Hyperloop to start construction

YNM · PostPosted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:04 am

Hmm... Wouldn't it be better if hyperloops are built fully underground ? Wouldn't it helps a bit for the vacuum ? And fully underground means better access to inner city...

Redirect Left · PostPosted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:33 am

YNM wrote:

Hmm... Wouldn't it be better if hyperloops are built fully underground ? Wouldn't it helps a bit for the vacuum ? And fully underground means better access to inner city...

I would imagine its cheaper to build overground, than the cost of heavy machinery churning out thousands of tonnes of dirt.

teccuk · **Joined:** Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:01 pm **Posts:** 665

supermop wrote:

teccuk wrote:

But it's niche. Its amusement parks and tourist rides. One or two tiny systems and I think a reasonable sized on ein India. But its hardly the future transport the 60/70s promised it would be.

The systems I mentioned exclude tourist rides and are real urban rapid transit systems used every day as such by residents. I don't think many of these really could be considered "tiny" in the way that the Seattle monorail is - these systems are larger than many cities' proper heavy rail metro systems. They certainly are niche, but monorail (and maglev, and now hyperloop) have always been intended as niche products for very specific circumstances, that they may or may not ultimately excel at. No one seriously proposed replacing a national heavy freight rail network with concrete beam monorail, just as Elon Musk isn't trying to get BNSF or UP to haul coal across country in hyperloops. If anyone in the 60s was actually proposing that monorail was somehow the future for all types of rail haulage they were either an overeager Alweg salesperson or a SciFi writer who didn't fully grasp the concept. Hitachi's monorail division seems to be doing just fine in terms of sales, even if Hitachi makes much more in revenue from heavy rail. Monorail (and other light rubber tired systems) can be built elevated less obtrusively that heavy rail, and can handle steeper inclines. For some lines these criteria may be more crucial than through running with a national network or more familiar equipment.

Beyond monorail and hyperloop, there are plenty of other small guided transit concepts that have no way of interfacing with either road or standard gauge rail, yet are still successful without becoming ubiquitous; primarily rubber tired metros and people movers, but also even various steel on steel rail systems, whether they be narrow gauge or light rail. Even large standard gauge heavy rail metros often have no real connections to the wider rail network and new vehicles are delivered by ship or truck rather than rail.

So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?

supermop · PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 12:32 pm

teccuk wrote:

supermop wrote:

teccuk wrote:

But it's niche. Its amusement parks and tourist rides. One or two tiny systems and I think a reasonable sized on ein India. But its hardly the future transport the 60/70s promised it would be.

The systems I mentioned exclude tourist rides and are real urban rapid transit systems used every day as such by residents. I don't think many of these really could be considered "tiny" in the way that the Seattle monorail is - these systems are larger than many cities' proper heavy rail metro systems. They certainly are niche, but monorail (and maglev, and now hyperloop) have always been intended as niche products for very specific circumstances, that they may or may not ultimately excel at. No one seriously proposed replacing a national heavy freight rail network with concrete beam monorail, just as Elon Musk isn't trying to get BNSF or UP to haul coal across country in hyperloops. If anyone in the 60s was actually proposing that monorail was somehow the future for all types of rail haulage they were either an overeager Alweg salesperson or a SciFi writer who didn't fully grasp the concept. Hitachi's monorail division seems to be doing just fine in terms of sales, even if Hitachi makes much more in revenue from heavy rail. Monorail (and other light rubber tired systems) can be built elevated less obtrusively that heavy rail, and can handle steeper inclines. For some lines these criteria may be more crucial than through running with a national network or more familiar equipment.

Beyond monorail and hyperloop, there are plenty of other small guided transit concepts that have no way of interfacing with either road or standard gauge rail, yet are still successful without becoming ubiquitous; primarily rubber tired metros and people movers, but also even various steel on steel rail systems, whether they be narrow gauge or light rail. Even large standard gauge heavy rail metros often have no real connections to the wider rail network and new vehicles are delivered by ship or truck rather than rail.

So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?

Examples of what?

Sylf · PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 6:11 pm

teccuk wrote:

So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?

If you are looking for examples of guided transit systems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_mover#Urban_transit
Check out Japan especially. One on that list runs inside a zoo. The rest are true public transportation. And it doesn't list Sapporo subway, which uses rubber tire metro system. So there's the argument that non-standard rail train system is viable.

But you can take the same list, and point to the Komaki Peachliner. The system did not attract the level of ridership originally expected, and had to discontinue the service. But shutting down such a service comes with its own problem too - what to do with the unused infrastructure? Abandoned stations attract vandalism. The unmaintained raised rail pose the risk of collapse eventually. But it takes so much money to disassemble, which nobody has.

So, when a system like this succeeds, it's great. When it fails, it fails spectacularly.

Kevo00 · PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 9:28 am

The rubber tyred idea is really a guided bus though - more of an adaptation of existing technologies rather than anything new.

rsdworker · **Joined:** Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:58 pm **Posts:** 142

Komaki Peachliner - yeah i think they should demlish and rebuild as Normal railway which could benift because normal railways can be connected rather separate systems

Redirect Left · PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:45 am

Virgin have started investing in Hyperloop stuff, with projected times from London to Edinburgh of under 1 hour, using conventional rail its currently about 4 to 6 hours.

BBC News

Transport Tycoon Forums

Hyperloop to start construction

Who is online