Author Topic: Hyperloop  (Read 19167 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13459
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #150 on: September 20, 2017, 01:47:46 PM »
^ it never was even anywhere near google glass stage -- its just a complete fantasy.


^California HSR has resorted to the motto "it's happening".  It appears that most of the state is still completely unaware that 100+ miles of "packet 1" are very much under construction and "packet 2" is in pre-construction (land acquisition, test borings, etc.). 

I am baffled as to why the hyperloop idea has so entranced people. 

The average person will walk past something that's under construction and not stop and ask any questions about what's being built. When the first phase of California's HSR opens, a bunch of people are going to be like, "oh, that's what that is?"

I did drive past a bunch of the HSR construction in Fresno a few weeks ago. South of the city, the piers that will support elevated track are being built. A bunch of road/highway bridges are also being rebuilt as part of the project.


maybe not even then because a third of this will not be high speed rail at all, and you will still be able to drive it quicker. i think i reqad that if they took something called the grapevine route instead it would have been quicker and have more hsr, but that would have cost way too much money. its something though, as good as we can get for hsr in the usa at the moment, and it will help.

Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4654
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #151 on: September 20, 2017, 01:55:26 PM »
maybe not even then because a third of this will not be high speed rail at all, and you will still be able to drive it quicker. i think i reqad that if they took something called the grapevine route instead it would have been quicker and have more hsr, but that would have cost way too much money. its something though, as good as we can get for hsr in the usa at the moment, and it will help.

Depends on when you're driving the 5.   Overnight, sure it may be quicker to drive.   During the day, probably not.  And you can't check email, have a lunch meeting, etc while driving your car. 

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #152 on: September 20, 2017, 01:57:36 PM »
The shorter, straighter route was avoided because it bypassed all of the Central Valley cities.  The route that is being built takes advantage of the way all of those places are oriented in basically a straight line.  It is requiring a lot of grade separation in them that drove up costs. 

The only "slow" section will be the Caltrans mixed track between San Jose and SF and then the immediate 5~ miles north of LA's Union Station.  In France the TGV approaches Paris very slowly for about 5-8 miles also. 

If you live in the east bay, you will be able to take BART to the San Jose HSR station (BART is under construction to the edge of San Jose and will soon break ground on a subway under the downtown).  Operation of HSR will be 200mph until just a 2-3 miles outside of San Jose.  So from Oakland on down, taking BART to San Jose will probably be faster than taking BART to the transit center in DT SF, then taking the "slow" HSR route. 

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13459
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #153 on: September 20, 2017, 02:06:31 PM »
i see somebody just answered this on ssp:


Let's take a fresh look at CHSR project. It only goes very fast in the Valley. In Southern California and San Francisco Bay Area, where it will share the corridor and the tracks with local regional slower trains, it only goes the slower speeds so it would not run over or through (crash) into the slower trains.

It's 473 rail miles between downtown S.F. and downtown L.A. You can drive it in 382 miles, 91 miles less, but the fast train is taking the long way and not the shortcut. It'll go slow the 62 or so miles between L.A. and Palmdale, and the 83 or so miles S.F. to Gilroy. That's 145 miles of the 473 miles it will not be going fast, therefore it can only go very fast over 328 miles. But then it will have to slow down to a stop, and accelerate from a stop at intermediate stations.
 
How many HSR stations will there be between L.A. and S.F?
(1) Transbay (2) Millbrae (3) Diridon (4) Gilroy (5) Merced (6) Madera (7) Fresno (8) Hanford (9) Bakersfield (10) Palmdale (11) Burbank, and (12) Union Station. Every stop at a station along the way will cause the average speed of the train to be slower. So the train will not be going very fast over that entire remaining 328 miles.

And please do not suggest the HSR trains will not be stopping at these intermediate stations, I know better because CHSR is building the longer route to get to them. What's the purpose getting to them if you're not going to stop at them?

So what do we have, we have a train that will probably take 3 hours or more to run between downtown L.A. and downtown S.F. with a technology that could do it in less than 2 hours - and that will be celebrated as a success.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #154 on: September 20, 2017, 02:15:48 PM »
So what do we have, we have a train that will probably take 3 hours or more to run between downtown L.A. and downtown S.F. with a technology that could do it in less than 2 hours - and that will be celebrated as a success.

Considering that driving from Downtown LA to Downtown SF would take about 6 hours, during which time you could only stare at the road and listen to music or podcasts ... I consider a 3 hour train trip—where you can relax, walk around, do work, watch movies, or read a book—to be a huge success.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #155 on: September 20, 2017, 02:24:42 PM »
But then it will have to slow down to a stop, and accelerate from a stop at intermediate stations.

