Branson Virgin Hyperloop passenger test
When they get the speed up to 300 KPH for 100 KM or more, then they will have something to crow about and build upon.
The “build out” to make such a system actually useful, might prove daunting.
Oh joy, another form of mass transit competing for subsidies.
Monorail! Monorail!
What problems with “duo-rail” ground transport are these systems supposed to solve?
Has hovertrain or maglev ever offered any advantage with respect the maintenance cost of both the tracks and wheels and bogies for high-speed trains? Or is the maglev advantage speed, and the Hyperloop, yet even more speed?
How do you make a switch with Hyperloop, or is the idea that one would get out of your seat and board a different Hyperloop at hub stations?
How many ‘tubes’ will the Hyper-loop vehicles operate in each direction - what sort of headway will be maintained between vehicles? Questions? Questions? Questions?
There is a long, long, long way between ‘proof of concept’ to a operating system with a positive economic return on investment - be that investment public or private.
MagLev is much further along than Hyperloop. I expect to see the infant phase of an intercity MagLev system break ground within this decade. Either in China or Japan. Hyperloop is many decades off from any feasible operation. That’s if it does become feasible.
If I wanted to ride in a transonic Suburban with tiny porthole windows, I’ll do it well above the ground with a good BRS/parafoil emergency mechanism, not in a trillion-dollar single-purpose tunnel that even minor earthquakes might compromise. This is Beach’s vacuum subway 2.0, with roughly comparable throughput, with either remarkably long safe headway or effective ‘platooning’ with physical contact (considering the effective deceleration should a pad ‘lose integrity’ on one of the Suburbans…)
If the whole generation of Aerotrains failed to thrive because there were no alternate uses for the track, and no cost-effective primary uses for the track … why should we think a system with 3x the guideway cost and only a fraction of the operating safety would be any better?
I think construction of Japan’s maglev has been stopped for now. I think these technologies are like the SST. Exciting but only ‘useful’ til the money runs out. What’s the point when you can reliably fly 600mph by air and 180mph by rail? Personally, I’d rather resources be used constructing the safest possible, most reliable, economical electrical system. And a safe, efficient hydrogen fuel cell system for road vehicles.
600 MPH by air? In which century?
Airliners fly much slower than that to save on fuel.
Cost to build and maintain has to be proven as well. As well as capacity to haul large amounts of people on a per hour basis. I have a distinct feeling the theory will fall apart in one of those areas. We shall see.
There is also a speed limit that has not been mentioned so far. They reported in the hyperloop tests as well as some of the maglev tests that above a specific speed some humans feel physical discomfort, disorientation or dizziness. Forget what speed that is but they hit it with the Maglev in China and I am not sure how they fixed it or if they fixed it. Virgin has run into it with it’s slower speed tests.
There may be a subsonic vibration at certain speeds. That’s been encountered with ventilation systems. Above a certain speed even slight undulations in the carriage system may induce that.
MY concern is what happens when an anomaly occurs 40 miles from a terminal. It would be like being stuck in an elevator. And the tube is built to hold a vacuum so it is strong. The base tunnels under the alps have thoughtful plans for contingency. I would like to see the hyperloops’ plans for contingencys.
600MPH is about Mach 0.9 at cruising altitude, ISTR that airliners typically fly M0.80 to M0.82 (~530 MPH). This is kind of funny as the Republic XR12 piston engine recce plane could cruise at 450+MPH and Republic was trying to get interest in an airliner version.
OTOH, the whole rationale for the Hyperloop design is that air drag at sea level becomes a real problem much above 100mph. Developing an short haul electric airliner could easily cost less than the CA HSR project.
I’m not sure about this. The real disadvantage of maglev - and it’s a big one, is that its equipment is not able to use conventional tracks nor can conventional equipment use maglev tracks.
In France, the TGVs use/used convential tracks to reach certain terminals and in other areas as well while new right of ways were being developed. That’s a BIG plus that shouldn’t be overlooked.
The top experimental speed of convential high-speed rail is about that of maglev or at least comes close anyways (around 300-325 mph).
Lyndon Henry who helped launch the Light Rail Now website refers to maglev, hyperloop, monorail, etc. as “gadgetbahn”. That’s a good name for it. All of these systems will probably be built and put into operation at some point and at some location. (There are already at least several maglevs operating).
But will any of these gadget-like technologies prevail in the end? I believe that the jury is still out. Way out.
Regards,
Fred M. Cain
You’re right about such systems. Remember when Disneyland opened and the future was monorails? Didn’t happen, did it?
I hear those things are awfully loud…
Depending on altitude, outside air temperature and indicated airspeed many aircraft fly at 460 - 480 knots true airspeed. That equals to 529 - 552 MPH true air speed. Of course your ground speed is never that due to upper level winds, Not really part of this coversation.
What about us brain dead slobs?
You’ll be given cushy pandemic-recovery jobs.
That’s the bugaboo people have a hard time with, even in the face of a working model. There’s a ton of stuff we could build, quite arbitrarily, that would never, ever be feasible. Somehow, this is unperceived.
For instance, we could easily build a spaceplane capable of kangaroo flights from, say, New York, reaching any point on Earth in under 45 minutes. There’s nothing to actually develop, just sit down and start bending metal with knowledge we already have. Tickets would be on the range of hundreds of millions of dollars, though. But, we could actual build it if we wanted to.
Feasible? Never. By the time you’d get your launch costs down low enough, you’d likely see your vehicle superceded by other technologies.