pods being connected together until they can carry 1000 people? (like a train!).

Due to the inflexibility of the hyperloop itself, they can only go from point A to point B and when those points are say, Chicago to Los Angles - that is all you need!

Just like with current travel on say, a 747 or an A380, you all come together a point A, whoosh to point B then disperse to individual destinations.

 

I do not believe that Hyperloop can supplant most current rail systems, rather it could enhance them. I foresee, some 60 - 80+ years from now, a 'larger gauge' hyperloop travelling from LA, Chicago, NY, Boston, Reykjavik, Glasgow, London, Paris, Berlin, Moscow etc.

There could be other, separate systems doing other pan European, pan African, pan American routes and people exchange routes at (very) large stations. 

Suppose I live in NY and want to visit friends in Birmingham, UK. I jump on the 'tube' and whoosh through to London, get off there and then catch a TGV (ish train) up to B'ham, then take a tram to near my friends address - journey time maybe 3 - 4 hours.

I won't ever be able to do that, of course as I will have been fertilising the daisies long before it comes to fruition but that is how I see a commercial Hyperloop system working.

Over to you, Elon!

John.

[Glorious NSE]

For example, a current "pod" carries say, a dozen people? What's to stop multiple pods being connected together until they can carry 1000 people? (like a train!).

Due to the inflexibility of the hyperloop itself, they can only go from point A to point B and when those points are say, Chicago to Los Angles - that is all you need!

Just like with current travel on say, a 747 or an A380, you all come together a point A, whoosh to point B then disperse to individual destinations.

 

Yep, a 'train' of pods is plausible to increase capacity per departure, but you still hit capacity/schedule issues, due to the incredibly inflexible infrastructure.

 

So you build a tube from Chicago to LA, a search reckons that to be 2016 miles, lets assume it hits the promoted top speed of 760mph, lets call it 2hrs 40mins, with say 20 mins each end to unload/reload up to 1000 people and their luggage - that means a max service of 4 trips per day, with no margin for error, disruption or maintenance of tube or pods.

 

Commercially, is that going to work? You have the technical capability to do a business day trip in the other city, but in reality, the pod will only be at one or the other end at any key departure time. If there is a market for an 8am departure (for instance) for business travellers, the equivalent the other end will be a less convenient 5am or 11am...

 

As an example, googling airline departures for direct flights tomorrow are at 0600, 0645, 0722, 0756, 0830, 0900, 0915, 1005, 1010, 1015, 11.35, 1205, 1246, 1325 (two flights at this time!), 1402, 1500, 1512, 1545, 1710, 1753, 1825, 1830, 1856, 1931, 2025, 2030, 2108, 2145

 

You can build two tubes, though that doubles your cost to build and to operate it, and if you can cover the overall capacity you need with one then you'd need to double your income too to cover the extra costs.

 

If you want an hourly departure (as the airline schedule suggests for some parts of the day) then you need *six* 2016 mile long tubes, because as far as I can tell so far, you can't do points.

 

And if you need a Chicago to St Louis connection you must build new tubes, if you need Chicago to KC, build more new tubes, if you need Chicago to Denver, build yet more new tubes....

 

An HSR example...

 

HS2 will have the max capacity with two tracks of an 1000 seat train and a potential 18 departures per hour, and those trains can use just two tracks out of London, then split off to head to a wide variety of destinations.

 

Even if the journey was just 20 minutes, a two tube hyperloop between two defined locations will only give you one departure every half hour to one location. If all journeys were 20 minutes, the equivalent capacity to HS2 would require 18 tubes.

 

The infrastructure requirements to do more than just connect two locations with an occasional shuttle service are bonkers.

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

Pie in the sky.  

 

Why, for Heaven's sake, do any goods need to be delivered at that speed? Surely it is the continual flow that matters in responding to demand, not the absolute speed.

 

Have you not read some of the threads on here from RMwebbers complaining that they are still ksitting waiting for delivery of that model they ordered 20 minutes ago!

