General > General Technical Chat
The Hyperloop: BUSTED
<< < (63/113) > >>
vk6zgo:

--- Quote from: mtdoc on January 20, 2018, 12:29:03 am ---

Even if it was not relevant to my point, I’m glad you brought the info regarding Richard Branson’s investment into the general hyperloop discussion. He may loose his money, but he’s no fool and has a good track record.

--- End quote ---

As did Alan Bond, till he "went down the gurgler"!
EEVblog:

--- Quote from: mtdoc on January 20, 2018, 12:39:44 am ---Very good point. Even if the hyperloop is never realized as a large scale public transport project (as I suspect will be the case due to financial and political but not technical reasons)

--- End quote ---

I'm happy to categorically state that practical realities will kill it, even if the financial and political will are there.
I'll even take a bet on it.
EEVblog:

--- Quote from: ogden on January 20, 2018, 12:01:39 am ---Why don't you add water powered cars and cold fusion projects to the list?  :-DD What I am trying to say - uBeam/FreakingRoads to Hyperloop is apples to orange comparison.

--- End quote ---

No, because both are similarly impractical. Both are a ridiculously convoluted way to do the intended task.


--- Quote ---Yes, they can struggle to get safety approval for human transportation for many years to come, but to say that Hyperloop is utterly failure or scam is.. how to say.. uneducated imprudence.

--- End quote ---

I have never said it was a scam, I'm saying it will ultimately be impractical to implement, it will not succeed as a public transport system as intended (e.g. the stated vacuum thing).
Not when you have perfectly practical existing technologies that work. e.g. Maglev works at 430kmh, I know, I've been on it.
To think that an order of magitude more complex, expensive, and less reliable system that only goes twice as fast will be a solution is complete folly.
wraper:

--- Quote from: EEVblog on January 20, 2018, 01:27:36 am ---I have never said it was a scam, I'm saying it will ultimately be impractical to implement, it will not succeed as a public transport system as intended (e.g. the stated vacuum thing).
Not when you have perfectly practical existing technologies that work. e.g. Maglev works at 430kmh, I know, I've been on it.
To think that an order of magitude more complex, expensive, and less reliable system that only goes twice as fast will be a solution is complete folly.

--- End quote ---
You can barely call Maglev as such being practical. Huge power is needed to push the train, therefore it's extremely expensive to build. It's absence except a few very short routes is an obvious consequence for that. Also running it underground needs some huge tubes or reducing the speed a lot. Air resistance is the main reason why Maglev cannot run faster. Placing Maglev into vacuum severely reduces requirements to Maglev part and therefore makes it able to run much faster, cheaper and more practical to implement.  I'm not saying that other parts of the whole system are not required to be viable as well.

--- Quote ---No, because both are similarly impractical. Both are a ridiculously convoluted way to do the intended task.
--- End quote ---
Look no further than modern CPUs/GPUs with billions of transistors in them. Convoluted as hell, especially by merits just a few decades ago. Yet you have them everywhere. If in 80's you said that in relatively near future PC or even freaking portable phone will need gigabytes of RAM and terabytes of storage, people would call you stupid or crazy.
Comparing hyperloop with uBeam and Solar Roadways is incorrect because you compare things which cannot work in theory to begin with what can work in theory but may be hard to implement.
EEVblog:

--- Quote from: wraper on January 20, 2018, 02:07:45 am ---You can barely call Maglev as such being practical. Huge power is needed to push the train, therefore it's extremely expensive to build. It's absence except a few very short routes is an obvious consequence for that. Also running it underground needs some huge tubes or reducing the speed a lot. Air resistance is the main reason why Maglev cannot run faster. Placing Maglev into vacuum severely reduces requirements to Maglev part and therefore makes it able to run much faster, cheaper and more practical to implement. I'm not saying that other parts of the whole system are not required to be viable as well.

--- End quote ---

And therein lies the devil in the practical detail.
It's all fine saying normal Maglev has problems and limits, and that reducing those problems isn't beneficial, but just think at what is involved in doing that, it's a showstopper.


--- Quote ---Look no further than modern CPUs/GPUs with billions of transistors in them. Convoluted as hell, especially by merits just a few decades ago. Yet you have them everywhere. If in 80's you said that in relatively near future PC or even freaking portable phone will need gigabytes of RAM and terabytes of storage, people would call you stupid or crazy.

--- End quote ---

It wasn't a huge jump, it was a slight increase in performance and techniques every year for, what, 50 years.


--- Quote ---Comparing hyperloop with uBeam and Solar Roadways is incorrect because you compare things which cannot work in theory to begin with what can work in theory but may be hard to implement.

--- End quote ---

Rubbish. uBeam and Solar roadways can both work in theory and also in practice, demonstrably so, that's a fact. They are just impractical.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod