[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 19 KB, 565x257, hyperloop.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964383 No.5964383 [Reply] [Original]

So what do /sci think about the hyperloop? spacex () com / hyperloop

>> No.5964429

doesn't matter what we think. california is invested in the high speed rail. even after they fail to build it under budget they will just keep pumping money into it.

>> No.5964475

isnt this "hyperloop" just a mag-lav train in a vacuum tube? This been thought about since early last century. Or is it like what the american army used to launch a rocket train in a gas tube filled with low resistance gas like helium?

>> No.5964486

>single man inventing pay pal, saving NASA, the car industry and now making rail gun tube transports

>> No.5964488

what people are failing to relize is that this is half the price of the proposed 'high speed' rail

>> No.5964499

>>5964475
no it's not mag-lev that's why it's a tenth the cost of high speed rail

>> No.5964514

>>5964488
...based on some highly unrealistic cost estimates for a radical new system that hasn't been demonstrated working over a distance of 10 meters let alone 300 miles of near-vacuum pressure vessel.

>> No.5964522

>>5964486
I think he's vesting his energy into a useless proposition. Flying cars would be much cooler.

>> No.5964525

>>5964488
It's like 1/10th the price if you're only shipping people.

>> No.5964535

>>5964522

There is absolutely NOTHING attractive about flying cars.

You might perceive it could be fun to do (like flying something that is meant for flying) -- but consider that other people would be using them, too.

People have a hard time navigating a city in one plane (giggle) -- do you really think it an improvement if they can also fly around buildings in a city?

>> No.5964539

>>5964383

There is nothing special or noteworthy about the ravings of a marketing machine comparing existing technology unfavorably against a tech that doesn't yet exist.

You are supposed to have learned in grade school to ignore such claptrap BS, until someone actually builds something that works.

Pie-In-The-Sky concepts of high-tech are not worth the time of anyone until that happens; try hard to ignore it.

>> No.5964541

>>5964475
It will not be in a vacuum, it will be a low pressure tube. You should read the 57 page design.

>> No.5964546

>>5964429
California is extremely confused about its own needs.

They know, for certain, that their traffic problems are within the city, but they are going to spend the money they don't actually have on an inter-city rail project.
Ignoring, too, that they already have inter-city rail, and it's not busy enough.

Californians don't want to give up their cars; this requires them to, so it won't do well.
They won't even give up their cars for some of the toughest commuting in the west.

Someone needs to get inventive for the things everyone knows is wrong -- not ALSO, but INSTEAD.

>> No.5964553

>>5964486
>>5964522
He's actually just putting this out there as an idea that maybe "someone" will pick up and do. It's the same sort of thing that people commonly post on their blogs.

He didn't "invent" PayPal, and in any case, it wasn't much of an invention. It's just another payment processor. If this specific company never existed, we'd have used something else very much like it.

Tesla is likewise a me-too non-invention. They make rather impractical luxury cars which have been selling as novelty products, and it's pretty unlikely that they'll have any real success in the budget market. Electric cars just aren't that hard. They're actually significantly easier to engineer. The main issue is the high battery prices.

When electric cars make sense, they'll get made at reasonable prices. Tesla isn't important, and isn't making anything important happen sooner. It might be profitable, but only like PayPal, in occupying a position that someone would have filled regardless.

SpaceX, on the other hand, has some real potential. There was nobody else in the business with the express goal of driving launch cost down by orders of magnitude. Their prices are the lowest in the business and their payload capacity is rapidly becoming the highest. The question at this point is whether they can provide the launch volumes they've been promising.

It's really not "saving NASA" though. They're soaking NASA for billions, and NASA is still wasting a fortune developing its own ridiculously expensive low-volume launch system.

>> No.5964576
File: 757 KB, 500x374, FUTURE.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964576

musk 2016

>> No.5964649
File: 123 KB, 683x1024, ElonsLair.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964649

>>5964486
you forgot an appropriate picture

>> No.5964655

>>5964546
very true, culturally it might be impossible to implement this in California

However, a lot of the buzz I'm hearing about this is coming from Europe! England is in the middle of a similar super-expensive high speed rail project, and they have a culture used to taking the train. Elon might have a better chance making this work elsewhere.

As far a technicalities, all the pieces actually seem feasible. He is using just enough of electric railgun acceleration, low but not vacuum pressure, and active pressure management and air cushion in the carriages to make the system work. His EV business has given him experience on the electric acceleration, his solar business has given him experience on the energy management (solar roofing along the entire tube length), his rocket business is giving him experience at mass-producing the tube and solving the aerodynamic problems. He might actually be the man to pull this off! or at least the prototypes.

Very exciting!

>> No.5964676
File: 7 KB, 220x220, 1374295845001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964676

>>5964576

>> No.5964681
File: 93 KB, 670x870, iwishaniggawould.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964681

>>5964676

>> No.5964747

I never see anything involving repair-ability with super-awesome-mega-long-fast transport of this type.

Build a tunnel. Then what? Mini- tectonic shift and we have a useless tunnel that we can't repair.

>> No.5964753

>>5964747

>Tectonic shift makes tunnels magically unfixable

What the fuck do you think the earth is made out of?

>> No.5964757

For people actually interested in reading the paper instead of retarded pop sci articles.
http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf

>> No.5964769
File: 94 KB, 640x480, tracked hovercraft.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5964769

>>5964383
I think it has a low TRL and tracked hovercrafts have been tried before(yes even with linear induction motors!), with boondogless results:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracked_Hovercraft

They need to perform some wind tunnel testing to prove their way around the Krantrowitz limit and that they won't have shockwave problems

>>5964747
It's not a tunnel, it's an elevated steel tube

>> No.5964786

>>5964769
They do indeed need to make a subscale demonstration. I think Musk is probably going to shop it around for grant money. He already is volunteering to use his Texas SpaceX test facility for the test track.

Heck, play his cards right and this lays the foundation as the first ride at SpaceLand!

>> No.5964835

>>5964786
With the amount of enthusiasm around, he could probably fund it on Kickstarter.

>> No.5964865

>>5964546
>Californians don't want to give up their cars;

As a Californian, I can assure you that this is amazingly true. I've never seen another population as in love with their vehicles.

>> No.5964895

>>5964769

They're running it subsonic, so there shouldn't be any shockwave issues really.

>> No.5965281

>>5964539
so much butt hurt