[Glorious NSE]

There's no reason the entire tube needs to have vacuum when the pod travels through it. Air locks work both ways, so one could send off the 8AM departure, then from a siding the 8.50AM departure can be pulled in to the loading zone and send off at a reasonable separation distance, both separated by a closed air-lock (or rather, a pair), which would be akin the railway practice of block systems with signals

 

Nothin'ew, actually

Given no points (at least, I don't think so yet?) the first one can't get back past the second one when it reaches it's destination.

 

With some tunnel beyond the stations, you could conceivably stable a second or third set, so you could flight two or more, but once your flight of multiples had run, you're restricted to running one on a shuttle until you run all of them back again...

 

So on the Chicago-LA with two tubes example if you had serial storage for two trains behind the terminals, you could run a block of 3 hourly in the morning and evening peak, but you would be forced to drop to one every three hours between the peaks to allow the flow to reverse.

 

That's better, but still substantially less flexible.

 

Alternately, you could have one continuous 'circular' loop - that could have as many trains as you need in it - the downside is to move one of them you'd have to move them all!

 

(edited for clarity)

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by Glorious NSE

[jjb1970]

I think that the hyperloop concept could work and think it is far less of a pipe dream than generally credited. When it was first revealed many pundits dismissed it as nothing more than an attempt by Elon Musk to disrupt the California high speed rail plans but I think that was grossly unfair.

[Reorte]

I think that the hyperloop concept could work and think it is far less of a pipe dream than generally credited.

How can it be less of one when it is a big pipe?

[Allegheny1600]

Yep, a 'train' of pods is plausible to increase capacity per departure, but you still hit capacity/schedule issues, due to the incredibly inflexible infrastructure.

 

So you build a tube from Chicago to LA, a search reckons that to be 2016 miles, lets assume it hits the promoted top speed of 760mph, lets call it 2hrs 40mins, with say 20 mins each end to unload/reload up to 1000 people and their luggage - that means a max service of 4 trips per day, with no margin for error, disruption or maintenance of tube or pods.

 

Are you talking about the pod-trains shuttling backwards and forwards?

I rather thought the clue was in the name - i.e. a loop! Even if it is rather in the shape of a double ended lollipop stick and yes, two tubes for the main 'drag' - that way you can have multiple departures per hour. Evidently the 'loop' of the lollipop does not have to accomodate the highest speeds as it is just to turn pod-trains around so can be quite tight radius.

Don't forget that by the time this technology is mature enough to have some decent routes* completed, fossil fuels as we know them will be virtually extinct and horrendously expensive so anything that works on electricity will be most welcome. 

Cheers,

John.

 

*By which, I'm not really talking about our small island! Places like China, India, USA, Brazil, Russia all have substantial populations AND great distances to cover. 

[Allegheny1600]

There's no reason the entire tube needs to have vacuum when the pod travels through it. Air locks work both ways, so one could send off the 8AM departure, then from a siding the 8.50AM departure can be pulled in to the loading zone and send off at a reasonable separation distance, both separated by a closed air-lock (or rather, a pair), which would be akin the railway practice of block systems with signals

 

Nothin'ew, actually

IF (it is a big IF) tubes were built according to my supposition above, then with a frequent service, I would estimate a pretty much continuous vacuum would be required.

It must be easier to maintain a vacuum continuously than to keep having to restore it?

Presumably, this would be a fair chunk of the running costs though.

[Glorious NSE]

Are you talking about the pod-trains shuttling backwards and forwards?

I rather thought the clue was in the name - i.e. a loop! Even if it is rather in the shape of a double ended lollipop stick and yes, two tubes for the main 'drag' - that way you can have multiple departures per hour. Evidently the 'loop' of the lollipop does not have to accomodate the highest speeds as it is just to turn pod-trains around so can be quite tight radius.

Don't forget that by the time this technology is mature enough to have some decent routes* completed, fossil fuels as we know them will be virtually extinct and horrendously expensive so anything that works on electricity will be most welcome. 

 

In which case, you need to move all the trains every time you want to run one, as an energy saving idea i'm not sure that flies...

[Edwin_m]

I imagine points are possible but would probably be suitable for only very low speeds, rather like on monorails where a whole chunk of the track is moved sideways. 

Edited May 1, 2018 by Edwin_m