• The first full-scale Hyperloop test track may launch in California next year
    17 replies, posted
[img]http://i.imgur.com/KM7d0na.jpg[/img] [quote]Hyperloop Transportation Technologies has secured land for the first full-scale Hyperloop, planned for a 2016 launch in the California model town of Quay Valley. Building off Elon Musk's freely available designs, the crowdfunded company has staked out a five-mile stretch of Quay Valley adjacent to California's Interstate 5 freeway as a place where the innovative transportation system can be deployed. If successful, it would be the first full-size implementation of Musk's ideas, published in August 2013. "This installation will allow us to demonstrate all systems on a full scale and immediately begin generating revenues for our shareholders through actual operations," CEO Dirk Ahlborn said in a statement.[/quote] [quote][B]Musk is already building his own Hyperloop test track in Texas, but HTT says Musk's track is a scaled-down model, allowing for easier testing of the physics involved. HTT's track will be designed for human passengers, testing the passenger systems, but will come with other limitations[/B][/quote] [url]http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/26/8112363/hyperloop-launch-quay-valley-california-2016[/url] Great that other companies are trying to develop it, but it sounds like they might run into funding issues.
Genuinely surprised that people are actually building/testing this thing, I thought it would likely just disappear
[QUOTE=smurfy;47221866]Genuinely surprised that people are actually building/testing this thing, I thought it would likely just disappear[/QUOTE] Howard Hughes. If you pull enough power, people will listen to what you say. Even if what you say is "Build a giant airplane out of wood, and make it fly."
I'm interested in using these things as a replacement for freight trains.
Best of luck to ya, ya crazy bastard. The interstate system and commercial air travel have only gotten better since they killed passenger rail in America in the 1950s.
[QUOTE=TestECull;47221933]Best of luck to ya, ya crazy bastard. The interstate system and commercial air travel have only gotten better since they killed passenger rail in America in the 1950s.[/QUOTE] That's why I'm more interested in using them for freight. Planes work good for fast priority shipping but they're expensive for heavy loads. Nothing can compete with container ships in how much you can move at a time, but they're slow, and once they dock all the TEU's have to be loaded onto truck or train. If you can load one of these up with ~50 TEU and ship it from San Diego or Houston to the center of the country in a matter of hours/a day, then you could have a profitable business from it. [editline]26th February 2015[/editline] But I imagine the train would have very sensitive load limits, and be expensive itself, so you'd obviously have to work out the economics of it.
I think this system of travel is a pipe dream, mainly because of problems with land usage rights, the costs of developing and implementing it, plus the economics behind it. It doesn't seem feasible. Also I imagine linking up cities with them is going to be a pain in the ass. They could make the stations on the outskirts of towns, but then that's going to be an even bigger problem when you want to generate a profit with it.
[QUOTE=Deng;47222055]I think this system of travel is a pipe dream, mainly because of problems with land usage rights, the costs of developing and implementing it, plus the economics behind it. It doesn't seem feasible. Also I imagine linking up cities with them is going to be a pain in the ass. They could make the stations on the outskirts of towns, but then that's going to be an even bigger problem when you want to generate a profit with it.[/QUOTE] I don't see any problems here regarding land rights, they just need to test whether its safe and reliable, because it is already proven to be economically feasible. It's the same deal as train tracks or highways, forced acquisition of homes and properties to put in advanced transportation infrastructure.
[QUOTE=Tasm;47222140]I don't see any problems here regarding land rights, they just need to test whether its safe and reliable, because it is already proven to be economically feasible.[/QUOTE] Well, not really, considering that we not know who is actually going to be riding on it, the total costs of construction and operation, the expected passenger traffic, etc. Not only that, but this is an experimental technology that has yet to be tested. [quote]It's the same deal as train tracks or highways, forced acquisition of homes and properties to put in advanced transportation infrastructure.[/quote] In America? A land where lawsuits happen if you so much as sneeze? The company will need a lot of support for this project, and if it happens to look ugly, or go over any kind of land that somebody else contests (from parks to housing), then you can be sure it will be bogged down for years working over the process. If we take Maglev trains as a recent example (which I hold out much more hope for), that took years of development and has only seen limited commercial use so far (and it hasn't been too successful).