All of the stations are being built with 4 tracks, meaning that you could easily have local and express trains. If there is enough ridership between the Bay Area and LA, you could run a few express trains per day that do not stop at any intermediate stations. There are a lot of possibilities for how they could run the system that would not require every train stopping at every station.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2017, 02:24:57 PM by taestell »

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 51095
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #156 on: September 20, 2017, 02:29:15 PM »
The shorter, straighter route was avoided because it bypassed all of the Central Valley cities.  The route that is being built takes advantage of the way all of those places are oriented in basically a straight line.  It is requiring a lot of grade separation in them that drove up costs. 

The only "slow" section will be the Caltrans mixed track between San Jose and SF and then the immediate 5~ miles north of LA's Union Station.  In France the TGV approaches Paris very slowly for about 5-8 miles also. 

If you live in the east bay, you will be able to take BART to the San Jose HSR station (BART is under construction to the edge of San Jose and will soon break ground on a subway under the downtown).  Operation of HSR will be 200mph until just a 2-3 miles outside of San Jose.  So from Oakland on down, taking BART to San Jose will probably be faster than taking BART to the transit center in DT SF, then taking the "slow" HSR route. 

Then again, if you're heading from downstate to the CBD of San Francisco, the HSR will be very fast. The Transbay Center is already under construction and will be the northern terminal of the HSR and CalTrain on the peninsula.

"Treat this (November 2018) election as if it's the last election in which you can fully exercise your democratic rights. Because it just might be." -- Margy Waller.

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13459
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #157 on: September 20, 2017, 02:30:34 PM »
^ yeah that part was a bit confusing because it seems like the poster was implying they would not run express although they have the track to do it.

however, the track sharing at each each end will certainly slow things down, if not the station stops. it still looks like a third of the route is not hsr to me.

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 51095
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #158 on: September 20, 2017, 02:37:19 PM »
Not everyone is familiar with high-speed rail systems around the world and too often equate them to really fast subways. They may not know that there are different classes of service with different trains and the higher-class trains make fewer or no enroute stops. I believe the Tokyo-Osaka Shinkansen has five or six different classes of service with trains departing every 5-10 minutes. The line carries some 300,000 people per day.

So to get back to Hyperloop, I struggle to see how it can offer these differentiated services with multiple enroute station stops with lower-class/more frequently stopping trains and similarly have any near the passenger handling capacity of conventional high speed rail systems.
"Treat this (November 2018) election as if it's the last election in which you can fully exercise your democratic rights. Because it just might be." -- Margy Waller.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #159 on: September 20, 2017, 02:40:55 PM »
The stretch between DT LA and Burbank will share existing (but rebuilt) commuter tracks.  From Burbank to Palmdale it will be HSR exclusive, but might not run at the full 200mph speed through the new tunnels.  It will definitely go over 100mph in the tunnels though, probably more like 150mph. 

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #160 on: September 20, 2017, 02:55:43 PM »


All of the stations are being built with 4 tracks, meaning that you could easily have local and express trains.

This article says that speeds in the mountain tunnels (about 20 miles of tunnel between Burbank and Palmdale and then a 7-8 mile tunnel near Merced) will be 200mph.  They narrowed the bore to save money, so the operating speed will be 200mph instead of 220mph:
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-capacity-cutback-20161020-snap-story.html

More ominously, in 2016 they decided to run single train sets instead of the doubles you see in some parts of Japan and Europe.  As is described in the article, this saves a ton of money at each station because the station structures are much, much smaller.  I imagine that the stations at SF, San Jose, and LA will be larger in order to accommodate the larger trains in the future.  The big capacity issue with HSR is caused by the stopping distance between trains in the event of an emergency.  The 2x length trains require no more space to stop than a single-length train. 

The issue with the hyperloop is that in order to operate safely, there would have to be a huge amount of space between consecutive 600mph pods.  The whole reason why maglev or faster traditional HSR has never been seriously pursued is because the longer stopping distance doesn't win the system any capacity.  This is just one more pesky detail the Muskman conveniently ignores. 


Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #161 on: September 20, 2017, 02:58:51 PM »
I assume that they're sharing tracks with other trains in dense urban areas because it would be extremely expensive to build dedicated tracks ... not because it's impossible. If the HSR ends up being extremely popular, they could always add dedicated tracks in LA and SF later.

