Re: Hyperloop to start construction
Posted: 15 Mar 2015 00:04
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...
The place to talk about Transport Tycoon
https://www.tt-forums.net/
I would imagine its cheaper to build overground, than the cost of heavy machinery churning out thousands of tonnes of dirt.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...
So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?supermop wrote: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.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.
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.
teccuk wrote:So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?supermop wrote: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.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.
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.
If you are looking for examples of guided transit systems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_mover#Urban_transitteccuk wrote:So Erm. Yeah. Any examples?
It's difficult to use the words "Will never succeed" around Elon Musk
Problem is that he have stopped working on the idea altogether, now the only "big enough" guy doing it is Branson of Virgin.audigex wrote: ↑03 Jun 2021 13:29Is hyperloop ambitious as hell? Sure, and I suspect it might be a stretch even for Elon and his gang of crazy engineers.... but I've written him off too many times and been proven comprehensively wrong on each occasion, so I can't bring myself to say "will never succeed" when it comes to his crazy ideas
It was an utterly ridiculous idea from the start. My expertise is the economics, but since, the engineers have really gone for it. Not even a partial vacuum will work. We know what works; 'boring trains'. The capital costs of maglev are eyewatering and why bother when it isn't interoperable with anything else?!YNM wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 21:06Problem is that he have stopped working on the idea altogether, now the only "big enough" guy doing it is Branson of Virgin.audigex wrote: ↑03 Jun 2021 13:29Is hyperloop ambitious as hell? Sure, and I suspect it might be a stretch even for Elon and his gang of crazy engineers.... but I've written him off too many times and been proven comprehensively wrong on each occasion, so I can't bring myself to say "will never succeed" when it comes to his crazy ideas
Honestly even if they don't get anywhere near the whole vacuum thing it's interesting to see at the propulsion method as it's basically yet another maglev. There's still one "type" of maglev not yet developed, and it'd be interesting to see it actually developed into a (potentially) useable standard.
idk, a certain other country is definitely already tunneling through a bunch of places and mountains to one day put a Maglev between their large cities... And their technology has actually been proven, not just words of air.
Maybe. One day. But if you really need to go faster than 320kph then air seems to be the better option. I think we'll likely see a couple of (1/2) big projects but it'll never (well within out lifetimes) be adopted widely.YNM wrote: ↑21 Jun 2022 11:02idk, a certain other country is definitely already tunneling through a bunch of places and mountains to one day put a Maglev between their large cities... And their technology has actually been proven, not just words of air.
And even then, that project doesn't escape political problems.