[QUOTE=OvB;47222006]That's why I'm more interested in using them for freight. Planes work good for fast priority shipping but they're expensive for heavy loads. Nothing can compete with container ships in how much you can move at a time, but they're slow, and once they dock all the TEU's have to be loaded onto truck or train. If you can load one of these up with ~50 TEU and ship it from San Diego or Houston to the center of the country in a matter of hours/a day, then you could have a profitable business from it. [editline]26th February 2015[/editline] But I imagine the train would have very sensitive load limits, and be expensive itself, so you'd obviously have to work out the economics of it.[/QUOTE] Mmhm. It definitely stands a better chance at surviving for freight service than it does for passenger service, and maybe in that capacity itt'l work.
[QUOTE=Deng;47222174] In America? A land where lawsuits happen if you so much as sneeze? The company will need a lot of support for this project, and if it happens to look ugly, or go over any kind of land that somebody else contests (from parks to housing), then you can be sure it will be bogged down for years working over the process. [/QUOTE] I can't speak for the US but here in AUS it's a pretty fast process of forced acquisition, you pretty much have no choice but to take the compensation. It wouldn't bog the process down in the slightest because companies building "significant" infrastructure entities are in their legal right to enact compulsory acquisition on someone's property.
[QUOTE=OvB;47221886]I'm interested in using these things as a replacement for freight trains.[/QUOTE] I can't see these being terribly useful for shipping aside from JIT manufacturing. They almost certainly will not have nearly the same freight capacity of a diesel train, and will cost more to use. The advantages of a diesel train is that it's comparatively cheap for bulk loads, and if you have a constant stream of them (even if new train shipments are separated by days) it doesn't matter if they are slow, because you'll just pull materials from on-site storage until the next one comes and unloads.
The average speed would be about 500-600 mph. Basically sounds like it would never be able to out-compete aircraft because of the cost of making thousands of miles of reduced pressure tubes that are safe from vandals and attack. At least with regular trains if something is left on the track it can either plow right through it or the speed is low enough that a derailment isn't completely catastrophic and deadly every time, the train driver can also see a a few hundred meters ahead and slam on the emergency brakes to slow the train somewhat before hitting something.
[QUOTE=Tasm;47224103]I can't speak for the US but here in AUS it's a pretty fast process of forced acquisition, you pretty much have no choice but to take the compensation. It wouldn't bog the process down in the slightest because companies building "significant" infrastructure entities are in their legal right to enact compulsory acquisition on someone's property.[/QUOTE] Considering that the High Speed Rail in California is taking literal decades to plan and build (in large part due to legal challenges), I wouldn't hold high hopes for the hyperloop. As a concept it seems cool, but it's just not very practical. Even geniuses have dumb ideas, and Elon Musk hasn't been too keen on throwing his full support behind the Hyperloop. It would be probably much more practical and better off in the long run for America to invest into developing high speed rail networks (Like Europe, Japan, and China have done), which have not only been proven to be economical and successful at competing with air traffic, but can utilize a great deal of existing infrastructure. Even longer term, I see Maglev as having a better chance, especially when the masters of high speed rail are already throwing their weight behind it instead of Hyperloop.
[QUOTE=Deng;47224366l]Elon Musk hasn't been too keen on throwing his full support behind the Hyperloop. [/QUOTE] To be fair he had two high tech businesses to run. I'm surprised he's even building a test track. He's said before that he's too busy these days to start anything new, but expresses a wish to resign from Tesla CEO (while remaining on the board) sometime after the Model III is in full production so he had time to devote to new ventures. He's also released a very detailed paper on how the Hyperloop would work, cost, be built.
[QUOTE=OvB;47221886]I'm interested in using these things as a replacement for freight trains.[/QUOTE] You'd have to scale it up quite a bit, but I think you bring up an interesting idea. I don't see why it wouldn't be directly scale-able.
Go musk
It's like the UTDC's test area 35 years ago, only this time not even the regional governments want to fund it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.