The Japanese high speed rail system is called the "Shinkansen" which means "new trunk line", literally meaning that the high speed trains do not share tracks with any other slower trains.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #162 on: September 20, 2017, 03:28:42 PM »
The HSR stations and approaches in the Central Valley will all be their own tracks, completely grade separated from everything else.  The only sections of the line that will be shared with other services are one LA commuter line and the Caltrains commuter line between SF, San Jose, and Gilroy.  Initially, conventional existing Amtrak will operate on the central valley section until the rest of the system is finished and they switch over to electric HSR trains.  The central valley section won't have any tunnels so that's why the diesel trains will be able to operate on the HSR tracks for several years.

Offline ColDayMan

  • ♫ An Apollo Legend ♫
  • Administrator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 22223
    • UrbanOhio
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #163 on: September 22, 2017, 03:41:24 PM »
Hyperloop One raises $85 million, looks to Trump for boost



As the only company to build a full-scale hyperloop system, Hyperloop One has closed $85 million to move on to the next stage.

The startup, headquartered in Los Angeles, has raised $245 million since its founding in 2014.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2017/09/22/hyperloop-one-raises-85-million-looks-to-trump-for.html
"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #164 on: November 14, 2017, 07:30:50 PM »
A vacuum tube scam coming to Denver:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/11/14/colorado-drivers-may-first-escape-traffic/860696001/

There are already 200mph trains and there are already autotrains.  That's how your car crosses from England to France through the Chunnel and how Amtrak hauls vacationer's personal vehicles from Washington, DC to Florida. 

So they're trying to adapt the autotrain idea for commuters.  So the cars need to get on and off of these trays super-fast or else it negates the whole purpose.  Five minutes of screwing around at either end of the tube completely negates the time advantage.   

We're just going to see whoever owns this company abscond with public money. 

Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4654
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #165 on: November 14, 2017, 08:58:06 PM »
A vacuum tube scam coming to Denver:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/11/14/colorado-drivers-may-first-escape-traffic/860696001/

There are already 200mph trains and there are already autotrains.  That's how your car crosses from England to France through the Chunnel and how Amtrak hauls vacationer's personal vehicles from Washington, DC to Florida. 

So they're trying to adapt the autotrain idea for commuters.  So the cars need to get on and off of these trays super-fast or else it negates the whole purpose.  Five minutes of screwing around at either end of the tube completely negates the time advantage.   

We're just going to see whoever owns this company abscond with public money. 

Neither the Chunnel trains, nor Amtrak are 200 mph trains however.

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 51095
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #166 on: November 15, 2017, 12:06:22 AM »
186 mph (top cruising speed of Eurostar trains) is pretty close. And auto trains also run through the Chunnel at up to 100 mph.
"Treat this (November 2018) election as if it's the last election in which you can fully exercise your democratic rights. Because it just might be." -- Margy Waller.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #167 on: November 15, 2017, 12:16:21 AM »
The top speed of 100mph or 200mph for a 20-mile run doesn't matter when the loading and unloading of the cars is such a clumsy maneuver. 

Now, a project that would actually be pretty interesting is if they suggested building a 100-mile tunnel under the Rocky Mountains that would enable cars and trucks to completely avoid the treacherous interstate 70 route immediately west of Denver.  So they'd need to dig a pair of 100-mile, 22~-foot diameter bores from Denver west to about Vail.  That would be a pair of tunnels 3x longer than the longest tunnels in the world in Switzerland. 


Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4654
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #168 on: November 15, 2017, 12:23:06 AM »
186 mph (top cruising speed of Eurostar trains) is pretty close. And auto trains also run through the Chunnel at up to 100 mph.

I've taken both quite a few times.  The Eurostar is limited in the tunnel to the 100 mph.   And if your statement about the auto train is true, the "at up to 100 mph" must be stressed, because I never felt like we were doing much more than 35....   Either way, it's an impressive system built by an group of nations not afraid to invest in infrastructure.   We're still waiting on Trump's bill....

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 51095
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #169 on: January 28, 2018, 01:47:02 PM »
Elon Musk’s “Innovations” are Not the Future — They’re Delaying ItTech CEOs Are Out for Themselves, Not the Public Good
https://medium.com/@parismarx/elon-musks-innovations-are-not-the-future-they-re-delaying-it-79a49f75507a
"Treat this (November 2018) election as if it's the last election in which you can fully exercise your democratic rights. Because it just might be." -- Margy Waller.

Offline ColDayMan

  • ♫ An Apollo Legend ♫
  • Administrator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 22223
    • UrbanOhio
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #170 on: February 13, 2018, 01:11:13 AM »
Columbus delegation impressed by visit to Hyperloop One testing grounds

After a visit to the desert testing grounds of Virgin Hyperloop One, Smart Columbus and Central Ohio planning officials say they're more optimistic about the chances of building an ultra-high-speed tube transportation system connecting Columbus to Chicago and Pittsburgh.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2018/02/12/columbus-delegation-impressed-by-visit-to.html
"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Online freethink

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #171 on: February 15, 2018, 03:38:08 PM »
CLEVELAND/CHICAGO HYPERLOOPTT

Hyperloop Transportation Technologies signs first cross-state deal in the U.S.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/15/hyperloop-transportation-technologies-signs-first-cross-state-deal-in-the-u-s/

Hyperloop Transportation Technologies Takes One Step Closer to First US Track

https://futurism.com/hyperloop-transportation-first-us-track/


Offline Mendo

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #172 on: February 15, 2018, 05:25:12 PM »
I doubt highway or rail right-of-way is straight enough for even half the claimed top speeds of the Hyperloop. So where would the route go?

Hey NOACA, how about a feasibility study on improving the Amtrak line that already exists. Maybe having a route that comes in at a decent time of day or isn't as slow as the Oregan Trail.

Online thebillshark

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #173 on: February 15, 2018, 05:48:33 PM »
I think the hyperloop is dumb but I also think it’s dumb this proposal bypasses Toledo.

Which brings me to a thought- given that you wouldn’t want to be slowing down and speeding up all the time in the hyperloop you probably wouldn’t want to daisy chain cities together but instead build parallel tubes (maybe stack them up in the same right of way) to connect pairs of cities together. For example in a Cincinnati to Detroit right of way, have a pair of tubes for Cincinnati to Dayton, a pair of tubes for Cincinnati to Toledo, and a pair of tubes for Cincinnati to Detroit. A Cleveland to Chicago right of way could have a pair of tubes for Cleveland to Toledo, Cleveland to Detroit, Cleveland to Ft Wayne, and Cleveland to Chicago all stacked together. The tubes for the smaller cities would branch off from the main right of way when they got close to those cities.

It also makes sense because probably acquiring a right of way that doesn’t curve would be the highest cost. If this thing goes as fast as they plan, then the main right of ways could be established in unpopulated areas without significant losses to travel time.

Hope Elon reads UrbanOhio cause that sounds like a good idea I just had of I do say so myself

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #174 on: February 15, 2018, 05:59:14 PM »
In London they just started international passenger train service to a third city on the European mainland -- Amsterdam.  Can't do that with the hyperloop without digging a third set of tunnels beneath the English Channel. 

Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4654
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #175 on: February 15, 2018, 06:16:44 PM »
In London they just started international passenger train service to a third city on the European mainland -- Amsterdam.  Can't do that with the hyperloop without digging a third set of tunnels beneath the English Channel. 


The first proposed tunnel under the channel was in 1802, put forth by a French mining engineer.   

186 years later, construction on the current Chunnel started when technology had advanced far enough to make it not only feasible, but economical.

Dream big Elon!

Online GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9123
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #176 on: February 15, 2018, 06:40:52 PM »
In London they just started international passenger train service to a third city on the European mainland -- Amsterdam.  Can't do that with the hyperloop without digging a third set of tunnels beneath the English Channel. 


Great even more roving packs of hammered English and Scottish men killing your MJ cafe buzz as they holler all over Amsterdam

Online Robuu

  • Premium Member
  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #177 on: February 16, 2018, 09:58:22 AM »
In London they just started international passenger train service to a third city on the European mainland -- Amsterdam.  Can't do that with the hyperloop without digging a third set of tunnels beneath the English Channel. 


Great even more roving packs of hammered English and Scottish men killing your MJ cafe buzz as they holler all over Amsterdam

This guy Amsterdams.

Offline StapHanger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 8718
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #178 on: February 16, 2018, 10:58:12 AM »
186 years later, construction on the current Chunnel started when technology had advanced far enough to make it not only feasible, but economical.

Economical? Lol, the investors got wiped out.

Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4654
Re: Hyperloop
« Reply #179 on: February 16, 2018, 11:11:09 AM »
186 years later, construction on the current Chunnel started when technology had advanced far enough to make it not only feasible, but economical.

Economical? Lol, the investors got wiped out.

Well relative to 1802 it is, and it's finally turning a profit 20 years after opening.   Maybe they should have waited another decade or two, but my point was it never hurts to speculate about what might be possible....